Page 13 - gateking051309

In spring 2006, before the adequacy of the City’s EIR for Gate King’s proposed

project had been resolved, CWIN and NCWD agreed on a stipulation for judgment in

their parallel annexation case. On June 1, 2006, the trial court entered a judgment on the

parties’ stipulation. The judgment provided that the trial court would issue a peremptory
writ of mandate commanding NCWD to set aside its WSA for the annexation of the Gate

King site, and to stay all proceedings to annex the Gate King site, until such time as the

City recertified its EIR for Gate King’s proposed project in compliance with California

Oak, and NCWD then “considered the project based on the City[’s] certified EIR.”

As noted above, the City certified its EIR/FAA for Gate King’s proposed project
in July 11, 2006. On July 13, 2006, NCWD adopted a resolution approving the City’s

EIR/FAA, and reaffirming NCWD’s annexation of the Gate King site.

In October 2006, NCWD filed a return to the trial court’s peremptory writ of

mandate in which it requested an order discharging the trial court’s writ, and dismissing

CWIN’s case. Broadly summarized, NCWD’s return argued that the trial court’s writ
should be discharged because CWIN had complied with the writ’s command to consider

Gate King’s project based on the City’s recertified EIR/FAA. In November 2006, CWIN

filed an objection to the return.

In June 2007, CWIN’s objections to NCWD’s return were argued to the trial court

(on the same day that SCOPE’s contentions were argued regarding the adequacy of the
City’s recertified EIR/FAA). On August 15, 2007, the trial court issued a statement of

decision in which it ruled that NCWD had not violated CEQA by incorporating the City’s

environmental findings regarding Gate King’s project. It followed, concluded the court,

that its writ should be discharged, and that CWIN’s petition should be dismissed.

On September 5, 2007, the trial court entered a formal order discharging its
peremptory writ of mandate, and dismissing CWIN’s petition.

In November 2007, CWIN filed a timely notice of appeal. (case No. B203781.)

13