Friday, July 24, 2026

Judge Denies PUSD Bid For Injunction to Block Pasadena Tree Ordinance Enforcement

By ANDRÈ COLEMAN, Managing Editor

Judge issues ruling after City says it will not enforce tree ordinance at district classroom facilities

On Friday, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Joseph Lipner denied the school district’s request for an injunction that would have stopped the City from enforcing its tree protection ordinance while a lawsuit proceeds.

In his ruling Lipner said he denied the request for a temporary restraining order on the basis that there is no irreparable harm to the school district in light of positions taken by the City.

The ruling states the City said it will not be enforcing the tree ordinance at “classroom facilities.”

“Specifically, the City has stated that, after the Petitioner passed Resolution 2896, ‘the City is no longer enforcing the stop work orders for classroom facilities exempted from the City’s zoning ordinance subject to the Board adopted Resolution 2896.”

The district filed its petition last week seeking a writ of mandate, declaratory relief and an injunction, arguing it has sovereign immunity from local zoning regulations and should not be subject to Pasadena’s Tree Protection Ordinance while removing contaminated soil from school campuses.

District officials say they must remove approximately 8,000 cubic yards of soil contaminated by the Eaton Fire from 11 campuses before the start of the 2026-27 school year.

According to court filings, environmental testing found elevated levels of lead and arsenic exceeding state screening levels at portions of the campuses, prompting recommendations from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control that contaminated soil be removed.

The district contends the work requires the removal and replacement of nearly 200 trees.

“This morning, the Los Angeles County Superior Court summarily denied Pasadena Unified School District’s request for a restraining order to prevent the City from enforcing its Zoning Ordinances relating to tree protection at certain PUSD sites,” said City Chief Communications Officer Lisa Derderian.

“The City has maintained that PUSD’s legal action against the City is inappropriate and unnecessary. We recognize that PUSD has authority to adopt a resolution exempting itself from the city’s zoning in some respects, and we will see how the court ultimately decides the extent to which PUSD can proceed. In light of today’s court ruling in the City’s favor, we continue to hope that PUSD will consider options to safeguard protected trees.”

The dispute centers on whether the school district, as a state agency, is exempt from local zoning regulations.

In a statement issued Friday afternoon, the district said the denial nonetheless left it with the result it had been seeking. PUSD said it went to court to keep the city’s stop-work notices from delaying soil remediation “necessary to protect students and restore school campuses.”

After the action was filed, the district said, the city confirmed it was not enforcing the stop-work notices at 10 of the 11 affected district sites following the school board’s adoption of Resolution 2896, which exempted those campuses from the city’s zoning ordinances. With that and the city’s assurance in court that it would take no further action, the district said, “there remains only one campus that currently can’t be fully remediated.”

“This is the practical outcome PUSD sought,” the statement said, adding that the district can now proceed with the cleanup without interference from the notices, which it said will be removed from those sites.

According to its petition, the district argues California law grants school districts sovereign immunity from municipal building and zoning ordinances when carrying out educational functions. The filing cites state court decisions holding that public schools are matters of statewide concern and alleges the City improperly interfered with the cleanup project by issuing stop-work orders and inspection warrants.

The City has maintained that while it does not dispute the need to remove contaminated soil, it believes the district must comply with Pasadena’s Tree Protection Ordinance before removing protected trees.

The legal battle follows weeks of escalating tensions between the two agencies. Earlier this month, Pasadena issued stop-work orders at multiple campuses, citing alleged violations of the tree ordinance.

The district later adopted a resolution under Government Code Section 53094 declaring the City’s zoning ordinances inapplicable to the cleanup project, a move that remains at the heart of the lawsuit.

Despite Friday’s ruling, the underlying lawsuit remains active. The court has yet to decide whether the district’s claim of sovereign immunity ultimately exempts it from the City’s tree ordinance or whether Pasadena can continue regulating tree removals associated with the cleanup project.