Merced County agency sued over transportation plan

Two environmental organizations are suing the Merced County Association of Governments for adopting a regional transportation plan they claim fails to meet targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, lacks a full review of environmental impacts and doesn’t encourage public transportation.

The Regional Transportation Plan is MCAG’s long-range planning document. Updated every four years, the plan outlines major transportation projects and specifies the investments necessary for improvement of the transportation network over the next 25 years.

The plan, which was adopted by MCAG in September, encompasses the region’s public transit, highway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. MCAG is a Merced-based joint powers agency that serves as the region’s planning organization.

According to the complaint filed Friday by the Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity, the plan allows per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the region to rise between 2020 and 2035. This goes against state legislation passed in 2008 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, according to the lawsuit.

The goal for the San Joaquin Valley region is to have greenhouse gas emissions 5percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 10 percent below 2005 levels by 2035. MCAG’s plan fails to meet the region’s 2035 greenhouse gas reduction target, the lawsuit says.

MCAG’s attorney, Emily Haden, could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

Senate Bill 375, the 2008 legislation that supports reducing greenhouse gas emissions, also requires agencies like MCAG to adopt a Sustainable Communities Strategy, which promotes “compact, transit-oriented communities.”

Environmental experts say the goal is to encourage densely developed communities, where people can walk or take public transit instead of driving – reducing the number of cars on the road. The lawsuit claims MCAG maintained its current transportation approach instead of promoting more public transit and establishing bike lanes.

“The most concerning thing is that this plan does not promote compact city-centric communities,” said Rachel Hooper, a San Francisco-based attorney representing the Sierra Club. “It does not encourage public transit, and that’s what we need to stabilize the climate.”

Hooper said the lawsuit was the Sierra Club’s last attempt at getting MCAG to rescind the transportation plan and adopt a new one. The environmental group is also seeking compensation for its attorney’s fees from MCAG.

“Litigation was the last resort and we regret that we had to file this case,” she said. “We did send letters advising the agency they had violated the law. We only sued because those letters were ignored.”

Kevin Bundy, the Center for Biological Diversity’s attorney, could not be reached Tuesday.

The lawsuit also alleges MCAG failed to comply with the environmental review processes required by the California Environmental Quality Act. According to the lawsuit, MCAG relied on a prior environmental analysis from 2011, called a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, but advocates said that’s not enough.

“The supplemental EIR did not address issues like farmland loss, water quality and how climate conditions have changed,” said Gary Lasky, conservation and legal chair for the Sierra Club, the Tehipite chapter.

“A supplemental EIR is only okay if there are no significant changes in conditions or in the law since the original report,” Lasky continued. “We’ve had growth, recession and new knowledge of climate change since then.”

Lasky said MCAG should conduct a new, full environmental impact report to address these changes.

MCAG is now working on an alternative planning strategy, Lasky said, which outlines alternative land use and transportation scenarios that will meet greenhouse gas reduction targets.

However, he added, there’s no assurance those scenarios will be followed and are not subject to environmental review.

This story was originally published October 28, 2014 at 6:58 PM with the headline "Merced County agency sued over transportation plan."