Yeah, God forbid San Francisco should ever consider flushing its toilets, washing its streets and irrigating the Presidio with anything other than pristine Tuolomne water
We're talking about an 8 million dollar plan, here, folks, not a 10 billion dollar demolition project. That 10b was just a number some interested critic pulled out of his ass. The plan is not a commitment: it designed to answer all the questions the wise guys think they know without even looking at the possibilities, that's pretty cheap information compared to the present very expensive ignorance. That's what a plan is for: to test all these bare assertions and assumptions.
What you think people want and what actually gets done are two completely different things. Disney went after Mineral King for "Me, Now!" and ended up with Everyone, Always.
Point is that you don't know what an ultimate project would cost. You don't know what it would look like. You don't even know whether it would require removal of the dam or the hydro facilities.* You don't know that the hydro can't be replaced; you don't know whether a development plan would pave the valley or designate it wilderness or something in between.
* In fact, here's an idea: drain the valley but leave the dam in place, rename it the Gifford Pinchot Memorial Bridge, and let it stand as a perpetual reminder, maybe even a museum.
Actually, all those things are pretty well worked out. We've walked this path before.
What you won't acknowledge, is that it is really about getting the electorate to start saying "yes" to the concept, then creeping the concept along, step by step, until you get things to a place you would not have gotten knowledgable people to in a transparent and straightforward way.
