Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Court of Appeal of California, Sixth Appellate District
September 9, 1992, Decided
[*466] [**793] This case arises out of a school district's attempt to create a Mello- Roos district to finance anticipated future needs due to population growth within its boundaries. Formation of the Mello-Roos district was successfully challenged by a developer on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) grounds. The primary issue on appeal is whether the formation of a community facilities district is a "project" within the meaning [***2] of CEQA.
The California Environmental Quality Act
The Legislature enacted CEQA in an effort to interpose some mandatory level of institutional concern for the environment into the public agency decisionmaking process. (CEQA; Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq. 3 ) Essentially, ] CEQA requires government agencies to prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) for any project they carry out or approve which may have a significant effect on the environment. (§ 21151.) "The purpose of an [EIR] is to provide public agencies and the public in general with detailed information about the effect which a proposed project is likely to have on the environment; to list ways in which the significant effects of such a project might be minimized; and to indicate alternatives to such a project." (§ 21061.)
CA(1)(1) "The act provides a three-tiered structure to guide agencies: If a proposed project falls within a category exempt [***3] from the requirements of CEQA by administrative regulation, or if it is certain that the project will not have a significant effect upon the environment, no further agency evaluation is required. [Citations.] If there is a possibility that the project may have a significant environmental effect, the agency must conduct an initial threshold study. [Citation.] If the initial study reveals that the project will not have such [**794] effect, the lead agency may complete a negative declaration briefly describing the reasons supporting this determination. [Citations, fn. omitted.] However, if the project may have a significant effect on the environment, an EIR must be prepared. [Citations.]" (Friends of "B" Street v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 999-1000 [165 Cal.Rptr. 514].)
The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
9 Cal. App. 4th 464 *; 11 Cal. Rptr. 2d 792 **; 1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1094 ***; 92 Cal. Daily Op. Service 7756; 92 Daily Journal DAR 12573
KAUFMAN & BROAD-SOUTH BAY, INC., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MORGAN HILL UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT et al., Defendants and Appellants.
Prior History: [***1] Superior Court of Santa Clara County, No. 714065, Read Ambler, Judge.
Disposition: The judgment of the superior court and the award of attorney fees are reversed. The District shall recover its costs on appeal.
formation, school district, facilities, environmental review, new school, community facilities, significant effect, exempt, site, environmental, annexation, projects, physical change, funds, environmental impact, public agency, agencies, formation of a district, anticipated, classrooms, finance, build, lease
Environmental Law, Natural Resources & Public Lands, National Environmental Policy Act, General Overview, Education Law, Administration & Operation, School Property, Governments, Local Governments, Duties & Powers