In the case of the Novato lawsuit, there seems to be some confusion between
what is "likely" to happen and what "might" happen. I agree with Mike Pechner
that there is a lot of uncertainty about whether freight would get to Island
Mountain or to Eureka. But that doesn't mean under CEQA that the impacts
of that outcome aren't required to be evaluated.

The NCRA has tried to divide its EIR into phases that are not only associated
with geography (e.g., the "Russian River Division" vs. "The Eel River Division")
but also with liklihood. The Willits - Lombard segment is "likely". Anything
else is "speculative."

Their problem is that CEQA does not allow this type of segmentation, particularly
when the agency promises or commits elsewhere to implement the "speculative"
scenario. Maybe, if the NWP Co., had submitted a plan to the state that said,
"as far as we expect, we have no plans nor intentions to go north of Willits"
or if NCRA Board members had said in Eureka, "at this time, there are no plans
to bring freight to Eureka" ....maybe they'd have a case.

But they didn't make these comments. They said the opposite and it wasn't that long ago
either. And that's why Judge Ritchie has tentatively found they violated state
law and it likely to be upheld on appeal.

Meanwhile the case has been delayed again. The TRO is in force. No additional state funds will be coming NCRA's way. At the same time, SMART looks to be putting its head in the sand and despite the economy and being tainted by the freight proposal will put its funding
measure on the ballot. DUMB. If they any sense, they'd defer the ballot measure
until the freight matter is resolved. They've got $20 million in the bank, what's
their hurry?