HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.06 Amicus NapaCITY CLERK
File # 0660-40
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: AUGUST 15, 2000
SUBJECT:
Request for Amicus Participation
Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County
Board of Supervisors
(Report prepared by Elizabeth H. Silver, City Attorney)
ATTACHMENTS:
1. None
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize City Attorney to add City of Dublin as
Amicus in the case of Napa Citizens for Honest
Government v. Napa County Board of Supervisors
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
DESCRIPTION: In May 1993, when the Council approved the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment
and the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan, the Council adopted Resolution No. 53-93 adopting a mitigation
monitoring program for the Eastern Dublin General Plan Amendment and Specific. Plan. The City is still
relying on the Mitigation Monitoring Program for project approvals in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area.
In Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Board of Supervisors, the trial court held that lead
agencies under CEQA are "forever bound" by adopted mitigation policies or measures once such policies or
f-".easures are found feasible. The County of Napa had approved a Specific Plan in 1986, which included a
mitigation measure regarding traffic improvements which were anticipated to cost $25,000,000. By 1998, the
cost of the improvements had risen to more than $140,000,000 with no prospects for CalTrans participation in
the funding, as had been previously anticipated. When the Board of Supervisors amended the Specific Plan in
1998, the Plaintiffs argued that the County could not delete or modify the mitigation measure but, rather, must
fund 100% of the costs of the improvements.
On appeal, the County will argue that infeasible mitigation measures may be deleted or modified so long as the
environmental impacts of so doing are adequately analyzed and disclosed to the public and CEQA is otherwise
complied with. Napa County has requested cities to join as an amicus on its brief, believing that cities, like
counties, need to have flexibility to react to changing fiscal and environmental circumstances. The League of
California Cities Legal Advocacy Committee has declined to recommend that cities join in this brief of an
amicus because the City of American Canyon is an intervener in the case on the side of the plaintiff and opposes
the League officially joining with the County on the Amicus Brief.
The central issue in the case -- whether and how adopted mitigation policies can later be modified or deleted
when they have become infeasible -- is important to the City of Dublin, given its Eastern Dublin Specific Plan
and General Plan mitigation monitoring program.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends the Council authorize the City Manager to add the City of Dublin to the Amicus Brief which
~,.~s being prepared on behalf of the California State Association of Counties.
COPIES TO: ~
ITEM NO.
G:\CC-MTGS\2000QTR3~AUGUST~8-15-00\AS-AMICUS MITIGATON.DOC