Bay Area Citizens v. Association of Bay Area Governments

The California Court of Appeal upheld “Plan Bay Area,” a regional transportation plan update and “sustainable communities strategy” adopted by Bay Area regional planning agencies to meet greenhouse gas emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) pursuant to the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375). Plan Bay Area was challenged by petitioners who contended that Plan Bay Area should have relied on emission reductions from statewide mandates to achieve the SB 375 targets to avoid “draconian” land use and transportation measures. The Court of Appeal found that the “only legally tenable interpretation” of SB 375 was that it required its targets to be met using regional land use and transportation strategies that achieved emission reductions independent of reductions achieved by statewide mandates. The Court of Appeal further concluded that CARB had discretion to require that the SB 375 emission reductions be in addition to those stemming from statewide standards. The Court of Appeal also found that the agencies had complied with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) regardless of SB 375 and CARB requirements.

Bay Area Citizens (BAC), a non-profit organization represented by the Pacific Legal Foundation, challenged the adoption by the Association of Bay Area Governments and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission of Plan Bay Area. BAC allegee that the adoption of the plan violated CEQA because the agencies’ analysis gave “the false impression” that the high-density development strategy set forth in the Plan was necessary to achieve the required greenhouse gas emissions reductions—BAC’s petition asserts that projected improvements in fuel efficiency and fuel composition would independently allow the Bay Area to “handily exceed” the required emissions reductions.