In Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359, the appellant argued "an initial study must disclose sufficient evidence to support each and every one of its findings." (36 Cal.App.4th at p. 1378.) In rejecting that contention, the appellate court held "an initial study must disclose the evidence upon which it is based in order to afford a basis for judicial review." (Ibid.) However, the failure of an IS to disclose the evidence supporting particular findings is not necessarily fatal to the resulting negative declaration. (Ibid.) "There is 'no authority . . . that an initial study is inadequate unless it amounts to a full-blown EIR based on expert studies of all potential environmental impacts. If this were true, the Legislature would not have provided in CEQA for negative declarations.' " (Ibid.) "The ultimate issue is not the validity of the initial study, but rather the validity of the lead agency's adoption of a negative declaration. Even if the initial study fails to cite evidentiary support for its findings, 'it remains the appellant's burden to demonstrate by citation to the record the existence of substantial evidence supporting a fair argument of significant environmental impact.' " ( Id. at p. 1379.)