Guerrero v. City of Los Angeles (Jan. 17, 2024) 98 Cal.App.5th 108 7

Guerrero challenged the MND adopted by the City of Los Angeles for its approval of a vesting tentative map in 2020 and related zone change in 2021. The City of Los Angeles filed a NOD after each action. Guerrero brought suit in 2021.

xl

Summary of Key 2024 CEQA Court Cases

Association of Environmental Professionals 2025

The City of Los Angeles argued that Guerrero’s lawsuit was time barred because it was filed after the MND’s 30-day statute of limitations ran in 2020. The trial court held for Guerrero; the Court of Appeal reversed.

The Court opined that Guerrero’s challenge to the MND should have taken place within 30 days of the filing of the first NOD in 2020. For litigation purposes, approval of the vesting tentative map “constitutes project approval under CEQA” even though additional related actions remained to be taken.

The City of Los Angeles did not need to make any changes to the MND in the form of a subsequent or supplemental document or addendum. Guerrero challenged only the MND, not the City of Los Angeles’s finding that no subsequent or supplemental document or addendum was necessary before approving the zone change. The Court explained why this meant that the 2020 NOD was the proper starting place for the statute of limitations:

Once the statute of limitations has expired, “any challenges under CEQA to later approvals or to changes in the project are ‘“limited to the legality of the agency’s decision about whether to require a subsequent or supplemental EIR, or subsequent negative declaration, and the underlying EIR or negative declaration may not be attacked.”’ [Citations.] . . . [T]his limitation applies even if the original MND was invalid or in some way defective. [Citations.]” ( Megaplex-Free Alameda , supra, 149 Cal.App.4th at p. 110.)

Objectors contend that Appellants’ reliance on case law involving supplemental or subsequent environmental review is misplaced, and that the cases are distinguishable. They argue that because the City adopted the MND in June 2021 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, section 15074, subdivision (b), their CEQA challenge was timely. However, because the limitations period for challenging the MND closed 30 days after the March 3, 2020 NOD was filed, and because there have been no changes to the Project requiring a subsequent or supplemental MND, the later adoptions of the same MND cannot restart or retrigger a new limitations period.