Passage Summary: Some people think you have to choose between safe, bright streets and dark skies for telescopes, but one town proved you can have both by using better light fixtures and smarter rules.

Conclusion: It is feasible to maintain well-lit streets for safety while also preserving dark skies for astronomical observation.

Reasoning: The city of Sandsville successfully achieved both goals by implementing specific lighting restrictions and using specialized street lamps.

Analysis: The astronomer is refuting a general claim of impossibility by providing a concrete counterexample. While 'many people' argue that light interference is an inevitable consequence of safety needs, the Sandsville case serves as a proof of concept that contradicts that necessity. When looking for the correct description of the method, focus on how the author uses a specific real-world instance to disprove a general theory. This is a classic 'existence proof' strategy used to undermine a claim that something cannot be done.