A recent case involving developer Charles Keenan and the City of Palo Alto highlights the importance of strict compliance with Mitigation Fee Act’s requirement that findings be made every five years concerning unexpended fees. The court held that the City’s failure to make such findings within the statutory deadline mandated refund of all unexpended fees
Deborah Quick
Failure to Timely Name and Serve Real Parties In Interest Does Not Warrant Dismissal Of An Entire CEQA Action if The Unnamed Parties Are Not Indispensable
By Deborah Quick on
Posted in CEQA
In the first reported interpretation of a 2012 amendment to CEQA’s statute of limitations provisions, the First District Court of Appeal addressed “whether an action against a lead agency must be dismissed–despite being filed within the limitations period–because of a failure to [timely name and serve] necessary third parties.” Save Berkeley’s Neighborhoods v. The Regents…