Court Rules on Monterey High School Stadium Project

For Immediate Release

December 21, 2022

 

Contact: PK Diffenbaugh, Superintendent | 831.235.2155

                       

COURT RULES ON MONTEREY HIGH SCHOOL STADIUM PROJECT

Court ruling in favor of MPUSD on all major components of Project;

Limited additional CEQA analysis to cause further delay

 

Monterey, CA - On December 8, 2022, Judge Thomas Wills of the Monterey County Superior Court issued his ruling in the case of Preserving the Peace v. Monterey Peninsula Unified School District. The case filed on August 27, 2021, against Monterey Peninsula Unified School District (MPUSD) sought to set aside MPUSD’s Board of Education approval of the long-awaited Monterey High School Stadium Project. 

 

The court ruled in favor of MPUSD on all major components of the project, but also concluded that the district should conduct limited additional California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis. This ruling will now cause further delay of a project that was originally introduced three years ago in 2019. 

 

“While the court determined that the district’s environmental review was adequate on all major issues, the ruling's requirement of additional analysis under CEQA will lead to continued delay of this needed project. Because of these lawsuits, class after graduating class continues to be denied the ability to utilize a safer, up to date, legally compliant athletic facility,” said Superintendent PK Diffenbaugh, Monterey Peninsula Unified School District. “It will be difficult to tell students that the project they have been waiting for since 2019 will be delayed yet again.”

 

The project addresses necessary updating of the Dan Albert Stadium at Monterey High School and additional athletic facilities on campus, including:

 

• Converting an existing dirt field adjacent to the Dan Albert Stadium that is used for overflow parking into a softball/multi-use field
• A 1,920 square foot strength and conditioning center
• Improvements to the track and field event area
• Four new, permanent field lights at Dan Albert Stadium
• Renovation of the stadium to be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act
• Replacement of the temporary press box
• New public address system
• Installation of separate visitor bleachers on the opposite side of the stadium

 

“The benefit the project will have for our students cannot be overstated,” said Monterey High School Principal Tom Newton. “Once complete, MHS soccer programs will no longer have to end practices and games due to darkness, girls’ softball will no longer have to miss class to travel through downtown to Jacks Park for practices and games, and students will have the opportunity to play in front of a home crowd instead of traveling off-campus to the Monterey Peninsula College’s lighted athletic field for football games. Planned improvements to the stadium and lower field will also help ensure compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title IX and, most importantly, ensure safety for student athletes.”

 

Background

 

On July 27, 2021, following extensive study and public input, MPUSD’s Governing Board certified an approximately 2,000 page final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that included legally binding mitigation measures that addressed neighborhood concerns including: 

1. Lights will only be used during from October – March
2. Lights will be turned off by 8 p.m. except for five nights a year
3. Lighted fields will not be used on weekends
4. Outside groups can not use the fields after 6:00 p.m.
5. No use of the fields will be allowed on Sundays
6. The district will limit the use of the public address system only to necessary announcements

Despite the district’s attempts to find common ground with neighbors, petitioners “Preserving the Peace” filed a lawsuit on August 27, 2021, in Monterey County Superior Court to stop the project, alleging five causes of action:

1. Violation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which requires that the District have analyzed potential impacts for the Stadium and Field Project and adopted mitigation measures where those impacts were found to be potentially significant
2. Violation of CEQA relating to a previously abandoned parking project
3. Violation of CEQA regarding the alleged widening of Logan Lane
4. Violation of Government Code section 53094, relating to the district’s exemption from local zoning ordinances
5. Violation of local zoning ordinances.

Petitioners’ legal counsel has filed two other lawsuits related to the project, one of which remains pending, and accuses the State Architect of having violated the law in approving the project. Additionally, more than 100 Public Records Act requests related to the Stadium to the district over the past three years has resulted in considerable district time and expense to produce tens of thousands of pages of records. Repeated litigation against the district over a number of other actions it has taken related to school facility projects has also been threatened.

Ruling

 

The court’s recent ruling was in favor of the district on four of the five causes of action. On the remaining cause of action, the alleged violation of CEQA related to the Stadium and Field Project, the district’s extensive CEQA analysis was upheld in relation to every significant component of the project: the district’s analysis of the lighting, the sound system, the ADA improvements to the stadium, the addition of visitor bleachers, the press box, the development of a new field, the improvements to the track and field area and the weight room were all found to be legally compliant. In rejecting the majority of petitioners’ arguments, the court noted that many of the petitioners arguments were “unpersuasive,” “inaccurat[e],” “flawed,” “lack[ing] merit,” “not fully formed,” and “completely unsubstantiated.”

 

Despite the foregoing, the court concluded that the district should conduct limited additional CEQA analysis or prepare clarifying language in relation to seven specific categories related to the Stadium and Field Project. For example, the court indicated that the district should further address one construction staging area because of its vicinity to a small wall made of stone that is no longer quarried, should clarify the number of parking spaces on campus, and indicate that signage and flagger personnel would be provided at all streets as mitigation for construction-related traffic hazards. 

As another example, after the court rejected petitioners’ arguments that noise mitigation measures were inadequately described, lacked specific performance standards, were ineffective, were infeasible, were illusory, or were improperly deferred, the court nevertheless concluded that petitioners’ argument regarding monitoring of the mitigation measures “may have some merit,” and that the mitigation measures should therefore be revised to be more express about enforcement. According to Superintendent Diffenbaugh, “each of these issues can be addressed by the district, but we are closely reviewing the court’s ruling to determine our options and next steps, and may seek clarification of certain of these issues.” 

 

Despite the delay, MPUSD’s Board President Jeff Uchida stressed that the district is not done fighting for students. “The Board has stated its commitment to this project and that commitment remains, because our students and our community deserve no less. We will take the steps legally necessary to accomplish this important project,” says Uchida. 

 

# # #