Articles Posted in Land Use

Published on:

by and

On the heels of President Trump’s January 20, 2025, Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy” promoting domestic energy and resource independence, he is promoting United States natural resources with Executive Order (“EO”) 14157, “Immediate Measure to Increase American Mineral Production,” issued March 20 to spotlight and bolster domestic mining. The President’s latest effort to prioritize mining, and in particular critical minerals, should come as no surprise. In a January 2025 speech, President Donald Trump framed his administration’s vision for domestic mineral production, particularly rare earth minerals, which are currently dominated by Chinese production: “We’re going to environmentally free up our rare earth minerals… We have some of the best rare earth anywhere in the world, but we’re not allowed to use it because the environmentalists got there first. They use the environment to stop progress, and we’re not going to let that happen.” [EO 14157 can be found here.]

Consistent with this vision, the March 20 EO seeks to accelerate domestic mining projects, reduce reliance on foreign supply chains, and streamline regulatory processes, including by expanding the scope of critical minerals to include gold, copper, uranium, and potash, while addressing critical bottlenecks in mine waste management. The order also permits the National Energy Dominance Council (“NEDC”), established by the President’s February 2025 Executive Order “Establishing the Energy Dominance Council“, to add other minerals to be within the scope of the order.

The EO focuses on three core mechanisms to boost domestic mineral production: (1) expedited permitting, (2) federal land leasing, and (3) funding and financing. The EO also notably addresses the uncertainty surrounding mining waste management under the Mining Act of 1872, particularly after the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., 33 F.4th 1202 (9th Cir. 2022) (“Rosemont Decision”). Some key points under the EO, and potential implications, include the following:

Continue reading
Published on:

by

On April 25, 2019, the California Construction and Industrial Materials Association (CalCIMA) filed a petition for writ of mandate and complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief (“Petition”)  in Ventura County Superior Court challenging the County of Ventura’s approval of a proposed “Habitat Connectivity and Wildlife Corridor” Project and its implementing regulations.  The Project was approved by the County Board of Supervisors in March 2019 and is intended to “discourage” development within the Project area.  The County approved the Project without completing environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The Project is essentially an overlay zone that is several hundred thousand-acres in size and includes thousands of acres of important mineral resource deposits (construction aggregate) that have been previously identified by the California Geological Survey and, in some instances, designated by the State Mining and Geology Board (both of which are separate divisions of the Department of Conservation) as being “regionally significant” in meeting the region’s building material needs. These important mineral deposits are a protected natural resource under CEQA and are necessary for use in future housing projects, road construction and repairs, and public infrastructure projects.

Due to the importance of these mineral resources, the County previously approved a Mineral Resources Protection overlay zone intended to ensure the resources were available for future extraction, and not encumbered by incompatible land uses.  The County also enacted specific “Goals, Policies and Programs” in its General Plan to provide enhanced protection for these mineral resources.

Despite the importance of these mineral resources, the County approved the Project overlay zone without completing any CEQA review.  The County concluded that CEQA compliance was not required because the Project is intended to benefit the environment.  However, notwithstanding these potential benefits, the Project and its implementing regulations will cause significant environmental impacts that require environmental review in accordance with CEQA, including the Project’s effects on future efforts to extract critical mineral resources. Continue reading

Published on:

by

On November 14, 2008, federal court Judge A. Howard Matz of the United States District Court,

Central District of California, awarded JMBM’s client, CEMEX, the full amount of attorneys’ fees requested for its defense of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lawsuit.

The attorneys’ fees were incurred in the last round of litigation involving actions brought against CEMEX with respect to a proposed sand and gravel quarry in Southern California. In this action, JMBM successfully defended the adequacy—under CEQA—of an environmental impact report prepared by the County of Los Angeles. JMBM sought and obtained on behalf of CEMEX, a substantial award of attorneys’ fees.

Continue reading