The following argument was made by a member of the City Council concerning the usage of city funds for public parks:

"The city has faced budget deficits in recent years, and some members of the City Council have proposed cutting funding for public parks to allocate those resources to more critical services like public safety and education. However, studies show that access to well-maintained parks contributes to the physical and mental health of the community, leading to lower healthcare costs over time. Therefore, cutting park funding is not only shortsighted but detrimental to the overall well-being of city residents. We should consider increasing instead of decreasing our investment in public parks, as they are essential to our community's health and prosperity."

Evaluate the argument and discuss whether it is well-reasoned. In your evaluation, be sure to consider the assumptions the argument relies on, the adequacy of the evidence provided, and how effectively the argument reaches its conclusion.