Author Archives: rmm_admin

James G. Moose

James G. Moose

Senior Partner

Mr. Moose joined the firm in 1986 as an associate, became a partner in 1990, and is now the senior partner in the firm.  His practice focuses on land use, water, and environmental matters, with an emphasis on issues arising under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State Planning and Zoning Law, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, the California Endangered Species Act, and other relevant land use and environmental statutes.  He represents public agencies, project proponents, consulting firms, non-profit organizations, and individuals.  He handles all phases of the land use entitlement process and permitting processes, including administrative approvals and litigation. Over the course of his career, he has also participated in drafting amendments to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.

Along with his former partner Tina Thomas and Whit Manley (Of Counsel to RMM), Mr. Moose is co-author of Guide to the California Environmental Quality Act (11th ed. 2007, Solano Press Books).

Representative matters in which Mr. Moose is currently involved, or has recently been involved, include the following:

  • Outside counsel to the California Department of Water Resources for both regulatory permitting and litigation with respect to the “California Water Fix” project, which involves proposed new water diversion and conveyance facilities for the State Water Project in the northern Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta;
  • Outside counsel to the California Governor’s Office and the California Department of Conservation with respect to the EIR required by Senate Bill 4 (Pavley 2013) on the subject of “well stimulation treatment” (including hydraulic fracturing) in California;
  • Outside counsel to the California High-Speed Rail Authority in CEQA litigation over the adequacy of the EIR for the Merced to Fresno segment of the future statewide high-speed train system;
  • Counsel to Friant Ranch LP in litigation over the adequacy of Fresno County’s EIR for the Friant Ranch Specific Plan, decided by the California Supreme Court on December 24, 2018;
  • Litigation counsel to Domain Corporation, proponent of the Ferrini Ranch project in Monterey County;
  • Outside litigation counsel to Yorba Linda Estates, LLC, with respect to its Esperanza Hills project in Orange County adjacent to Chino Hills State Park;
  • Outside counsel to the City of Santa Cruz on a variety of environmental, land use, and water-related matters;
  • Outside counsel to the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission with respect to the proposed North Coast Rail Trail Project;
  • Outside counsel to the City of Salinas on a variety of land use matters;
  • Outside counsel to the City of Roseville on a variety of land use and environmental matters;
  • Outside counsel to the Sierra Community College District with respect to its Facilities Master Plan Update for its Sierra College Campus in Rocklin;
  • Outside counsel to the North Kern Water District with respect to CEQA issues associated with competing water rights applications on the Kern River; and
  • Land use counsel to Love’s Travel Stops & Country Stores with respect to the company’s proposed travel centers in California.

Published Cases

Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (Case No. S219783; Dec. 24, 2018) __ Cal.5th ___; High Sierra Rural Alliance v. County of Plumas (2018) 29 Cal.App.5th 102; Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College District (2017) 11 Cal.App.5th 596; Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Investment and Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 160; Friends of the College of San Mateo Gardens v. San Mateo County Community College District (2016) 1 Cal.5th 937; Keep Our Mountains Quiet v. County of Santa Clara (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 714; Citizens for a Green San Mateo v. San Mateo Community College District (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1572; South County Citizens for Smart Growth v. County of Nevada (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 316; Alliance for the Protection of the Auburn Community Environment v. County of Placer (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 25; Habitat and Watershed Caretakers v. City of Santa Cruz (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 1277; Salmon Protection and Watershed Network v. County of Marin (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 195; Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach (2011) 52 Cal.4th 155; California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957; California Native Plant Society v. City of Rancho Cordova (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 603; Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412; Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1490; Californians Against Waste v. California Department of Conservation (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 317; CalBeach Advocates v. City of Solana Beach (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 529; County of Amador v. El Dorado County Water Agency (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 931; Chaparral Greens v. City of Chula Vista (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1134;  Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. Stanislaus County (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144; Western States Petroleum Assn. v. Superior Court (1995) 9 Cal.4th 559; Sacramento County v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1992) 3 Cal.4th 903;City of Sacramento v. State Water Resources Control Board (1992) 2 Cal.App.4th 960; Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors of Santa Barbara (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Oro Fino Gold Mining Corp. v. County of El Dorado (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 872; Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990)  221 Cal.App.3d 692; Midway Orchards v. County of Butte (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 765; Mountain Lion Coalition et al. v. California Fish and Game Commission et al.(1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 1043; City of Hanford v. Superior Court (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 580;Citizens for Quality Growth v. City of Mt Shasta (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 433; and Emmington v. Solano County Redevelopment Agency (1987) 195 Cal.App.3d 491.

Mr. Moose regularly teaches CEQA courses and seminars or lectures for such organizations as the UC Davis Extension Program, the Association of Environmental Professionals, CLE International, Lorman International, and the California Continuing Education of the Bar program, State Bar Environmental Law Conference at Yosemite. He is also President of Solar Cookers International, a Sacramento-based international nonprofit corporation focused on encouraging the use of solar thermal cooking around the world.

Education

  • J.D., University of California, Berkeley, School of Law (Boalt Hall), 1985
  • B.A., English/History, University of California, Berkeley, 1981 (cum laude; phi beta kappa)

Professional Affiliations

  • State Bar of California – Environmental Law and Public Law Sections
  • California State Courts
  • United States Supreme Court
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • United States District Court, Eastern District of California
  • United States District Court, Northern District of California
  • Articles Editor, Ecology Law Quarterly,
  • Selected for inclusion in 2009-2018 Northern California Super Lawyers ® magazine
  • Selection to the Sacramento Business Journal’s Best of the Bar 2014
  • “AV” rating, Martindale-Hubbell

Community Involvement

  • President, Solar Cookers International, Inc.
  • Advisory Board Member, Center for Law, Energy and the Environment at Berkeley Law
  • Board Member, Gifts to Share, Inc.
  • Former Board Member, Sacramento City-County Solid Waste Advisory Committee
  • Former Board Member, Environmental Council of Sacramento

Waste Management

Waste Management

For over 20 years RMM attorneys have advised both public and private entities, including Waste Management of California, Inc., in the permitting and expansion of numerous municipal solid waste and hazardous waste landfills, transfer stations, and material recovery facilities throughout California. We have experience assisting lead agencies and project proponents in protecting health, safety and the environment through compliance with CEQA, the Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939), the Tanner Act and the California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act. Our attorneys also have been involved in bioreactor, landfill-gas-to-energy, and other projects proposed to include emerging technologies in response to the problem of climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Andee Leisy is the lead attorney at RMM working on waste management issues.

Golden State Warriors “Chase” Arena – Mission Bay, San Francisco

Golden State Warriors “Chase” Arena – Mission Bay, San Francisco

The Golden State Warriors proposed to construct an 18,500-seat event center to host the Warriors’ NBA games, and to provide a state-of-the-art venue for concerts and other functions. The project also includes two 11-story office buildings and retail uses. The 11-acre site is located in the Mission Bay area of San Francisco, adjacent to the bay. The proposal met with unrelenting opposition from a small group of benefactors of UC San Francisco, who wanted to reserve the property for medical research. The City certified the EIR and approved the project in December 2015. The project qualified for a “fast-track” litigation schedule under Assembly Bill 900.

The trial court and First District Court of Appeal both ruled that the EIR was adequate. (Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Investment and Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 160.) Groundbreaking occurred in January 2017, on the same day the California Supreme Court denied a petition for review, ending the litigation. The EIR prepared by the City has won an award of excellence from the Association of Environmental Professionals, and co-counsel Gibson Dunn received a “California Lawyer of the Year” award for its work. Whit Manley of RMM served as lead CEQA counsel for the Warriors, and argued the case at both trial and on appeal.

Napa Pipe

Napa Pipe

Napa Redevelopment Partners proposed to redevelop the “Napa Pipe” site, a shuttered industrial facility on the east bank of the Napa River, just south of the City of Napa. In 2013, the County certified an EIR and approved a mixed-use project, including a Costco, office and commercial space, and 960 residential units. Although the proposal met with considerable opposition, no lawsuit was filed, and the development agreement and other entitlements are now final. RMM attorney Whit Manley represented the partnership throughout the CEQA and entitlement processes, and continues to work with the County and the City of Napa to move the project to fruition.

Treasure Island Redevelopment – City and County of San Francisco

Treasure Island Redevelopment – City and County of San Francisco

The City and County of San Francisco certified an EIR and approved a plan to redevelop Treasure and Yerba Buena Islands in the middle of San Francisco Bay. The plan calls for a new, mixed-use community, including 8,000 residential units; 140,000 square feet of commercial and retail space; 100,000 square feet of office space; restoration and reuse of historic buildings on Treasure Island; parks and open space; and a new ferry terminal. RMM advised Treasure Island Community Development (a partnership of Lennar Urban and Wilson Meany) during the City’s consideration of the project, and represented the developer in trial and appellate litigation challenging the adequacy of the EIR. The First District Court of Appeal upheld the EIR in a published decision. (Citizens for a Sustainable Treasure Island v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1036.) Whit Manley served as lead CEQA attorney in the case. Development is now underway.

Village 5 Specific Plan – Lincoln

Village 5 Specific Plan – Lincoln

The Village 5 Specific Plan will guide development on 4,785 acres along the Highway 65 bypass, adjacent to the City of Lincoln. The project includes a wide range of residential housing types, a balanced mix of commercial and business facilities, village centers, schools, fire stations, plentiful open space and parks, a modern and efficient transportation network, and other public and private uses. Tiffany Wright is the lead RMM attorney representing Richland Communities.

Village at Squaw Valley Specific Plan

Village at Squaw Valley Specific Plan

Voted 2016 ‘Best Ski Resort’ in North America by USA Today and Best Readers’ Choice, Squaw Valley/ Alpine Meadows is an internationally renowned mountain resort in North Lake Tahoe that spans over 6,000 skiable acres. The Village at Squaw Valley Specific Plan project includes the development of resort hotel, residential and employee housing, commercial, retail, and recreational uses largely on an already paved parking lot at the base of the ski resort. Andee Leisy and Whit Manley represent Squaw Valley Real Estate LLC in ongoing litigation over the adequacy of the environmental impact report certified by Placer County and related approvals.

Friant Ranch Specific Plan (Fresno County)

Friant Ranch Specific Plan (Fresno County)

Since 2011, Jim Moose and Tiffany Wright have represented Friant Ranch LP, proponents of the Friant Ranch Specific Plan, in three CEQA lawsuits over the EIR for that project. After vigorously defending the cases in the trial court, Mr. Moose and Ms. Wright helped their client settle two of the three cases. The third lawsuit resulted in a 2018 decision by the California Supreme Court, Sierra Club v. County of Fresno, which requires that air quality analyses in EIRs attempt to substantively connect air quality impacts to likely health consequences. Mr. Moose and Ms. Wright continue to represent Friant Ranch, LP, on remand from the Supreme Court.

Port of Los Angeles – Everport Expansion and the Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Program

Port of Los Angeles – Everport Expansion and the Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Program

Berths 226236 [Everport] Container Terminal Improvements Project. Andee Leisy and Laura Harris assisted the Los Angeles Harbor Department’s Environmental Management Division and consultant team with preparation of an Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement, prepared pursuant to CEQA/NEPA for the expansion and related improvements of the Everport/Evergreen terminals at the Port of Los Angeles. Ms. Leisy and Ms. Harris reviewed and commented on administrative draft sections of the EIR/EIS and assisted with responses to comments. The Board unanimously certified the EIR as adequate on October 19, 2017. Although numerous comments were received on the Draft EIR/EIS from environmental groups, no litigation was filed. RMM is also assisting the Port with numerous environmental documents as part of its Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance (MOTEMs) improvement program. Andee Leisy and Tiffany Wright are the lead RMM attorneys for the Port.