Given the competing interests involved, allocation of the Master Settlement Agreement funds on a 60/40 population/Medicaid spending basis is not unfair or unreasonable ( see, Weinberger v. Kendrick, 698 F.2d 61, 73, cert denied sub nom. Lewy v. Weinberger, 464 U.S. 818). Concerning the procedural challenges to the approval process, appellants' claims that there was a rush to judgment are unconvincing inasmuch as each had at one point or another urged acceptance of one of the three settlement proposals, and that there was no impediment to any of the appellants opting out of the settlement and pursuing its own litigation. [See, 179 Misc.2d 435.]