A hearing has been set for Aug. 12 in Sacramento County Superior Court on a dispute between the Colusa County Board of Supervisors and the Colusa City Council.
Colusa County officials filed the lawsuit on Jan. 20 over the housing development project at Colusa Industrial Properties – and named CIP as a party of interest in the complaint, although it no longer owns the project.
The County alleges the Colusa City Council approved the housing development without formally notifying the Airport Land Use Commission of changes in the project’s scope, from 84 single family homes to 180, and that the project was approved without adequate study required under the California Environmental Quality Act, thereby resulting in unmitigated health and safety impacts to the public.
County officials also claim the Colusa City Council committed a “prejudicial abuse of discretion” when they overruled the Colusa County Airport Land Use Commission’s findings on Nov. 21, 2021, that the project was incompatible with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
The county’s lawsuit “seeks alternative and peremptory writs of mandate” commanding the City of Colusa and CIP to comply with CEQA and the CEQA guidelines.”
The lawsuit also asks the court to vacate the City Council’s overrule of the ALUC and requests a permanent injunction prohibiting further development at CIP until Colusa and CIP comply with all CEQA requirements, all state and local laws, policies, ordinances, and regulations – and comply with all applicable land use and development standards set forth in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
In the lawsuit, the County claims that Colusa officials relied on an improper and entirely inadequate study for evaluation of the environmental impacts associated with the substantial changes to the scope and size of the project that was approved by the County in 2008.
The lawsuit also claims a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report was required to evaluate the additional impacts and mitigation measures that could reduce those impacts.
Colusa County has also asked for the defendants to pay for the cost of the lawsuit and attorney fees, as well as “other and further relief the court deems just and proper.”
Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Steven Gevercer will hear the County’s petition for the writ of mandate.
At the same time, Gevercer will hear a petition by Colusa Industrial Properties and City of Colusa to have the entire action dismissed because the CEQA challenge is years past the statute of limitations.
CIP Chief Executive Director Ed Hulbert said he is baffled that the County wants to block development that both the county and the city approved, with minor changes, in a process that spanned 17 years, multiple public hearings, and involved thousands of pages of documents.
Hulbert said the project was extensively reviewed and the City Council approved the project, which added single family homes but eliminated the high-density housing and a congregate facility (clubhouse) at the golf course that was previously approved by the county, directly on flight-path open space.
In his opposition to the court, Hulbert said CIP sold the project in 2018 to another entity, who also resold the project. Since then, 27 single-family homes have been built, many are lived in with no complaints by the homeowners, and another 24 are under construction.
Hulbert’s argument for the demurrer is that the county’s own airport manager in 2020 repeatedly approved several of the first of the homes built in the project.
“Just what does the County want that it can get from this lawsuit?” Hulbert asked in a letter to the Board of Supervisors last week.
Hulbert also appeared before the board on April 12 to request the matter be placed on an agenda for an open and public discussion, not to argue the merits of the case, but to discuss whether the board exercised sufficient oversight of their staff and counsel, who Hulbert said has continued to attack the City of Colusa and CIP in pursuit of a lawsuit that will cost taxpayers tens or hundreds of thousands dollars, which Colusa County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey A. Thompson said (before he transferred the case to another court as required by law) would not likely prevail.
“In my 40 years in business here, I have never seen anything like this; not even close,” Hulbert said.
The County has retained Prentice Long Law Group to lead the challenge against the City of Colusa and CIP. The County also hired Sacramento attorney Christopher L. Stiles, of Remy Moose Manley, to pursue a CEQA hearing.
The City of Colusa is represented by Jones & Mayer, of Sacramento.
CIP has retained Pioneer Law Group, of Sacramento, and Clark & Nelson, of Colusa, in seeking a dismissal of the case.
Hulbert said he and other taxpayers will expect a full accounting of the public’s cost for the County to bring forward a lawsuit that will likely result in “a complete loss or a hollow win that amounts to nothing more than a minor re-do of some formality in City approval.”
Colusa County Counsel Richard Stout on Tuesday would not comment on the litigation because the county is currently engaging in settlement discussions with the other parties.
As to Hulbert’s request to have the matter placed on the agenda for an open session discussion, Colusa County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler replied that the Board of Supervisors have respectfully declined.
“We value and appreciate the role Colusa Industrial Properties plays in the community, and are hopeful we can resolve the issues that necessitated the filing of this legal action,” Tyler responded to Hulbert, in an April 15 letter.
The Aug. 12 hearing in Sacramento is scheduled for 10 AM if the lawsuit is not resolved before that date, according to court documents. ■