B is the answer in my view.Premise: The city is in a financial crisis and must reduce its spending. The zoo’s current budget equals less than 1 percent of the city’s deficit, so withdrawing support from the zoo does little to help the city’s financial situation. Furthermore, the zoo, which must close if its budget is cut, attracts tourists and tax dollars to the city. Finally, the zoo adds immeasurably to the city’s cultural climate and thus makes the city an attractive place for business to locate.
Conclusion: Cutting City Zoos funding in half, is false economy.
Clearly, we can see that the conclusion of the argument made by the author concludes that it is false economy to cut the City Zoo's funding in half. Why? The zoos current budget equals less than 1% of the city's deficit, hence withdrawing support from the zoo does little to help the city's financial crisis. In addition, the zoo attracts tax dollars to the city, since cutting the budget of the zoo means closing the zoo down, these tax revenues from the zoo will be lost. Last but not the least, the zoo makes the city an attractive place for businesses to locate, so, closing down the zoo will be detrimental to the financial position of the city.
A: Reducing spending is the only means the city has of responding to the current financial crisis. This is the objective that the city officials seek to attain; however, this is not the point that the author wishes to make in the argument above.
B: It would be false economy for the city to cut the zoo’s budget in half. Correct. The city wishes to cut its spending. The zoo official is presenting a case that concludes that cutting funding of the zoo in half will be detrimental to the financial economy of the city rather than helping the city to achieve improvements in it's financial standing.
C: City Zoo’s budget is only a very small portion of the city’s entire budget. This is true and it is one of the facts presented by the author to support the conclusion of the argument. However, this is not the main point or conclusion of the argument.
D: The zoo will be forced to close if its budget is cut. This is a premise rather than the conclusion of the argument.
E: The city’s educational and cultural climate will be irreparably damaged if the zoo is forced to close. This is another fact cited by the author to support his conclusion that it would be bad economy to cut the zoo's budget in half.