by Dan Raile : pando – excerpt
The Silicon Valley corporate practice of shipping outlying employees to-and-from HQ in giant private shuttles erupted in conflict early last year with a spate of well-documented bus blockades.
The plaintiffs are wielding that quintessential Californian cudgel, the California Environmental Quality Act, seeking to throw an Environmental Impact Report into the works of the pilot shuttle program. They also allege that the shuttles are illegal under state vehicle code, stopping as they do in red zones…
“They’ve been begging us from the time we brought this lawsuit to let them out, and in open court said we had only included them to attract publicity,” said Richard Drury, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs.
Generally, intervenors carry the same rights and liabilities of other interested parties. They could be deposed and subjected to discovery proceedings. Perhaps, as involved but non-sued parties, they can seek to limit their exposure in some material way…
If the various City agencies intend to draw the case out in hopes it will simply go away, Drury has bad news for them.
“It wouldn’t be moot even if the trial were extended past January 31st. The City wants to do a permanent program, and that could still require and EIR and still be found illegal. Otherwise, they could theoretically continue to do pilot programs forever without us ever able to get it to trial in 18 months. But there is a mootness exemption called “capable of repetition but evading review” which keeps that from happening.”… (more)