Unless the residents of Glen Hills band together, the proposal to rezone that city will be approved. If it is the cit...

kellyagama on April 23 at 10:54PM

i need an explination

there is nothing explaining why the answer is what it is

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

Emil-Kunkin on April 28 at 09:41PM

Apologies, I've notified the devs to try to get the explanation back up.

In the meantime, let's look at the passage. We are told that if they don't band together, the reasoning will happen that will enable development. If development happens, there will be crowding in streets and schools, which will have the effects of forcing taxes to rise, and may destroy the rural environment.

We are then just asked to find something that must be true.

A does not have to be true. It is possible that they band together, But still fail to defeat the proposal. Banding together was a necessary condition, not a sufficient one.

B does have to be true, it accurately describes the passage. We are told that if the development occurs, schools are sure to be crowded, which will necessitate an increase in taxes.

C doesn't have to be true. Passing does indicate the atmosphere will be lost, but failing to pass does not bar it from being lost anyways.

D doesn't have to be true, this just illegally negates b.

E doesn't either, this is an illegal negation of the statement that building will lead to overcrowding.