Rearranging the Deck Chairs
by Frank Bryan

Read excerpts from article:

... Planning is no longer an option for government. If government is to work -- and it must work if democracy is to be preserved -- then it is up to the planners, especially those who plan the future of our municipalities.

With such an awesome responsibility, what in the name of all get out are planners doing worrying about aesthetics? Talk about rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic!

As anyone who has been down and out, really down and out, knows, grooming is not a high priority. Is that what planners want to be? Tanning salons for rich communities? Hairdressers of the body politic?

Example: I know a family in rural Vermont that's poor. The quintessential model of rural poverty. Dying of malnutrition. The works. If the government would devote a fraction of the energy it spends being concerned with how they look -- making sure they remove junk cars from their yard, for instance -- to concern for how they are, we might be able to begin to solve a real problem in this country: the scandal of poverty in the midst of plenty.

My point. To the extent that planners direct their efforts to finding ways to make sure there are "effective, efficient, and fair" ways to zone for aesthetics, they are wasting their time. Put it this way. When your grandchildren sit at your knee and ask you what you were doing to help solve the great issues of our time, do you want to say, "I was working to expand the police power of the state to allow us to make sure no one parked an unregistered car in their yard"? Wouldn't you be a tad embarrassed to tout this effort, given the disintegration of the civil order we see occurring all around us?

Planners should never sell themselves short. They are too important to be spending time on aesthetics. ... article continues with discussion of why planners should not be dealing with aesthetic-based planning or regulation.