City of Bellflower v. State Water Resources Control Board
Appellant Cities of Bellflower, Carson, Cerritos, Downey, Paramount, Santa Fe Springs, Signal Hill, and Whittier appeal from a judgment granting their petition for a writ of mandate ordering respondents California Regional Water Quality Control for the Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) and the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) (collectively the Water Boards) to set aside and void certain resolutions. The trial court ordered the resolutions set aside because the environmental impact documents prepared in connection with the resolutions failed to include an analysis of alternatives to the project as required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)(Pub. Resources Code, 21000 et seq.). On appeal, the Cities contend the trial court also should have ordered the resolutions set aside on the grounds that the documents failed to analyze the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of compliance with the resolutions and the reasonably foreseeable mitigation measures as required under CEQA. The Water Boards filed a cross-appeal from the judgment. They contend the trial court abused its discretion by ordering them to set aside and void the resolutions, when the court should have simply compelled them to correct the CEQA violation by preparing an analysis of alternatives. Court conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ordering the Water Boards to set aside and void the resolutions, and the Cities additional grounds for voiding the resolutions do not have merit. Therefore, Court affirm.
Comments on City of Bellflower v. State Water Resources Control Board