Charles G. Kinney v. Three Arch Bay Community Services District, et al.

The ocean near Laguna Beach, CA, is plagued by muddy storm-water runoff events, and some of the best beaches in the U.S. are suffering. Sufficient environmental rules exist, but there was a failure to enforce the rules coupled with a long-standing cover-up by public entities and others. That means the rules are being ignored. Here, 3 public entities are continually violating the Clean Water Act, their own NPDES permits, Cal. Coastal Commission rules, or nuisance laws. In addition, 2 state regulatory agencies keep turning their backs on the yearly CWA violations. The public entities and some federal courts are “gaming the system” so that CWA citizen lawsuits are heard in the wrong court (not in Southern Div.) and then the cases get summarily dismissed. Some of the questions presented include: Are public entities violating the CWA, their NPDES permits, and/or nuisance laws when rain falls over 0.5 inch per “day” because their muddy storm-water runoff goes straight into the ocean? Can defendants ignore public, real-time data that tracks daily rainfall amounts which show when CWA or NPDES permit violations occur? Must a 60 day notice list real-time public data? Can a district court require a pre-filing review of a citizen’s lawsuit under the CWA? Can this district court ignore a Local Rule and re-assign the case to a court in the wrong division? Can these courts ignore federal court rulings as to “adequate notice” and obvious CWA violations? Can the Ninth Circuit do a de novo review that ignores ministerial abuse of discretion decisions?