ELR Citation: ELR 20216
No(s). B213637 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. Sep 17, 2009)

A California appellate court affirmed a trial court's judgment dismissing a land company's complaint against a city that terminated the company's environmental review of a proposed development project and rejected the project before the completion of a draft environmental impact report (EIR) under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The city, which rejected the project after the company allegedly spent millions of dollars in an effort to comply with the city's requirements, argued that the city had a mandatory duty under CEQA to complete and consider an EIR before rejecting the project. But CEQA's EIR requirement applies only to projects that a public agency proposes to carry out or approve, not to projects that the agency rejects or disapproves. In addition, the company failed to adequately allege due process and equal protection violations. An ownership interest alone does not cloak the prospect of developing the property with the protections of procedural due process. Rather, a land use application invokes procedural due process only if the owner has a legitimate claim of entitlement to the approval. Here, the city's decisions whether to enter into a development agreement and adopt the proposed plan were discretionary. Moreover, the company's allegations did not amount to an outrageous or egregious abuse of power, and there is no factual basis on which to conclude that the city's decision to reject the project was wholly irrational.