2022-11-04 (F) Save the Field (Supreme Ct) - Petition for Review.pdf

​

Save the Field petitioned the California Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District Division One's unpublished decision. Case S276936.

This continuance leaves the injunction in place for now. 👍

Judge Bacal continued the hearing on the petition for writ of mandate to December 16, 2022 at 1:30 p.m.

This continuance leaves the injunction in place for now. 👍

Judge Bacal continued the hearing on the petition for writ of mandate to October 14, 2022 at 1:30 p.m.

https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/nonpub/D079480.PDF

​

​DMUSD's claims that the appeal is frivolous or unjustified are completely denied: pp 2-24

The judgement that the MND + FEIR are compliant with CEQA, despite arguments to the contrary during oral arguments: pp 24-37

​

37-2022-00005335-CU-TT-CTL_ROA-92_07-05-22_Order_1657393112774.pdf

​

August 2022: At the August 24th School Board Meeting, Chris Delehanty stated, "We've been working with our counsel to move forward with the steps in the court of appeal that will come September 13th, and with our hearing with the lawsuit against the City of San Diego to move forward in moving past that injunction and getting that project done." The meeting presentation slide also includes the hearing for the lawsuit against the City of San Diego has a September 30th date.

According to the Superior Court website, the appeal case had no future events scheduled as of the date of the school board meeting, so it is unclear where the September 13th date comes from.

​

July 7, 2022: DMUSD requested permission to appeal the injunction.

​Justices Huffman, Haller, and Dato denied DMUSD permission to appeal the injunction against the City of San Diego. DMUSD did not publicly disclose this at the July or August regular board meetings.

​

April 2022: At the April 27th School Board Meeting, the appeal timeline was communicated as "sometime in the summer, we don't have a date yet".

Also during the same part of the meeting, the injunction was communicated, "...As you know there was a hearing last week, the tentative ruling was not in our favor. Our legal counsel argued well on our behalf and it was not instated with ... briefing and we're continuing to work and fight against that, uh, a lot of projects continue so we'll update as we have more information on that."

37-2022-00005335-CU-TT-CTL_ROA-83_05-12-22_Minute_Order_1652453983887

The Court, having taken the above-entitled matter under submission on 04/22/2022 and having fully considered the arguments of all parties, both written and oral, as well as the evidence presented, now rules as follows:
Petitioner's motion for preliminary injunction is GRANTED, conditioned on petitioner posting a bond in the amount of $60,000.

​

This is the final version of the injunction that stopped construction.

37-2022-00005335-CU-TT-CTL_ROA-60_04-01-22_Minute_Order_1650032900573.pdf

​

April 1 2022: Justice Bacal granted Save the Field an injunction against the City of San Diego based on the strength of the evidence.

​

February 2022: DMUSD started construction despite not having all of their environmental review settled. Meanwhile, Save the Field applied for an injunction of the City of San Diego’s permits to stop further damage.

​

January 2022: DMUSD applied for permits from the City of San Diego, despite the appeal not being settled and not having complete environmental review.

​

The following links are the Municipal Code listing the requirements that are not met by this project:

​

The Project Fails to Comply with the City’s CDP and LCP Requirements

https://docs.sandiego.gov/municode/MuniCodeChapter12/Ch12Art06Division07.pdf

​

The proposed coastal development will not adversely affect environmentally sensitive lands (see Pictures).

​

b) Supplemental Findings--Deviations to Environmentally Sensitive Lands Within the Coastal Overlay Zone

(2) The proposed coastal development permit will preserve existing public views to and along the ocean and other scenic coastal areas as specified in the Local Coastal Program land use plan and Chapter 13, Article 2, Division 4.

(3) The proposed coastal development complies with the Environmentally Sensitive Lands Regulations in Chapter 14, Article 3, Division 1.

​

Despite receiving permission to repair the damage done during construction, the repair was wholly inadequate and allowed erosion to flow into the protected Reserve.

Wildfire risk and Inability to evacuate should immediately disqualify this design.

The design is too large for the small neighborhood.

​

https://docs.sandiego.gov/municode/MuniCodeChapter12/Ch12Art06Division03.pdf

126.0301

Article 6: Development Permits Division 3: Conditional Use Permit Procedures

(Added 12-9-1997 by O-18451 N.S.; effective 1-1-2000.)

Purpose of the Conditional Use Permit Procedures

The purpose of these procedures is to establish a review process for the development of uses that may be desirable under appropriate circumstances, but are not permitted by right in the applicable zone. The intent of these procedures is to review these uses on a case-by-case basis to determine whether and under what conditions the use may be approved at a given site. Further, the intent is that each use be developed so as to fully protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the community. To provide this protection, conditions may be applied to address potential adverse effects associated with the proposed use.

(Added 12-9-1997 by O-18451 N.S.; effective 1-1-2000.)

The city did not analyze the rebuild to ensure consistency with the SD Climate Action Plan.

The rebuild fails to comply with the city’s CDP and LCP requirements.

The project is not in conformity with the city’s Certified Local Coastal Development Plan.

​

The Del Mar Heights Rebuild Focuses on Car Traffic at the Expense of Compliance with the City of San Diego Climate Action Plan

https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/san_diegos_2022_climate_action_plan_0.pdf

​

Car traffic into the bottlenecked site is a core issue highlighted by the horrific May 13, 2016 accident. Despite that known traffic issue, the district has spent two years avoiding a traffic study and attempting to solve the traffic problem by increasing the number of cars on the site. The design includes more car parking spaces, and does not include bike parking, off-street bike access, busing, carpooling, or EV charging.

​

STFvCityofSD_02082022petition.pdf

​

Save the Field petitioned the San Diego Superior Court regarding the City of San Diego's Approval of the CDP, CUP, SDP, and CDP.

A 37-2020-00020207-CU-TT-CTL_ROA-108_08-06-21_Notice_of_Appeal_1628822197342.pdf

​

August 2021: Save the Field appealed the December judgment that led to the improper use of an MND and FEIR.

37-2020-00020207-CU-TT-CTL_ROA-105_07-07-21_Final_Return_and_Request_for_Discharge_1627055601716.pdf

​

July 2021: DMUSD resurrected the vacated Mitigated Negative Declaration and combined it with a Focused Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), a document that is normally used to remedy a Full EIR that has minor issues. This combination is in violation of CEQA law.

37-2020-00020207-CU-TT-CTL_ROA-51_12-23-20_Notice_of_Ruling_on_Petition_for_Writ_of_Mandate_1610578030998.pdf

​

December 22nd, 2020: At the December 22nd, 2020 special board meeting, DMUSD stated the following, "As you know we had a court hearing today, and we are happy with the decision, and we appreciate the judge's thoughtful and comprehensive ruling. Now that the judge has set aside the central concerns raised by the litigants, we stand ready to move forward with the rebuild of Del Mar Heights School."

​

Judge Wohlfeil ruled against DMUSD on three counts that that required remediation. As part of this process, he vacated the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and the judgment stated that DMUSD was required to follow CEQA law.

4274096-v1--2020-11-06 (F) Response to Obj to Opening Brief

4274099-v1--2020-11-06 (F) Notice of Lodgment of Excerpts of Administrative Record

4274089-v1--2020-11-06 (F) Reply to Brief in Oppo to Petition for Writ of Mandate

4255272-v1--2020-10-28 DMUSD Opposition Writ of Mandate Dec

4255275-v1--2020-10-28 DMUSD Opposition Writ of Mandate

4255274-v1--2020-10-28 DMUSD Opposition Writ of Mandate Brief

4255273-v1--2020-10-28 DMUSD Opposition Writ of Mandate Objections to Petition

4255271-v1--2020-10-28 DMUSD Opposition Writ of Mandate Dec

A Community Fire Safety Report by an expert on fire safety, regarding the proposed changes to Del Mar Heights School.

The petition document delivered to the district on Friday, 12 June 2020, outlining violations that are the causes of action.

​

June 2020: Despite months of community engagement and protest, DMUSD went ahead with the oversized school plans with only a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) despite the fire risk and lack of defensible space, so Save the Field was forced to file a CEQA lawsuit to ensure proper environmental review.

The supporting information for the petition.

“[A] watchdog to ensure that the Del Mar School District…[doesn’t] deprive children of critical play space…”

“[T]his project as proposed has not fully addressed all of the associated environmental impacts. A much more thorough analysis of these impacts, and better design/mitigation is essential…”

​Letter from DMUSD Superintendent Holly McClurg to then-City Council President Pro Tem Barbara Bry, asking for improvements to city streets and sidewalks.

​

DMUSD Knows It Needs a Traffic Study and Upgraded Sidewalks, but Doesn’t Want Responsibility for Them

Despite all of the attention on increasing car traffic traffic on campus, DMUSD knows that traffic is a problem and sidewalks are inadequate.

In a January 25, 2019 letter to then-City Council President Pro Tem Barbara Bry, Supt Holly McClurg requested that the city make important improvements to crosswalks, and implement traffic calming measures. “We recommend a study be performed of the traffic crossing west to east on Boquita Drive. Please note, the District would like the results of the traffic study to be utilized in the upcoming reconstruction of the Del Mar Heights School.”

At a recent meeting with Del Mar Heights parents, Chris Delehanty admitted that they removed the ADA ramp to avoid having to do a traffic study.

The district has repeatedly stated their goal is to bring more cars into the school site by extending the queue and doubling parking.

Traffic into the bottleneck is a top issue with the site, however the Project currently has no traffic study. In addition, the district has openly said they removed the ADA ramp at the south end of the parking lot to avoid being required to do a traffic study.

The San Diego Taxpayer's Association supported Measure MM in July 2018.