Mary F. Lerner
Partner | Fresno, Monterey
mlerner@lozanosmith.com
Tel: 559.431.5600
Fax: 559.261.9366
Vcard
Bio
Overview
Mary F. Lerner is a Partner in Lozano Smith’s Fresno and Monterey offices and serves as co-chair of the firm’s Municipal and Governance Practice Groups. Ms. Lerner is also a member of the firm’s Facilities and Business, and Labor and Employment Practice Groups. Ms. Lerner advises clients regarding a wide-range of issues affecting public agencies.Experience
Ms. Lerner's practice is focused on personnel matters, finances, development, CEQA, LAFCO, the Brown Act, board governance, sustainable groundwater agencies, elections, code enforcement, First Amendment issues, labor negotiations, and public safety. Ms. Lerner is general counsel for public agency clients throughout California. In addition, she assists clients in defense of issues related to the Americans with Disabilities Act.Education
Ms. Lerner obtained her Juris Doctor degree from the San Joaquin College of Law. She graduated from California State University, Fresno with a Bachelor of Science degree in Political Science.Community Involvement
Ms. Lerner is an adjunct professor at the University of Phoenix, where she teaches Business Law (undergraduate and graduate levels) and Ethical Legal Topics (undergraduate level), as well as serving as a mentor to new faculty. She was selected as a recipient of the Phoenix500 Award, recognizing top faculty from across the country who go above and beyond engaging and supporting students and fostering their learning. Ms. Lerner also partners with the Fresno County Bar Association on various civic engagement opportunities, including the Speaker's Bureau, where she works on projects with local high school students.California Legislature Amends Multiple Housing Laws in Budget Trailer Bill
October 3, 2025 Number 40 On June 30, 2025, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 130, one of the “budget trailer bills” implementing the State’s 2025-26 budget, into law. AB 130, effective immediately, amends several housing laws and once again redefines the obligations of local agencies with respect to the approval of housing projects. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) AB 130 amends Civil Code section 714.3 to prohibi...
U.S. Supreme Court Backs Oregon City’s Anti-Camping Law
July 2024Number 35The United States Supreme Court issued a pivotal decision in the case of City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (June 28, 2024) 603 U.S.___ [2024 WL 3208072], significantly impacting how local governments can address homelessness. The ruling reverses the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Martin v. City of Boise (9th Cir. 2019) 920 F.3d 584 that had barred public agencies from enforcing public camping laws against homeless individuals when the number of homeless persons exc...
AB 413: New Parking Restrictions Near Intersections
May 2024Number 23Assembly Bill (AB) 413, effective January 1, 2024, restricts vehicles from parking, stopping, or standing within 20 feet of an intersection or 15 feet of a curb extension at an intersection. Full enforcement of this law begins January 1, 2025.BackgroundPrevious California law did not restrict vehicles from parking, stopping, or standing near an intersection. The Legislature enacted AB 413 to further its goal of zero traffic fatalities. According to the bill’s author, Ca...
New Law Going into Effect January 1, 2024, Restricts Municipal Regulations on Delivery of Medicinal Cannabis
October 2023Number 35Last year, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill (SB) 1186, the Medicinal Cannabis Patients’ Right of Access Act (Act). The Act goes into effect January 1, 2024, and prohibits municipal agencies from adopting or enforcing any regulations that directly or indirectly prevent the retail delivery of medicinal cannabis to patients.BackgroundCalifornians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes. Through the Medical Marijuana ...
In a Victory for Public Agencies, United States Supreme Court Upholds City Off-Premises Sign Ordinance
May 2022Number 19In its recent holding in City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Austin, LLC (U.S., Apr. 21, 2022, No. 20-1029), The United States Supreme Court upheld the right of public agencies to regulate on-premises and off-premises signs differently.The City of Austin, Texas (City) regulates signs that advertise things that are not located on the same premises as the sign (known as off-premises signs). The City’s sign code at the time of this dispute prohibited co...
California Supreme Court Affirms, for the First Time, a Reduction of Public Pension Benefits without an Off-Set
October 20, 2020Number 75The California Supreme Court recently upheld, for the first time, unilateral state reductions to pension calculations without a corresponding off-set for employees, despite the “California Rule.” The “California Rule” generally prohibits public employers from making detrimental changes to a public retirement plan unless the employer provides the plan members some off-set that keeps the retirement benefits, more or less, unchanged. O...
Plaintiffs with Late Tort Claims Take a Hit
May 2020 Number 39 A would-be plaintiff’s ability to obtain relief from the government claim presentation requirement (the Government Claims Act, Gov. Code, § 810, et seq.) has been limited by the California Court of Appeal. In Lincoln Unified School Dist. v. Superior Court (2020) 45 Cal.App.5th 1079, the court held that a plaintiff may not request that a court waive the six-month time limit for submitting a claim to a public entity for reasons different than the plaintiff pres...
New Brown Act Case Clarifies Brown Act's Pending Litigation Exception When Litigation is Orally Threatened
April 2020Number 27On February 10, 2020, the California Court of Appeal decided Fowler v. City of Lafayette (2020) __ Cal.App.5th __, concluding a five-year dispute among neighbors involving the construction of a tennis court cabana on private residential property. Neighbors opposing the project challenged it at every stage in the review process. In the end, the disagreement embroiled the City of Lafayette (the City) in Brown Act litigation. On appeal, the case established new precedent gover...
How to Address COVID-19 with Your Governing Board: Brown Act Reminders
*** UPDATED AS OF 3/27/20 *****This Client News Brief (CNB) supersedes and replaces the prior CNB on this topic based on the new Executive Orders and public health officer directives.March 2020Number 13BackgroundWith growing concerns over the spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), many public agencies are closely monitoring guidance and updates from health and science officials. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) along with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ...
AB 1600 Modifies Pitchess Motion Filing Deadlines and Expands Potential Access to Peace Officer Personnel Records
January 2020Number 7Assembly Bill (AB) 1600, which took effect on January 1, 2020, shortens the filing timelines for Pitchess motions in criminal matters and renders the personnel records of supervisorial officers potentially discoverable.BackgroundPitchess motions are written requests for the discovery of peace officer or custodial officer personnel records. Prior to the passage of AB 1600, Evidence Code section 1403 required that a criminal defendant file written notice of a Pitchess motion...