This prop is a perfect example of a "rigged" issue.
It does NOT order a study to be done of the issue, seeking impartial information on the issue.
It instead REQUIRES 8 million to be spend to bypass that, and go ahead and CREATE THE PLAN.
Normally, in major public projects, you start by evaluating whether you should do something, and the feasibility of doing it.
This bypasses all the pesky thinking and evaluating stuff, and jumps right into spending money, and creating the plan to do it (no matter how feasable)
Note that it does NOT require a feasability evaluation, first.
So, homeowners, it's like deciding to spend $20,000 for an architect to draw up plans to replace your house, before you've decided that you want to replace your house..........
