Agoura Village - We Who Care

Received in the mail the news the Supreme Court did not take the case. Looking back, it should have been no surprise for a few reasons. 1) Public Opinion. The truth of the matter is the vast majority of people just don't seem to care 2) A woman representing herself as a Private Attorney General enforcing the Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). Gone are the days of Abraham Lincoln teaching himself how to be a lawyer and succeeding. The woman part, I really felt it had no bearing until I suffered being in hostile courtrooms getting yelled at by judges for defending the case. That cross look. Yelling, angry faces for no reason. They simply did not want people, especially women, coming into their courtroom acting like a lawyer convincing them of anything.

What gave me some hope was my win in Altmann v. The City of Agoura Hills City Council BS104251 2007. Judge Chalfant was and is an honest, decent judge. Yes, the City did have to go back and actually study the endangered species they want to kill for their supposed greater good, and yes, they will have to replant some of them. That is the only victory. The case in Altmann II BS118229 was equally as sound if not moreso, if one actually studies the law, the 70s case law behind creating CEQA, and takes into consideration the actual wording of the law, and the sheer compound danger of a million square feet of development and three hundred homes in a zone 4 fire hazard area (most hazardous) built around Kanan Highway and Agoura Road.

To all the supporters of stopping the all-out disaster presently called Agoura Village, thank you so much for your money, time, and kind thoughts. I'm truly sorry we (I) failed. It is a true agony to me to see our town be swept into some hideously overdeveloped major brand-stamped non-descript place, like so many "cities" corrupted by short-term greed. It is a blueprint for urban sprawl and decay. More painstaking is the impending environmental crisis of yet another peaceful, life-giving environment lost. This I am either plagued or blessed to grieve on a very intimate basis.

There is hope; there is always hope. Maybe one "Earth Day" when "people" stop and reflect on what we are actually doing, they will realize our own home is being destroyed bit by bit, day by day, hour by hour. Finally they will "wake up" and take actions within their own power to stop this unconscious, mindless, heartless, soulless destruction.

The Petition for Review was revised, edited, and in short, made much better than the copy I had previously posted. If you would like to read it, the link is on a previous entry on this blog.

Petition for Rehearing/ Petition for Review

The ruling of July 9th 2010 required immediate attention in filing a Petition for Rehearing with the Court of Appeals, and filing a Petition for Review with the California Supreme
court. These petitions were filed with the Court Friday, July 16th. For the reasons in these petitions, the court should reconsider.

This is a true "Hail Mary" action, and I pray it works.

Petition for Review: http://5pointedstar.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/petition-for-review/

Petition for Rehearing: http://5pointedstar.wordpress.com/2010/07/19/petition-for-rehearing/

Appeals Court Affirmed Lower Court Decision

Details to come.

Hearing Scheduled for June 8th

The hearing for Agoura Village is scheduled for
Tuesday June 8th, 2010, 11 a.m. at The Court of Appeals, California State Building, Third Floor, 300 South Spring Street, Los Angeles 90013. Phone: (213) 830-7000.

I hope you can attend. Thank you for your support.

Reply Brief Filed April 26, 2010

The following is the Reply Brief we filed April 26, 2010. Now the case is fully briefed, we are looking for a trial date. :-)

http://agouravillagemyblog.wordpress.com/2010/04/28/reply-brief/

Opening Brief

Opening Brief is published at Word Press because this google site does not allow for cut and paste. http://agouravillagemyblog.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/hello-world/

I have recieved the City's opening brief and am currently working on the reply brief which I will post when it is completed.

Agoura Village?

This is an update regarding the second lawsuit filed against the current Agoura Village Specific Plan ("AVSP").

The AVSP currently is the approval of three large developments in one, encompassing 135 acres in and around the intersection of Kanan Hwy and Agoura Road in Agoura Hills, California. The proposal will allow 1,000,000,000 sq ft of building (the size of the Oaks Shopping Mall) plus 300 homes with no limit of square footage. The only mitigation for traffic is a proposed "roundabout" on Kanan Dume Hwy. No highway widening or new road is proposed.

Citizens for Sensitive Development, a project of the International Humanities Center, http://ihcenter.org/groups/csd is helping fund the lawsuit filed December 10, 2008 by Mary Altmann in Superior Court. The reason for the lawsuit is that the current AVSP environmental impact report ("EIR") failed to identify Fire Hazard as a significant impact, failed to adequately assess and mitigate the archeological impact of the development, and failed to notify people who commented on the prior EIR as required by law.

Judge Thomas I. McKnew, Jr. heard the case July 28, 2009. He agreed with the City on all points and entered a corresponding judgment August 26, 2008. An appeal to this decision was filed October 22, 2009 over concern the judgment was factually and materially incorrect. The case in the California Court of Appeals should be heard in 2010.

Citizens for Sensitive Development are interested in a project that will honor the historic Indian life and unique species present there, preserve the unique quality of the area, and hallmark the area as the rural Gateway to the Santa Monica Mountains. Some of us envision a low-density, recreational only (no residential) project with an aquatic theme so visitors and residents may choose between recreation at Agoura Hills, or hitting the traffic for the beach. In any case, we are against the massive upzoning of this area, and can only logically conclude it will be a safety hazard and traffic concern in it's present form. We think of sensible, reasonable alternatives, and a planning decision that can and should be logically thought out and legally accurate.