Skip to content
  • J.D., University of California, Davis, King Hall School of Law, 2000
  • B.S., Environmental Toxicology, University of California, Davis, 1995
  • State Bar of California, Environmental Law Section
  • Admitted to all California State Courts

If there is a farmers market nearby, Tiffany will probably be there. She loves procuring, preparing, eating, and learning about the amazing variety of locally-grown produce and the farmers who grow it. She also enjoys exploring California’s great outdoors, reading, and impressing her teenager with her knowledge of 80s and 90s punk and alternative music.

  • The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for CEQA review of several transit and transportation projects including the Metro Crenshaw/LAX (K) Line, Regional Connector, Westside Purple Line Extension, West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor, and the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor, and the successful defense of several of those projects in CEQA and NEPA litigation.
  • The City of Inglewood for the CEQA review of the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center (Intuit Dome) and the Inglewood Transit Connector Project
  • Richland Communities for several large specific plan projects, including the Lincoln Village 5 Specific Plan, a 4,943-acre mixed-use development in western Placer County.
  • The Port of Los Angeles for CEQA review of various projects to implement the Port’s Master Plan.
  • Calaveras County and Tuolumne County in the updates of their general plans.
  • Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502
  • Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (2013) 57 Cal.4th 439
  • Tulare Lake Canal Co. v. Stratford Public Utility Dist. (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 380
  • Today’s IV, Inc. v. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 985
  • Ocean Street Extension Neighborhood Assn. v. City of Santa Cruz (2021) 73 Cal.App.5th 985
  • Japanese Village, LLC v. Federal Transit Administration, 843 F.3d 445 (9th Cir. 2016)
  • Beverly Hills Unified School District v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 627
  • South County Citizens for Smart Growth v. County of Nevada (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 316
  • Sustainable Transportation Advocates of Santa Barbara v. Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 113.
  • St. Vincent’s School for Boys, Catholic Charities CYO v. City of San Rafael (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 989
  • CalBeach Advocates v. City of Solana Beach (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 529
Tiffany K.
Wright
SENIOR PARTNER
916.443.2745
SENIOR PARTNER
916.443.2745
SENIOR PARTNER
916.443.2745
Professional Highlights
  • As the lead CEQA attorney for numerous major transit projects for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, helped deliver billions of dollars of transit infrastructure. That work has included advising Metro throughout the environmental review process for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor, the Metro Crenshaw/LAX (K) Line, the Regional Connector, the Westside Purple Line extension, the West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor, the Green (K) Line extension, the Eastside Transit Corridor, and the North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit project. Successfully defended Metro in dozens of CEQA and NEPA lawsuits in both State and Federal courts.
  • Guided agencies through CEQA’s judicial streamlining statutes for major projects, including the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center (Intuit Dome) and the Los Angeles Aerial Rapid Transit (Gondola) projects.
  • Advising developers on housing and mixed-use projects ranging in size from small single- and multi-family projects to large specific plans encompassing thousands of acres in both the entitlement process and in litigation.
  • Advising cities and counties through the process of updating their general plans, including compliance with the Planning and Zoning Law and CEQA.
About Tiffany

Tiffany represents public agencies and private applicants in a variety of land use and environmental law matters. She has helped deliver billions of dollars in public infrastructure projects, as well as major private developments. Her practice includes all phases of land use entitlement and permitting, including administrative approvals and litigation. Her practice covers the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the California Planning and Zoning Law, the Subdivision Map Act, the Williamson Act, the California Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the federal Endangered Species Act.

Tiffany helps clients navigate California’s housing laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, Housing Crisis Act, and the Abundant and Affordable Homes Near Transit Act. She also provides strategic guidance in identifying and using CEQA tools to expedite environmental review and litigation, including judicial streamlining statutes (AB 987 and SB 44), and exemptions and streamlining for housing and transit priority projects.

Tiffany also teaches several land use and environmental law continuing education classes and seminars for professional organizations such as the Association of Environmental Professionals and Law Seminars International. She regularly speaks at conferences and meetings, such as conferences for the California Chapter of the American Planning Association, the California Association of Environmental Professionals, the League of California Cities, the County Counsels’ Association of California, and the American Public Transportation Association.

  • J.D., University of California, Davis, King Hall School of Law, 2000
  • B.S., Environmental Toxicology, University of California, Davis, 1995
  • State Bar of California, Environmental Law Section
  • Admitted to all California State Courts

If there is a farmers market nearby, Tiffany will probably be there. She loves procuring, preparing, eating, and learning about the amazing variety of locally-grown produce and the farmers who grow it. She also enjoys exploring California’s great outdoors, reading, and impressing her teenager with her knowledge of 80s and 90s punk and alternative music.

  • The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority for CEQA review of several transit and transportation projects including the Metro Crenshaw/LAX (K) Line, Regional Connector, Westside Purple Line Extension, West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor, and the East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor, and the successful defense of several of those projects in CEQA and NEPA litigation.
  • The City of Inglewood for the CEQA review of the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center (Intuit Dome) and the Inglewood Transit Connector Project
  • Richland Communities for several large specific plan projects, including the Lincoln Village 5 Specific Plan, a 4,943-acre mixed-use development in western Placer County.
  • The Port of Los Angeles for CEQA review of various projects to implement the Port’s Master Plan.
  • Calaveras County and Tuolumne County in the updates of their general plans.
  • Ocean Street Extension Neighborhood Assn. v. City of Santa Cruz (2021) 73 Cal.App.5th 985.
  • Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502.
  • Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (2013) 57 Cal.4th 439.
  • Japanese Village, LLC v. Federal Transit Administration, 843 F.3d 445 (9th Cir. 2016).
  • Beverly Hills Unified School District v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 627.
  • South County Citizens for Smart Growth v. County of Nevada (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 316.
  • Sustainable Transportation Advocates of Santa Barbara v. Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 113.
  • St. Vincent’s School for Boys, Catholic Charities CYO v. City of San Rafael (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 989.
  • CalBeach Advocates v. City of Solana Beach (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 529.
Return