Ballona Wetlands: Court Rules Against Restoration Opponents

On February 21, 2023, Superior Court Judge Hon. Mary H. Strobel denied a petition brought by Ballona Wetlands Restoration opponents attempting to stop restoration work by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). This means the work may proceed for the time being.

At issue is $1.7 million in Proposition 12 bond funds allocated by the California Coastal Conservancy (Conservancy) to CDFW for restoration work at the Ballona Wetlands, in the area south of Culver Blvd. The work, to be performed by CDFW's contractor ESA and others, involves preliminary planning and engineering for the enhancement of tidal channels and removal of non-native, invasive plants.

Four other lawsuits brought against CDFW challenging the Restoration Project EIR will be heard separately by another judge in May of this year.

Restoration opponent Ballona Wetlands Land Trust (BLT) filed the lawsuit against the state last year and the case is scheduled for trial in October of this year. However, BLT sought to have all ongoing work, and expenditure of the funds, immediately stopped by the court.

The BLT argued to the court that they would be irreparably harmed if this work were allowed to move forward and, therefore, requested a preliminary injunction (a court order to stop the work now). BLT also argued that they were likely to prevail when the case went to trial in October.

The court was not persuaded. Siding with CDFW and the Conservancy, Judge Strobel wrote:

"While the court finds that Petitioner [BLT] has shown some probability of success, the court characterizes that probability of success [at trial] as relatively low. Since Petitioner also does not show evidence of irreparable harm, the two interrelated factors do not weigh for granting injunctive relief. The motion for preliminary injunction is DENIED. The request for an immediate stay of CDFW's approval of the ESA Contract is derivative of Petitioner's arguments for a preliminary injunction and is denied for the same reasons."

In Judge Strobel's 24-page opinion, she discusses the case particulars at length and in doing so, sheds dim light on BLT's likelihood of success at trial in October. Based on my amateur reading of the Judge’s words, I would characterize BLT's chances as a "sucker bet".

In their lawsuit filing, BLT asks the court to require state taxpayers to foot their bills for court and attorney costs. Should BLT lose at trial in October, they and not taxpayers must pay their court costs and attorney's fees.

Enjoy your Ballona Wetlands!

References:

Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No. 22STCP03307. Ballona Wetlands Land Trust vs. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, et al.

Ballona Wetlands: Coastal Commission Approves Ballona Early Permits. Marina Del Rey Patch. December 16, 2022. https://patch.com/california/m...

Ballona Wetlands Restoration: Litigation Update, Summer 2022. Marina Del Rey Patch. August 5, 2022. https://patch.com/california/m...

Author's note on affiliations:

Dr. David W. Kay served on the Board of Directors of the non-profit Friends of Ballona Wetlands from 2007 until 2015, and served as Board President in 2012-13. He presently serves on the Board of Ballona Discovery Park in Playa Vista. Dr. Kay is a staunch advocate for the state of California's plans to restore the Ballona Wetlands Ecological Reserve.

From 1984 until 2022, Dr. Kay was employed by Southern California Edison Company, exclusively in the company's environmental services organizations. His many responsibilities included restoration of the 440-acre San Dieguito Wetlands near Del Mar. He retired in 2022 as Senior Manager for Major Project Environmental Management at the company, after 38 years of service.

Dr. Kay earned bachelor and masters degrees in biology and a doctorate in environmental science. See Dr. Kay’s Patch Community Contributor profile here.