COURT ADDRESSES SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE STANDARD IN CONTEXT OF CEQA

摘要

The most recent case interpreting the substantial evidence standard of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was handed down on June 22,2006, by the Sixth District Court of Appeal. In Gilroy Citizens for Responsible Planning v. City of Gilroy, 140 Cal. App. 4th 911,45 Cal. Rptr. 3d 102 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006), a local citizens group, together with an employee of a grocery store and member of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, filed a petition for a writ of mandate alleging a litany of shortcomings by the City of Gilroy while considering the environmental impacts of a Wal-Mart Supercenter. The petition included allegations that the City failed to provide the legally-required 45-day notice of availability of the draft environmental impact report (EIR), failed to complete an initial study before relying on a 12-year old economic impacts report, and failed to follow CEQA's required procedure for issuing a written response to commenting agencies. The petitioners also took issue with the content of the EIR, In their view, the EIR improperly excluded an analysis of Wal-Mart's blight and urban decay impacts, failed to provide meaningful consideration of the proposed mitigation measures, and failed to properly analyze traffic impacts.