Waiting for answer This question has not been answered yet. You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
I need some assistance with these assignment. the city of marina and the board of trustees of california state university Thank you in advance for the help!
I need some assistance with these assignment. the city of marina and the board of trustees of california state university Thank you in advance for the help! In the context of this case, "The Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA) challenges an environmental impact report (EIR) prepared by the Board of Trustees of the California State University (Trustees)" (City of Marina v. Board of Trustees 1). Fort Ord is a former Army Base situated on the Pacific Coast. FORA, a body formulated in the year 1994 through the Fort Ord Reuse Authority Act, was given the role of managing the facility. The body's roles include ensuring the protection of the distinctive environmental resources within and surrounding the facility. The facility hosts the California State University Monterey Bay (CSUMB), which sought to expand the campus to meet the growing demand for college education around the State to reach its projected mark of 25,000 students by the year 2030 (City of Marina v. Board of Trustees 5). By its conception in 1994, the campus had enrolled 633 students (City of Marina v. Board of Trustees 5). To meet its target, the trustees created an action plan that included an Environmental Impact Report.
In its explication of environmental impacts that ought to be mitigated, the trustees of California State University outlined five effects that, according to them, could only be mitigated with the involvement of FORA. These effects on the environment related to drainage, water supply, traffic, waste-water management, and fire protection (City of Marina v. Board of Trustees 7-8). These areas necessitated the improvement of infrastructure. The trustees felt that they were not lawfully obligated to finance traffic and fire protection improvements in terms of infrastructure. hence, mitigation was infeasible. They also felt that the advantages of the intended expansion overshadowed or prevailed over the environment's unmitigated effects (City of Marina v. Board of Trustees 11). The .Trustee agreed to provide their 'fair share' in financing water supply, drainage, and waste-water management but not in traffic and fire protection according to the stipulations of the Public Resources Code section 21081.
