In the past, we’ve held contests to decide on the names for new municipal buildings in our town, with the winning entry chosen by our town council. However, these contests were really just a sneaky way for the town council to choose the name they wanted all along. With hundreds of entries to choose from, the council was bound to find the name they had in mind. I think we can all agree that the only real winners in these contests were the town council members themselves. As you all know, a new library will be opening within the next year. This time, I propose that we hold a public vote to choose the name. The process will be simple. Residents can visit the polling station and write down any name they like. The votes will be tallied, and the most popular name will be given to our new library. A similar process has been used in neighboring cities. Residents reported that they felt the process was fairer. A higher percentage of people approved of building names compared to instances where names were decided through contests. Having a vote is a faster process than judging individual contest entries. And, the names chosen through votes are often more familiar and easier to pronounce. By holding a vote, town council can show residents that it truly values what they have to say. And finally, our neighboring town of Westmont also named its library by a vote.

Question

Which evidence included in the second paragraph is least relevant to the speaker’s argument?

A. And finally, our neighboring town of Westmont also named its library by a vote.
B. Having a vote is a faster process than judging individual contest entries.
C. Citizens reported that they felt the process was fairer.
D. A higher percentage of people approved of building names compared to instances where names were decided through contests.

Answer 1

A. And finally, our neighboring town of Westmont also named its library by a vote.

This statement provides an example of another town's practice but does not directly support the speaker's argument about the unfairness of the previous naming contests or the advantages of holding a vote in the current situation. The other options provide more directly relevant evidence regarding the fairness, speed, and approval rates of the voting process.