ELSAT-CR-17-20

mygoalusa

Saunders: Everyone at last week’s neighborhood association meeting agreed that the row of abandoned and vandalized houses on Cariton Street posed a threat to the safety of our neighborhood. Moreover, no one now disputes that getting the houses torn down eliminated that threat. Some people tried to argue that it was unnecessary to demolish what they claimed were basically sound buildings, since the city had established a fund to help people in need of housing buy and rehabilitate such buildings. The overwhelming success of the demolition strategy, however, proves that the majority, who favored demolition, were right and that those who claimed that the problem could and should be solved by rehabilitating the houses were wrong.

20. Which one of the following principles, if established would determine that demolishing the houses was the right decision or instead would determine that the proposal advocated by the opponents of demolition should have been adopted?

(A) When what to do about an abandoned neighborhood building is in dispute, the course of action that would result in the most housing for people who need it should be the one adopted unless the building is believed to pose a threat to neighborhood safety.

(B) When there are two proposals for solving a neighborhood problem, and only one of them would preclude the possibility of trying the other approach if the first proves unsatisfactory, then the approach that does not foreclose the other possibility should be the one adopted.

(C) If one of two proposals for renovating vacant neighborhood buildings requires government funding whereas the second does not, the second proposal should be the one adopted unless the necessary government funds have already been secured.

(D) No pain for eliminating a neighborhood problem that requires demolishing basically sound houses should be carried out until all other possible alternatives have been thoroughly investigated.

(E) No proposal for dealing with a threat to a neighborhood’s safety should be adopted merely because a majority of the residents of that neighborhood prefer that proposal to a particular counterproposal.

The question is asking for a statement to support either the "demolish is right" (option1) or "rehab the house" (option2).

Eleminate D & E first. A is to support option2; C is to support option1; B does not support either of them. There must be something wrong with my understanding.

robertchu

I choose B.

A, "..., unless the building is believed to pose a threat to neighborhood safety", does not really help us choose one decision over the other.

C, "...two proposals for renovating vacant neighborhood buildings", does not address the issue of choosing between "demolishing" and "rehab".

Since "attempting rehab" does not preclude "demolishing", but "demolishing" preclude "rehab", B navigate us to choose "rehab".