Are land development approvals obtained through the state’s voter initiative procedure subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)? This issue has recently been at the center of debate over the development project for the World Logistics Center in Moreno Valley, California. Although the project has been condemned for failure to comply with CEQA regulations, voter initiative approval may override CEQA objections based on a prior California Supreme Court ruling.
The World Logistics Center is a huge development project consisting of logistics facilities spread over 2,300 acres of property. Environmental review for the project generated an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that received the approval of the Moreno Valley City Council in August 2015. Subsequent to the approval, several organizations initiated multiple lawsuits alleging that the City Council was in violation of CEQA regulations and that the EIR did not adequately address the environmental concerns presented by the development project.
Simultaneous with the initiation of these lawsuits, an organization called the Moreno Valley Jobs Coalition distributed a petition to obtain approval of the project through voter consensus. The petition required 7,609 signatures and ultimately received over 48,000 signatures. It was submitted to the city council and the development project was re-approved. This decision has raised the question of the legitimacy of using voter initiatives to circumvent review requirements under CEQA.
The California Supreme Court confronted a similar set of facts in Tuolumne Jobs & Small Business Alliance v. Superior Court (2014) 59 Cal.4th 1029. In the case, the court concluded that voter initiative laws and CEQA regulations are irreconcilable. The voter initiative law presumes a prompt process in which the initiative petition, after being signed by the required number of supporters, must either be promptly adopted by the city council, put forth for a special election, or supplemented by a report detailing the initiative – all within a prescribed and mandatory time frame. CEQA, in contrast, entails a lengthy examination of environmental impacts and can persist for months. The Court determined that the right of the public to a prompt resolution of their ballot initiative supersedes other regulatory review because the judicial system is obligated to “jealousy guard this right of the people.”
Contact Shane Coons at 949-333-0900 or visit his website at www.ShaneCoonsLaw.com to find out more about his practice.