Opinion ID: 1954124
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Study of Environmental Impact on Lake

Text: The plaintiffs next assert that the superior court erred when it affirmed the board's approval of the proposed CDS because the board reneged upon its promise to review the environmental impact of the proposed CDS upon a nearby lake to which the plaintiffs have easement rights. Absent citation to any authority to support their argument, the plaintiffs contend that the board's failure to conduct this review violated their procedural due process rights. The plaintiffs, however, have failed to develop this argument sufficiently for our review. See In the Matter of Bazemore & Jack, 153 N.H. 351, 356, 899 A.2d 225 (2006). The plaintiffs have not sufficiently stated the legally protected interest they claim is at issue. Nor, as the trial court observed, have they pointed to [any] authority guaranteeing them independent engineering review of the impacts on [the lake] as part of their due process rights. Under these circumstances, we decline to review their argument.