Sounds like another rail fan that doesn't understand
the law.

The source of the state EIR process is the state
funding of the track repair project. If the NCRA
were a private company and freight were operating and
not requiring state funding, I believe that an EIR
would not be required.

Also, the improvements referred to are not minor
and involve much disruption and the NCRA is raising
the standards on the track, which constitutes an
"improvement" under the law.

In court, the NCRA is not arguing that they shouldn't
have done an EIR. They are arguing that Novato
complained too late. The judge agreed with Novato, several
times, therein granting them the TRO.

Fundamentally, I don't understand the rail fans position.
What's so wrong with a public agency having to disclose
the environmental impacts of their projects?