Jefferson should move forward with its plan to build storm-water storage tanks

underground beneath Becker Boulevard. These tanks will allow sewer overflow
during storms to be safely stored until it can be properly treated. Currently, sewer
overflow runs directly into Jefferson Bay, where it wreaks havoc on the water quality.
This is not only detrimental to fish and other wildlife in the bay, but also causes the
water to emit offensive odors. Opponents of the plan complain that it will shut down
traffic on Becker Boulevard for several months. But what's a little traffic headache
compared to a cleaner environment?

Why is the author's response to potential objections inadequate?
It answers the traffic concern with a flippant rhetorical question rather than meaningfully addressing the issue.
It does not sufficiently emphasize the environmental benefits of the plan to build underground storm-water storage tanks.
In favoring the environment, the response betrays the author's bias against the community's use of automobiles.

The author's response to potential objections is inadequate because it answers the traffic concern with a flippant rhetorical question rather than meaningfully addressing the issue. The opposition's concern about traffic disruption on Becker Boulevard is a valid concern that should be addressed seriously. The author's dismissive tone does not effectively address the potential impact on the community and fails to acknowledge the inconvenience and potential economic implications that may arise from shutting down traffic on the boulevard for several months. The author should provide a more thoughtful response that acknowledges and addresses the concerns of the opponents, while still emphasizing the environmental benefits of the plan.