I've got to agree with this commentary. These lawsuits, if successful, will simply require additional studies about speculative stuff in order to find out things we already actually know. And turning issues over to judges rather than resolving things ourselves really is not in anyone's best interests!
For example, the whole idea in Carmel Valley is to try to respond to the community's stated request not to improve the road to carry more cars but rather to use the road there is more efficiently. In the Salinas Valley, the water project was not intended to allow anyone in the zone of benefit to develop in any way they might want for the foreseeable future, just to try to keep them all supplied with safe and usable water for the things they're doing now. In the Open Monterey project, of course we would all like more time to review anything, but in fact if hearings are going to work as a way to influence policy, responsive solutions will always be a moving target.
Nothing decided in court will actually address any of this in real life. The most that can happen is for the judge to require another step in the process by which decisions are reached. And does anyone really think we lack information upon which to plan our future land use at this point?
(However, as a stimulus package in these tough times, these sorts of activities will certainly keep a lot of lawyers and land use consultants employed.... Talk about 'shovel ready'....)