SANTA CLARITA ORG. v. County of Los Angeles

Rossmann & Moore, Antonio Rossmann, Roger Brannon Moore, San Francisco, and David Rowen, for amicus curiae The Planning & Conservation League in support of Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Raymond Fortner, County Counsel, Tracy Swann and Lawrence Hafetz, Deputy County Counsel for Defendant and Respondent County of Los Angeles.

Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, Robert I. McMurry, Ann Catherine Norian, Los Angeles, and Edgar Kalatian, for

Real Parties in Interest and Respondents Newhall Land and Farming Company and Valencia Corporation.

GILBERT, P.J.

In Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment v. County of Los Angeles (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 715 , 131 Cal.Rptr.2d 186 ( Scope I), we held that the water service portion of an environmental impact report (EIR) must analyze the actual amount of water that will be available for a project. In Scope I, the EIR for the West Creek residential subdivision did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.). [1] It relied on contractual entitlements to water. Because this water is not of the "wet" variety, it has been called "paper water."

After remand, the County of Los…