Introduction
In-depth explorations of the applicability of ethical principles are not limited to theoretical reasoning but can instead be directed toward practical analysis. In particular, the use of scenarios describing an essential moral problem is a thriving academic strategy for improving instructional research and critical appraisal skills. The subject of the analysis in this essay is an academic case study about a political decision regarding a recreation base in the city of Forest Lake. The paper identifies the ethical dilemma, examines the factors and reasons that led to this outcome, and makes three recommendations.
Ethical Dilemma
The ethical dilemma, which is the central problem in the scenario described, determines the nature of the prioritization of the people who have the power to determine the order of life in the city. Thus, the ethical dilemma at the heart of this scenario is this: should public servants prioritize saving the budget over citizens’ social needs?
Background of the Dilemma
Even at the dawn of the first civilizations, primitive communities sought to ensure the delegation of official duties in order to achieve the most comfortable existence possible. Thus, in such communities, some individuals were responsible for the hunting, others were in charge of processing the resulting raw materials, or beautification, and still, others had the power to manage their subordinates. The aim of such management was not at all a totalitarian desire to demonstrate their power at the expense of the weaker members of the community but the desire to direct the vector of the group’s development effectively. It is safe to say that although tens of thousands of years have passed since then, the structure of society has not undergone tremendous changes. Administrative centers still have a political apparatus, whose duties include managing the life of the city and improving it qualitatively.
For instance, it is the municipal mayor’s office’s responsibility to provide power and control over public safety, combined with the management of parks and recreation services, emergency, transportation, and public services departments (“State & local government,” 2020). Generally speaking, the administration of city life is a priority for City Hall.
However, there is no doubt that improving city residents’ quality of life cannot be achieved by any single activity. Generally speaking, comfort is a multifactorial and complex phenomenon, which requires consideration of several factors at once. Among the most apparent reasons for urban happiness are infrastructure development, landscaping, and good municipal services (“What makes a happy city,” 2020). Moreover, each citizen wants their political voice to be heard, and individual needs to be met at the municipal level. This is not surprising because some residents may be deprived of developed physical or cognitive abilities for a variety of reasons, in which case the government must take care of them.
In the example described, the authority initially fulfilled its social obligation by creating the Strong Lives recreation facility, which was beneficial to all residents’ categories. The city’s subsidy and preferential terms of service to vulnerable population categories made it incredibly popular. Thus, high aggregate demand among the population was dictated by high legitimacy. Nevertheless, economic reasons, namely the desire to save budgetary resources, led the mayor and their government apparatus to abandon the center in favor of a cheaper option. From this point of view, it might seem that such an initiative was justified since the citizens were presented with an alternative. However, the reform’s consequences have been an increase in membership fees, the firing of several former employees, and a new center’s refocusing. In other words, a deliberate turn toward creating public discontent and criticizing the actions of the authorities.
It is difficult to determine with certainty the true reasons that prompted the mayor to make this choice since qualified economic advice should have told them about the possible consequences of such a decision. The creation of a new center is unlikely to save a significant amount of money in the budget since its services will continue to be used, it will impoverish the population and thus reduce aggregate demand. The result of this effect will be a recession and a decline in the level of contentment in the city, which has already resulted in the formation of opposition and the overthrow of the government. The scenario under study clearly shows that choosing to save money against public welfare is the wrong ethical strategy.
Options for Recommendations
The ex-mayor may likely have had several constructive solutions that could have helped retain power and preserve the city’s social fabric. First and foremost, these included a review of current economic policies assuming that Strong Lives would continue to exist. The mayor has stated that the center is too focused on other cities, so a thorough step would be to convene a meeting between the authorities of the cities in question and Strong Lives leaders. During the discussion of ways to develop, officials and managers would surely come to a compromise solution, among which would be to diversify the club’s activities, or going back to one city.
A second recommendation could come from here, which is very radical but has a chance of success. Specifically, interested cities could invest in expanding the range of influence Strong Lives across all regions so that the recreation base in the initial city would not have to focus on other locations. As a result, the service could become incredibly popular across the country and help citizens outside the city limits in question.
On the other hand, if Strong Lives’ disappearance were inevitable, it would have been relevant for the apparatus of government to take care to create favorable conditions for membership in Northern Healthy. It made no sense to create a new offering in a market that did not bring consumers any additional rewards but instead took away existing benefits. In other words, this approach was highly disruptive. Therefore, a third recommendation would be to suggest a re-evaluation of Northern Healthy’s policy to create a more comfortable environment for the city.
Recommendation and Conclusion
In conclusion, it is worth noting that solving ethical dilemmas is a difficult philosophical task that requires the individual to set clear priorities and compassion. In this example, the mayor’s desire to save money was fatal for several reasons. First, the creation of a new center would not have brought the municipality an economic miracle. Second, this reform catalyzed public discontent and resulted in the loss of office. It can be said that the mayor paid for their decision. In this dilemma, the right point to do would have been to put the city’s needs first and build economic policy based on the priority. In the future, if mayors are faced with such a problem, they should be more careful in their final verdict, consider the public mood and listen to the people.
References
State & local government (2020) Web.
What makes a happy city? (2020) Web.