Southern Sierran
Angeles Chapter Conservation Legal Committee and Loyola Law Partner in Environmental Law Training

BY DEAN WALLRAFF
Vice Chair, Angeles Chapter Conservation Legal Committee

The Angeles Chapter Conservation Legal Committee and the Loyola Law School Environmental Law Society held a day-long workshop on environmental law on March 7 for conservation activists at Loyola Law School. Many of the Chapter's activists were among the 60 attendees.

Vic Otten, Chair of the Conservation Legal Committee led off with a presentation on the California Public Records Act and the federal Freedom of Information Act. These are important tools that allow members of the public to obtain information from public agencies. I made the next presentation, on how federal and state law fit together. Most environmental laws exist in federal and state versions, designed to work together. The federal Clean Water Act, for example, delegates most of the enforcement to the states, and the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act provides the basis for state regulation and enforcement in California.

Tom Mauriello, Angeles Chapter Legal Co-Chair, made the next presentation on recovery of attorney's fees by successful plaintiffs. In the U.S., each party to litigation is responsible for paying its own attorneys, but there are some situations where a plaintiff who prevails can compel the losing defendants to pay the plaintiff's attorney. For example, the California Public Records Act states that, when a citizen sues a public agency to force disclosure of public records and the citizen wins the lawsuit, the court must order the agency to pay the citizen's attorney's fees. And in general, when a lawsuit has resulted in a significant benefit for the public, as is the case with most of the Sierra Club's lawsuits, the court may award attorney's fees to the prevailing plaintiff. These provisions are important aids for financing our litigation.

The next topic, addressed by attorney Frank Angel, was the Clean Water Act, and the California equivalent. The main access point for citizens is the permitting process for point-source discharges and for dredge and fill operations. Citizens can receive notice of pending permit applications, and comment, and can sue when the law is violated.

Gabe Ross, from the San Francisco law firm of Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP, gave a presentation on the Law of Global Warming. California is in the vanguard on this issue, having passed the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). This law mandates a return to 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions in California by 2020, and to 80% of 1990 levels by 2050. (For more information on this landmark legislation, see the Air Resources Board's scoping plan online at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm.) Citizens can help enforce this law via CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act, by commenting on and litigating Environmental Impact Reports for housing developments and general plans when they don't contain sufficient mitigation for global warming.

During lunch, which was generously provided by three local law firms – Sabrina Venskus, Tom Mauriello and Trutanich-Michel LLP – audience members had a chance to ask the assembled company of lawyers questions about environmental law.

Babak Naficy spoke next, about "paper water" vs. actual water. Large development projects are required, as part of their entitlement process, to show that sufficient water will be available to supply the projects' needs. In some cases, developers cite water supplies that are theoretically but not actually available. California law requires actual water to be available, and it is up to activists to monitor this. An excellent guide to the legal issues involved was written by the California Water Impact Network, and is online at http://www.c-win.org/uploads/Guidebook.pdf.

Next up was the federal Clean Air Act and the corresponding California statutes, presented by Loyola Law School's professor of environmental law, Dan Selmi. He emphasized ways that citizens can access the process, especially CEQA. The final presentation was by Tracy Egoscue, the Executive Officer of the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board. She lamented the reduction made by recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the number of streams and wetlands subject to Clean Water Act protection. This reduction in protection harms water quality throughout the U.S. A bill before Congress – the Clean Water Restoration Act – would restore the protection. Please write or call your Senators and Representative to ask for their support of this important federal legislation.

[top of page]