HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-11-12 - RESOLUTIONS - CEMEX VS LACO (2)RESOLUTION NO. 02-160
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE
CALIFORNIA STATE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE INTERVENTION IN THE
CEMEX VS. LOS ANGELES COUNTY CASE IN ORDER TO PURSUE THE
PROTECTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S SOVEREIGNTY AND PREVENT
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THROUGH THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT,
FROM SUCCESSFULLY ARGUING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S
PREEMPTIVE RIGHTS IN THIS MATTER
WHEREAS, Cemex vs. Los Angeles County involves the County's exercise of
discretion and processing of the Soledad Canyon Sand and Gravel Mining Project ("Soledad
Canyon Project").
WHEREAS, in May 1991, Transit Mixed Concrete Company ("TMC") (predecessor to
plaintiff Cemex, Inc., a Louisiana corporation ("CEMEX"), submitted an application to the
Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for the proposed surface mining of 56.1 -million
tons of concrete aggregate, sand and gravel, on a 500 -acre subsurface estate owned by the
federal Bureau of Land Management ("BLM"). The proposed project would extend over a
20 -year period and include the operation of a concrete batching plant, appurtenant
facilities, and the authorization of a reclamation plan for the mined land. The proposed
project is the subject of two companion federal contracts issued by the BLM to CEMEX
which authorize the proposed mining, subject, however, to compliance with applicable state
and local laws and regulations.
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2000, the BLM issued a Record of Decision ("ROD")
approving Cemex's proposed mining operations subject to compliance with numerous state
and local laws and regulations. Pursuant to the State Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
("SMARA"), Cemex was required to obtain a surface mining permit, and approval of the
reclamation plan, from the County of Los Angeles and to obtain additional permits from
various other agencies of the State of California. All these approvals required compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA").
WHEREAS, on November 27, 2001, and after expressing concerns over the adequacy
of the FEIR's analysis of traffic impacts and suggested mitigation measures, the Board of
Supervisors postponed a vote on the Soledad Canyon Project until February 26, 2002.
Rather than wait for the County to issue a decision on the project, or assist with preparing
a revised traffic impacts analysis, Cemex filed suit against the County in the United States
District Court, Central District of California.
WHEREAS, on April 23, 2002, the County of Los Angeles, lead agency for the
Soledad Canyon Project under SMARA and CEQA, formally denied the project and adopted
findings in support of its decision. The County's denial was based in part on a number of
issues:
I. Cemex failed to demonstrate that the project would not adversely affect the
health, safety, and welfare of persons residing in the surrounding area;
Resolution No. 02-160
Page 2
2. The project was inconsistent with the County of Los Angeles General Plan; and
3. Cemex failed to cooperate in its recirculation of the EIR for the project, as
required by CEQA, precluding an adequate analysis of traffic impacts.
WHEREAS, in the complaint filed on January 25, 2002, Cemex among other things
contends that the Los Angeles County surface mining and reclamation permit approval
process, as prescribed under SMARA, and the conditions imposed by the County on the
project, are preempted by federal law, and specifically, the Supremacy and Property
Clauses of the U.S. Constitution.
WHEREAS, on September 9, 2002, the Court granted the United States Attorney's
motion to intervene as a plaintiff iia the action on behalf of the United States Department of
the Interior ("DOI"). The County anticipates that plaintiffs will file a motion for summary
judgment in the near future. The State's immediate intervention is therefore critical.
WHEREAS, the federal government's intervention at the trial court level on behalf
of plaintiff Cemex Corporation emphasizes the importance of State intervention and
representation in the trial court proceedings. Adverse decisions in this case would
significantly reduce state and local authority to conduct environmental review and issue
permits under state law.
1. If submitted immediately, the State's application to intervene would be
considered timely by the Court because the case is within the early stages of the
proceedings.
2. The State of California could demonstrate a direct and protectable interest in the
subject matter because of the Department of Conservation's authority over
mining resources, reclamation plans, and other responsibilities under SMARA.
Contracts issued by the BLM to Cemex require compliance with SMARA.
3. The case has potentially wide-ranging statewide significance because it attempts
to pit the federal government's purported interest against the State's interests.
4. The DOC's interests are inadequately represented by the existing parties.
WHEREAS, the preemptive action by the federal government in Cemex vs. Los
Angeles County is just one of several such actions in California. This is a practice that is
threatening the sovereignty of the State of California.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby
resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. Request the California Attorney General to file a request for
intervention in the Cemex vs. Los Angeles County case immediately;
Resolution No. 02-160
Page 3
-- SECTION 2. Request California Governor Davis to actively support the California
Attorney General's intervention in the Cemex vs. Los Angeles County case on behalf
of the California Department of Conservation; and
SECTION 3. Request the support of other local partners, including other public
agencies, Assemblyman Richman, and Senator Knight, in the City's efforts to join us
by formally requesting this action by the California Attorney General.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of November, 2002.
MA OR
ATTEST:
C 1'Y CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Sharon L. Dawson, CMC, City Clerk, of the City of Santa Clarita do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa
Clarita at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 12th day of November, 2002, by the
following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
JJL:lep:srl
S:\\PBS\TMC\cc,es .attygeu.111202.doc
McLean, Kellar, Smyth, Weste, Ferry
None
None
CITY CLERK