practice areas |
public agencies |
community groups |
members of the firm |
hiring
INITIATIVES AND REFERENDA
Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP drafts local citizen initiative measures and referenda affecting land use issues, such as management of future growth and preservation of agricultural and open space lands. The firm also has defended cities and counties in litigation challenging adopted initiatives, and represented initiative proponents in pre-election challenges to initiatives.
-
The firm successfully defended Napa County in litigation brought under the state planning law challenging a citizen initiative to protect farmland in the County. The firm drafted the initiative and was retained by the County to defend the measure in litigation brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a building industry association, and local landowners. The trial court found that the initiative was not preempted by state planning laws. The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court; the California Supreme Court granted review and affirmed the court of appeal decision. (DeVita v. County of Napa, 9 Cal.4th 763 (1995).) The firm represented the County throughout the litigation.
-
The firm drafted and, in cooperation with Orange County, successfully defended an initiative that established a planning process for reuse of a military air base designated for closure. The trial court held that aviation law did not preempt the initiative, and that the initiative did not violate the County’s general plan.
-
The firm represented Save Stanislaus Area Farm Economy in its successful lawsuit challenging Stanislaus County’s refusal to place on the ballot a citizen initiative (Measure F) to protect County farmland. (Save Stanislaus Area Farm Economy v. Board of Supervisors, 13 Cal.App.4th 141 (1993).) The firm also drafted the challenged initiative.
-
The firm has assisted numerous other cities and counties in defending legal challenges to adopted land use initiatives and referenda. Key published decisions include Merritt v. City of Pleasanton, 89 Cal.App.4th 1032 (2001); Garat v. City of Riverside, 2 Cal.App.4th 259 (1991), Lesher Communications, Inc. v. City of Walnut Creek, 52 Cal.3d 531 (1990), and L.I.F.E. Committee v. City of Lodi, 213 Cal.App.3d 1139 (1989).
-
The firm assisted Napa County community groups in defeating an initiative that would have permitted unregulated growth on nearly 700 acres of agricultural, watershed and open space lands. The firm drafted the groups’ ballot argument and successfully defended the argument against a court challenge brought by the initiative’s proponents.
-
The firm has drafted numerous initiatives on behalf of community groups and local governments. These include measures in the following cities and counties: Amador County (1992); Brea (2000); Fairfield (2003, 1997); Fremont (1981); Healdsburg (1996); Laguna Beach (1998); Los Altos Hills (2002); Mammoth Lakes (1996); Marina (2000); Milpitas (1998); Monterey County (1996); Morgan Hill (2004, 1990); Napa County (1990); Orange County (1994); Palo Alto (1997); Petaluma (1998); Pleasanton (1996); San Diego County (2003, 1992); Saratoga (1996); Solano County (1994, 1984); Sonoma County (2000); City of Sonoma (2000); Stanislaus County (1992); San Diego County (1998); Tiburon (2002); Truckee (1997); Watsonville (2002); Windsor (1997); Yolo County (1990). The firm has drafted or assisted with referenda challenging local legislation on behalf of community groups in many jurisdictions, including the cities of Claremont, Los Altos Hills, Menlo Park Novato, Orange, Palo Alto, Scotts Valley, Stockton, Truckee, and Yorba Linda.