Public Law Journal: Summer 2014, Vol. 37, No. 3
- Four Members Appointed to the Public Law Section Executive Committee
- Inclusionary Zoning for Affordable Housing Under Attack
- Legislation Update
- Litigation & Case Law Update
- Message from the Chair
- Sold Out Public Records & Open Meetings Conference Offers Survey of Existing Laws, Compliance Issues, and Current Developments.
- The Next Frontier: Transgender Legal Rights
- The Public Law Section Plans Dynamic Annual Meeting Programs
- Through the Looking Glass: Why Making "Reverse Ceqa" the Law in California Would Significantly Expand Ceqa's Scope While Undermining Its Purpose and Procedures
- When Government Cover-ups are a Good Thing: Preventing Exposure of Your Agency's Decisionmaking Via the Deliberative Process Privilege
- Willfully Ignorant: the California Building Industry Association's Attempt to Eliminate Ceqa's Long-Standing Role in Protecting Human Health and Public Safety
- Two Views: "Reverse Ceqa"
Two Views: "Reverse CEQA"
Editor’s Note: With this edition, the Public Law Journal begins an occasional series of articles focusing on issues pending before the California Supreme Court of interest to public law practitioners. We have asked the authors to roll up their sleeves and have a little fun letting us know what they think the Supreme Court should do.
Public law practitioners spend many hours guiding clients through review of the projects under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), analyzing how proposed projects impact the environment. In California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, the California Supreme Court addresses the so-called "reverse CEQA" issue – do entities doing CEQA review of proposed projects have to consider the impact that the environment has on those projects? Specifically, the Supreme Court has asked the parties to address the following issue: "Under what circumstances, if any, does the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.) require an analysis of how existing environmental conditions will impact future residents or users (receptors) of a proposed project?"
Beth Collins-Burgard on one side, and Matt Vespa and Kevin Bundy on the other, present two views on "reverse CEQA.’