Iwasaki's careful respect for the Long Beach program and its lawyers earned him the political capital he needed to complete his takeover in a matter of weeks. "The Long Beach program had strong support in the community so in a situation like that, one has to recognize that it's not like a takeover where I have all the answers and I know best," Iwasaki said. "The people in the community who are working there have the contacts and the knowledge that will allow service to continue." Things have gone less smoothly across town. There, Dudovitz, a longtime poverty lawyer and executive director of the San Fernando Valley's 36-year-old legal aid program, continues to struggle with his hostile takeover of the neighboring San Gabriel-Pomona Valleys service area one year after it was accomplished. On the bright side, Dudovitz has extended his respected program to clients in the San Gabriel-Pomona Valley, and he now operates on a much larger budget, $6.5 million last year. However, his clash with the old San Gabriel program resulted in litigation, bitter feelings and a mission that some say is not clearly focused on serving poor people. "It was a difficult situation that was probably mishandled by everyone," a longtime observer of the public interest community said of the San Fernando Valley-San Gabriel-Pomona Valley merger. "There are very few people who come out as the heroes. Personalities got involved when they shouldn't have. Things were said that caused bad feelings and couldn't be unsaid." Iwasaki's merger with the smaller, 48-year-old Long Beach program was friendly and fast, and no one - not even Long Beach board members - lost a job. When it was over, Iwasaki had $1 million more in federal dollars and two new offices. Long Beach clients regained services they had lost years ago when federal budget cuts and dwindling grants reduced the staff of 15 lawyers to five and cut immigration and consumer law programs. Iwasaki said, "[I judged the transition] better than I could have hoped for."
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer: How many people were fired in order for Long Beach clients to regain services?

Flowing water causes sediment to move. Flowing water can erode both rocks and soil. You have already learned that materials can dissolve in water. With enough time, even rocks can be dissolved by water. This process happens really slowly. It may take over a million years to dissolve a rock. It doesnt matter how big the rock is. With enough time, flowing water can dissolve it. Moving water also has the ability to move small pieces of rock and soil. How can water move a rock? Doesnt it need energy? Of course, water gets its energy because it is moving. Moving water has kinetic energy. Things that have more energy can do more work. When water stops moving it will have no energy. It will no longer be able to move the rock and soil. When this happens the rock and soil will settle to the bottom of the calm water. Scientists call this process deposition.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer: Would deposition of or the moving of a particular rock take more energy?

From a human point of view, a habitat is where you live. It might be your city, town, or neighborhood. Your habitat can be altered. Most people move a few times in their lives. But a plant cannot move. An animal may not be suited to live in another area. A habitat is the natural home or environment of an organism. Humans often destroy the habitats of other organisms. The loss of habitat can cause the extinction of species. Extinction is when a species disappears forever. Once a species is extinct, it can never be brought back. Humans cause habitat destruction in many ways. There are two common ways this happens. Land may be cleared. Another way is when an animal or plant is brought to an area where it does not belong.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer: What do humans consider are the characteristics of a habitat?

Mr. Thorndike had risen, and, in farewell, was holding out his hand to Andrews. He turned, and across the court-room the eyes of the financier and the stenographer met. At the sight of the great man, Spear flushed crimson, and then his look of despair slowly disappeared; and into his eyes there came incredulously hope and gratitude. He turned his head suddenly to the wall. Mr. Thorndike stood irresolute, and then sank back into his chair. The first man in the line was already at the railing, and the questions put to him by the judge were being repeated to him by the other assistant district attorney and a court attendant. His muttered answers were in turn repeated to the judge. "Says he's married, naturalized citizen, Lutheran Church, die- cutter by profession." The probation officer, her hands filled with papers, bustled forward and whispered. "Mrs. Austin says," continued the district attorney, "she's looked into this case, and asks to have the man turned over to her. He has a wife and three children; has supported them for five years." "Is the wife in court?" the judge said. A thin, washed-out, pretty woman stood up, and clasped her hands in front of her. "Has this man been a good husband to you, madam?" asked the young judge. The woman broke into vehement assurances. No man could have been a better husband. Would she take him back? Indeed she would take him back. She held out her hands as though she would physically drag her husband from the pillory. The judge bowed toward the probation officer, and she beckoned the prisoner to her.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?
Answer:
Did the woman speak good things about her husband?