Newstral
Article
jdsupra.com on 2018-08-07 21:08
Groundwater Extraction Permits Not Subject to CEQA in San Luis Obispo County - Approval is a Ministerial Action, not subject to CEQA, Appellate Court Finds
Related news
- California Supreme Court Set to Review Companion Groundwater Cases and Resolve When County-Issued Well Permits May Be Treated As Ministerial and Not Subject to CEQAjdsupra.com
- California Appellate Court Finds Railroad Company Not Subject to Jurisdictionjdsupra.com
- Land Use Matters July 2022 – CEQA Appellate Decisions & Other Legal Developmentsjdsupra.com
- CEQA Judicial Outcomes: Fifteen Years of Reported California Appellate and Supreme Court Decisionsjdsupra.com
- Land Use Matters March 2023 – CEQA Appellate Decisions & Other Legal Developmentsjdsupra.com
- Land Use Matters December 2023 - CEQA Appellate Decisions & Other Legal Developmentsjdsupra.com
- California Supreme Court Holds Medical Marijuana Zoning Ordinance is a Project Subject to CEQAjdsupra.com
- California Supreme Court Clarifies What Is a “Project” Subject to CEQAjdsupra.com
- CEQA Plaintiffs Beware: Meritless Lawsuits May Be Subject To Counter-Claims for Malicious Prosecutionjdsupra.com
- Broad CEQA reforms are needed, not just selective CEQA carve-outsocregister.com
- CDCR’s Inaction In Failing To Maintain Historic Former Hotel Not A “Project” Subject To CEQA, Holds First Districtjdsupra.com
- CEQA abuse, not corruption, held up Hollywood projectLA Times
- SCEQA not stifling housing or economic growth: Letterssbsun.com
- California Supreme Court Holds Groundwater Pumping Charges Are Not Property-Related Charges Subject to Proposition 218 - Case May Impact Groundwater Pumping Charges Authorized Under SGMAjdsupra.com
- California Appellate Court Upholds CEQA Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologyjdsupra.com
- CEQA Year In Review 2014: A Summary Of Published Appellate Opinions And Legislation Under CEQAjdsupra.com
- “New and Improved” is Not Always a Good Slogan Under CEQAjdsupra.com
- First District Holds LA’s Water Allocations To Agricultural Lessees Were Authorized Under Existing Leases And Did Not Constitute Or Implement A Separate “Project” Subject to CEQA Reviewjdsupra.com
- California Appellate Court Upholds Negative Declaration for County "Up-Zoning" Ordinance - Aptos Council v. County of Santa Cruz ruling also clarifies CEQA "Piecemeal" Doctrinejdsupra.com
- Appellate Court Rejects Challenges to Residential Development in Montebello - BB&K Defends City from CEQA, Brown Act and Planning and Zoning Law Claimsjdsupra.com