Scenario: You have an issue which you resolve in a way that you feel supports "the public interest". A public meeting is met with collosal apathy. You get 10 letters against and 1 in favour. The opponents (the 10 letters people) exert pressure on the politicians by saying the planner is against the public interest and cannot show any support. They say that if the general public doesn't care then why not change it so that the 10 are satisfied and then everyone is either happy or apathetic. As a planner I need to represent the longer term repurcussions but my logical arguments are being overwhelmed by the vocal 10. How would you respond to this scenario?