SD County to pay Sierra Club nearly $1M

Posted at 6:26 AM, Sep 17, 2015
and last updated 2015-09-17 09:26:56-04
SAN DIEGO – San Diego County has agreed to pay the Sierra Club nearly $1 million in attorney fees and costs associated with their lawsuit against the county in regard to its controversial Climate Action Plan. 
The county announced Wednesday it will pay $977,986 to the environmental nonprofit group. 
In 2012, the Sierra Club sued the county, claiming its CAP plan did not do enough to protect the public health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. According to the San Diego Union Tribune, the Sierra Club sued the county because it failed to put enforceable measures in place for reducing emissions. 
In October of 2014, the California Court of Appeals upheld a lower court’s decision that the CAP was inadequate. 
In April of this year, the county agreed to rescind the plan and go back to the drawing board.  
The Sierra Club told 1010News Thursday that all the money coming from the county is going to its attorneys, none will go to the nonprofit itself. It issued the following statement Thursday:

“The Sierra Club will not receive compensation or a payout on this litigation. This money reimbursed our attorneys for their time and their enormous effort to challenge the County of San Diego's inadequate Climate Action Plan. Much thanks goes to our attorneys, Jan Chattan- Brown of  Chattan- Brown and Carstens and Malinda Dickenson.  Sierra Club's Mike Bullock spent an amazing amount of time helping  with detailed information on the science of Climate Change.  The attorneys took the case on a contingency basis. This means that they would not get paid unless they won. This was a huge gamble of their time. We are very grateful that there are caring people like our attorneys who are willing to help the environment, our quality of life in San Diego County and the Sierra Club.  We hope that the county moves forward quickly with a solid Climate Action Plan, as mandated by the court. Then we can use this plan to measure the viability of the 2015 Regional Transportation Plan and the viability of land use plans like Lilac Hills that challenge our General Plan.”