Appeal And Judicial Review - - CA Public Resources

Section § 29770

This law allows anyone unhappy with how a local government implements a resource management plan in a specific area, called the 'primary zone,' to appeal to a commission. The appeal must argue that the government's action is inconsistent with the plan or relevant laws, and the commission must review the appeal within 60 days unless it's outside its scope. If no one appeals, the commission itself can still choose to review the action if it seems inconsistent with the plan. The commission is required to set up rules for handling these appeals, and can also give feedback on projects in nearby areas, called the 'secondary zone,' if they affect the primary zone.

(a) Any person who is aggrieved by any action taken by a local government or other local agency in implementing the resource management plan, or otherwise taken pursuant to this division, may file an appeal with the commission. The ground for an appeal and the commission consideration of an appeal shall be that an action, as to land located exclusively within the primary zone, is inconsistent with the resource management plan, the approved portions of local government general plans that implement the resource management plan, or this division. The appeal shall be heard by the commission within 60 days from the date of the filing of the appeal, unless the commission, either itself or by delegation to the executive director, determines that the issue raised on appeal is not within the commission’s jurisdiction or does not raise an appealable issue.

(b) In the absence of an appeal by an aggrieved person, the commission may decide by majority vote to review on appeal any action taken by a local government or other local agency in implementing the resource management plan, or otherwise taken pursuant to this division, for land located exclusively within the primary zone, if the commission believes the action may be inconsistent with the resource management plan, or this division.

(d) The commission may comment on projects within the secondary zone that impact the primary zone.

resource management plan primary zone inconsistent action local government appeal commission review aggrieved person jurisdiction issue administrative procedures secondary zone impact majority vote review appealable issue project comments

(Amended by Stats. 2006, Ch. 547, Sec. 4. Effective January 1, 2007.)

Section § 29771

When there's an appeal related to a decision under Section 29770, a commission reviews the case. After the hearing, the commission can either reject the appeal or send it back to the local authorities for another look, providing reasons for their decision. If sent back, the local agency must make changes to the decision and present it again for commission review. The decision from the appeal cannot take effect until the commission confirms, with solid evidence, that it aligns with the resource management plan and the relevant parts of local government plans.

After a hearing on an appealed action pursuant to Section 29770, the commission shall either deny the appeal or remand the matter to the local government or local agency for reconsideration, after making specific findings. Upon remand, the local government or local agency shall modify the appealed action and resubmit the matter for review to the commission. A proposed action appealed pursuant to this section shall not be effective until the commission has adopted written findings, based on substantial evidence in the record, that the action is consistent with the resources management plan, the approved portions of local government general plans that implement the resources management plan, and this division.

appeal hearing local government reconsideration commission review modify appealed action written findings substantial evidence resources management plan local government general plans effective action decision alignment appeal denial remand process consistent action resource management compliance adopted findings

(Amended by Stats. 2009, 7th Ex. Sess., Ch. 5, Sec. 32. (SB 1 7x) Effective February 3, 2010.)

Section § 29772

If you are unhappy with a decision made by the commission about the resource management plan, or by a local government or agency action that can be appealed, you can ask a court to review it. You need to file a petition within 60 days of the commission's decision or their final decision on an appeal.

An aggrieved person may seek judicial review of any action taken by the commission in adopting the resource management plan or any action taken by a local government or other local agency that is appealable pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 29770, by filing a petition for writ of mandate in accordance with Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure within 60 days from the date that the commission action was taken or, if appealed to the commission, within 60 days from the final decision of the commission on the appeal.

judicial review resource management plan aggrieved person writ of mandate local government action appealable decision Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 commission decision final decision petition filing deadline appeal process local agency action

(Amended by Stats. 1998, Ch. 584, Sec. 11. Effective January 1, 1999.)

Section § 29773

This section explains that the commission has the authority to review, comment on, and make recommendations about significant projects within the Delta Plan. These projects can include actions by state and federal agencies and may impact the Delta's cultural, recreational, and agricultural values. The commission can identify these impacts, suggest ways to reduce them, and check if projects align with management plans.

Additionally, the commission can address community concerns regarding large-scale habitat projects. The Delta Stewardship Council is urged to consider these recommendations and, if suitable and in line with the Delta Plan's goals, adopt them.

(a) The commission may review and provide comments and recommendations to the Delta Stewardship Council on any significant project or proposed project within the scope of the Delta Plan, including, but not limited to, actions by state and federal agencies, that may affect the unique cultural, recreational, and agricultural values within the primary and secondary zones. Review and comment authority granted to the commission shall include, but is not limited to, all of the following:

(1) Identification of impacts to the cultural, recreational, and agricultural values of the Delta.

(2) Recommendations for actions that may avoid, reduce, or mitigate impacts to the cultural, recreational, and agricultural values of the Delta.

(3) Review of consistency of the project or proposed project with the resources management plan and the Delta Plan.

(4) Identification and recommendation of methods to address Delta community concerns regarding large-scale habitat plan development and implementation.

(b) The council shall take into consideration the recommendations of the commission, including the recommendations included in the economic sustainability plan. If the council, in its discretion, determines that a recommendation of the commission is feasible and consistent with the objectives of the Delta Plan and the purposes of this division, the council shall adopt the recommendation.

Delta Plan significant project review commission recommendations cultural values impact recreational values impact agricultural values impact resource management plan large-scale habitat plan Delta community concerns economic sustainability plan Delta Stewardship Council feasibility assessment project consistency review impact mitigation primary and secondary zones

(Added by Stats. 2009, 7th Ex. Sess., Ch. 5, Sec. 33. (SB 1 7x) Effective February 3, 2010.)