McCann v. City of San Diego

Summary

The California Court of Appeal reviewed Margaret McCann’s challenge to the City of San Diego’s CEQA review of utility-undergrounding projects. The court held that McCann’s claims concerning projects deemed exempt from CEQA were barred because she failed to exhaust the City’s administrative appeal procedure, and it rejected most challenges to the mitigated negative declaration for the remaining projects. The court nevertheless reversed in part because the City’s finding that the projects would not significantly affect greenhouse-gas emissions was unsupported by substantial evidence, requiring further review for consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan.

Holdings

1. McCann's challenge to the City's determination that the Exempt Projects were exempt from CEQA was barred because she failed to use the City's available administrative appeal procedure.
2. The City's notice of the right to appeal the exemption determination was adequate for due process and CEQA purposes.
3. The City lawfully delegated the CEQA exemption determination to staff while reserving project approval for the City Council.
4. The City did not improperly segment the MND projects from the broader utility-undergrounding program.
5. The project description was adequate even though the precise locations of individual transformer boxes had not yet been selected.
6. McCann failed to identify substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the MND projects would cause a significant aesthetic impact requiring preparation of an EIR.
7. The City abused its discretion by finding that the MND projects would have no significant greenhouse-gas impact without analyzing whether the projects were consistent with the City's Climate Action Plan and identifying applicable reduction measures.
8. The superior court properly denied the preliminary injunction because McCann could not demonstrate a probability of prevailing on the merits of her challenge to the Exempt Projects.

Questions Presented

1. Whether McCann's CEQA challenge to the projects found categorically exempt was barred because she failed to exhaust the City's administrative appeal procedure.
2. Whether the City's notice of the right to appeal the exemption determination satisfied due process and CEQA requirements.
3. Whether the City improperly bifurcated the exemption determination from project approval.
4. Whether the City improperly segmented the MND projects from the broader utility-undergrounding program.
5. Whether the project description was inadequate because the precise locations of transformer boxes had not yet been determined.
6. Whether substantial evidence supported a fair argument that the MND projects would cause a significant aesthetic impact requiring an EIR.
7. Whether substantial evidence supported the City's finding that the MND projects would have no significant impact from greenhouse-gas emissions.
8. Whether the superior court abused its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded