The question and the people who need the answer

In a constructed 2027 case, a municipal resilience office asks a separate inquiry team to help the East-District Infrastructure Committee before the next flood season. The committee, called the board below, owns the later funding decision. The inquiry team may arrange the agreed investigation and return advice; it does not acquire investment or deployment authority.

The broad difficulty could lead to pump renewal, distributed storage, changed demand management or acceptance of a bounded risk. The current pre-season inquiry concentrates on the district pumping arrangement, including permanent and mobile capacity, maintenance, staffing and safe access. That smaller boundary does not reject storage or demand measures, settle relocation rights or declare long-term watershed effects irrelevant.

Using PSD.1, the team first returns:

Prepare a pre-season recommendation about the district pumping arrangement for the board’s funding consideration. Make affected service concerns, operating conditions, protected limits and material dissent visible. Return a narrower comparison or a statement of the missing premise when the basis cannot support the whole investment question; the board retains the choice.

That is already a useful result. A missing recipient, horizon or authority boundary would stop a stronger engagement claim. Here those conditions are supplied by the example, while the problem formulation remains contested.