The state of the law now is you have to offer someone a chance to do that. It's procedurally fair. It's mandated by the Supreme Court, so unless there were substantive legal changes, I don't see a way around it. The simple fact is that it needs to be explained better to people so they can use it properly.
There's also a dearth of research as to what the outcomes are later, when people do these mitigation plans. Do they stick to those plans? Did they actually incur those costs after they came? Did they not? There's no research on that.