A mitigation policy that requires acreage to be set aside for agriculture in the same amount that is used for new subdivisions will not be reviewed by the California Supreme Court. A local judge initially found the policy unconstitutional, but the appellate court reversed that decision on the basis that farming could be adversely affected when farmland is lost to urban development.
The higher court's denial to hear the case means that the court of appeals' decision will stand. The Supreme Court only hears one percent of requests originating from civil lawsuits. Stanislaus County's conservation program was not the first or only of its kind, as several areas adopted similar rules before this program was challenged.
To read the last post about the Stanislaus County program being upheld by the appeals court, click here.
Posted: 3/1/11
