Inyo, County of v. Los Angeles, City of
Citation: 7 ELR 20583
No. No. 3 Civ. 13886, 139 Cal. Rptr. 396/71 Cal. App. 3d 185, (Cal. Ct. App., 06/27/1977) Preliminary injunction continued
The court holds that Los Angeles failed to comply with a previous writ requiring submission of an adequate environmental impact report (EIR) discussing the proposed increase in the interim ground water pumping rate from the Owens River Valley acquifer. The provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) demand that the EIR consider all alternatives to the proposed increase in ground water pumping, especially that of water conservation, before a locality seeks to obtain additional water. Compliance with CEQA requires that the proposed pumping activities be examined in the context of the city's entire operations in the Owens Valley. Further, the city violated CEQA's public information goals when it submitted a final EIR based on a restrictive project definition which excluded the proposed export of ground water to Los Angeles.
For moving papers in the case, see ELR 65453.
Counsel for Petitioner
L. H. Gibbons, Dist. Attorney, County of Inyo
Courthouse, Drawer D, Independence CA 95326
Antonio Rossmann, Special Counsel to the County of Inyo
476 Jackson St., San Francisco CA 94111
Counsel for Respondents
Burt Pines, City Attorney; Edward C. Farrell, Chief Ass't City Attorney for Water & Power; Kenneth W. Downey, Ass't City Attorney
111 N. Hope St., Box 111, Los Angeles CA 90051
Counsel for Amici Curiae: Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth, and League of Women Voters of Eastern Sierra
Brent N. Rushforth, John R. Phillips, Carlyle W. Hall, Jr.
Center for Law in the Public Interest
10203 Santa Monica Blvd., Fifth Floor, Los Angeles CA 90067
Joined by Regan & Evans, JJ.