Says Their Jurisdiction Preempts State CEQA Law
Seven lawsuits pending against the California High Speed Rail Authority’s plan to move forward on construction of the Fresno to Bakersfield section may have been sidetracked last Friday. The US Surface Transportation Board ruled by a 2 to 1 margin the project could not be challenged in court based on state California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) rules. The ruling appears to stop state or federal courts from issuing any kind of halt to construction of the rail line since the federal agency has jurisdiction.
The ruing states that “The issue is ripe for a decision because several CEQA lawsuits have been filed and, regardless of Opponents’ suggestions to the contrary, permanent injunctive relief has already been requested and a preliminary injunction could be requested at any time in those pending lawsuits. Moreover, the Authority states that, contrary to the claims of some of the Opponents, it is in the process of implementing and/or procuring construction contracts for a majority of the Line and uncertainty regarding the preemption issue could impact its ability to proceed.”
The Board noted that they already approved the project that has federal funding to move forward back in August.
Regards construction of this leg of the route the Authority has said it is working on a contract with Dragados USA Inc.to build the 65 mile Fresno to Bakersfield route to be signed in the next few months.The ruling appears to increase chances construction could begin soon and not be halted by some court proceeding.
Opponents of the project include the litigants in the seven CEQA lawsuits (County of Kings, Citizens for High Speed Rail Accountability, Kings County Farm Bureau, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, Dignity Health, First Free Will Baptist Church of Bakersfield, Coffee-Brimhall LLC, and the City of Shafter (collectively, CEQA Litigants)); Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail, Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund, and California Rail Foundation (collectively, Transportation Groups); United States Representatives David G. Valadao, Jeff Denham, Kevin McCarthy, and Devin G. Nunes; Senator Andy Vidak and Assemblywoman Diane L. Harkey of the California State Legislature; Friends of Rose Canyon; Madera County Farm Bureau (Farm Bureau); MEL’s Farms; Roar Foundation; Jacqueline Ayer; Carol Bender; William C. Descary; Kathy Hamilton; and Alan Scott.
The federal ruing says opponents can still argue that the state CEQA rules may affect Prop 1A state bond funding sine that is strictly a state of California matter.
“In addition, as we have noted, we do not opine here on whether Proposition 1A requires the Authority to comply with CEQA as a condition of its funding. Whether CEQA compliance is required before the Authority is allowed to obtain or use Proposition 1A funding is a question of state law for a state court to decide.”