TRANSDEF Presents at Annual TRAC Meeting
10/27/12 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
The 2012 Annual
Conference of the Trainriders Association of
California was held in Berkeley today. TRANSDEF was
invited to co-present the keynote address, along with
the Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design
(CARRD) on the topic of Where is High-Speed Rail
Going in the Near Term? Elizabeth Alexis of CARRD
began with a presentation which laid out the complete
picture of what is funded to proceed in the next
few years. David Schonbrunn of TRANSDEF then
delivered an explanation of why rail advocates are
suing CHSRA, entitled Fighting for What Could
Be. Read
More...
Our Legal Team Has Been Busy
10/17/12 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
Round
2
On October 15, 2012, petitioners in the Atherton I and Atherton II cases filed their Appellants Opening Brief, challenging several elements of a largely favorable court ruling back in February. For the brief, and details, see the bottom of this page.
Round 3
Two days later, our team filed an Objection to the Authority’s Return on the Writ. This is a procedure in which the High-Speed Rail Authority, represented by the Attorney General’s office, is seeking to demonstrate that it has completed a series of actions ordered by the Court, back in February. The Authority claims that its April 2012 Partially Revised Final Program EIR complies with CEQA. Our Objection claims that the EIR violates CEQA because it refuses to analyze as an EIR alternative the Blended System described in the Revised 2012 Business Plan. For details, see this page. Read More...
On October 15, 2012, petitioners in the Atherton I and Atherton II cases filed their Appellants Opening Brief, challenging several elements of a largely favorable court ruling back in February. For the brief, and details, see the bottom of this page.
Round 3
Two days later, our team filed an Objection to the Authority’s Return on the Writ. This is a procedure in which the High-Speed Rail Authority, represented by the Attorney General’s office, is seeking to demonstrate that it has completed a series of actions ordered by the Court, back in February. The Authority claims that its April 2012 Partially Revised Final Program EIR complies with CEQA. Our Objection claims that the EIR violates CEQA because it refuses to analyze as an EIR alternative the Blended System described in the Revised 2012 Business Plan. For details, see this page. Read More...