Today (Thursday, April 19) the judge heard arguments in our legal case. Our attorneys argued forcefully that the massive changes to the Zoo’s plans meant that it should have been considered as a new project, rather than piggybacking on a lesser level environmental document for the old project, which lacked any information whatsoever about key project impacts and which misrepresented others. The City and Zoo attorneys, in turn, argued that we were trying to apply the wrong legal standard, that the previous Memorandum of Understanding with the community had no legal significance (see http://www.saveknowland.org/2012/04/04/bait-and-switch-how-the-zoo-and-the-city-of-oakland-used-a-1998-mou-to-mislead-the-community/ ) and should be ignored, and that the criteria for activating a key provision in the California Environmental Quality Act had not been met–namely, that there were NOT new circumstances or new impacts from the changed project. It’s hard to imagine how they can make such an argument with a straight face, but there it is.

Continue Reading →

Follow