San Francisco Tomorrow v. Romney
Citation: 2 ELR 20273
No. No. C-72-65 RHS, 342 F. Supp. 77/4 ERC 1065/(N.D. Cal., 04/25/1972)
Plaintiffs, organizations which allege concern for the condition of the urban environment and individuals residing in the vicinity, do not have standing under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to challenge the legality of the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's) financial assistance to two urban renewal projects in the San Francisco area. Persons who have a "mere non-pecuniary interest" in the enforcement of a statute have no standing to sue under that statute; its enforcement is the responsibility of the President and his delegates. Moreover, HUD had no obligation to comply with NEPA in the present case because all relevant planning of the projects had been determined prior to the effective date of the statute, and any changes in the plans since that date will not have a significant effect on the environment.
Counsel for Plaintiffs
J. Anthony Kline
Public Advocates, Inc.
433 Turk Street
San Francisco, California 94102
James W. Moorman
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
311 California Street
San Francisco, California 94104
Counsel for Defendants
Francis B. Boone Asst. U.S. Attorney
San Francisco, California