This site is not an official site of the American Planning Association or the American Institute of Certified Planners.
It is a totally independent site.

APAWatchDog.org named
Cyburbia’s “Planning Site of the Day
March 6, 2007

Some of us who have served on APA Board or AICP Commission use this independent site to better inform you about APA/AICP and reach out for your input in a way that would not be feasible via the official APA website.
See “About Us.”

2014 APA/AICP Election Results

Announced April 29:

Elected to the APA Board of Directors were Carol Rhea, FAICP, Board President-Elect; Courtenay Mercer, AICP, Region I; Brian Campbell, FAICP, Region V; Kurt Christiansen, AICP, Region VI; Ann Bagley, FAICP, Director at Large; and Shedrick Coleman, Director at Large-Focused.

Elected to the AICP Commission were Valerie Hubbard, FAICP, Commission President-Elect; Deborah Lawlor, FAICP, Region I; Karen Wolf, AICP, Region V; and Marissa Aho, AICP, Region VI.

 

Charley Wunder, AICP Commissioner 1992–1994, Succumbs

Charlie Wunder Self PortraitCharley Wunder, an “ordinary ol’ planner” who appeared out of nowhere to win one of the closest contests in AICP history to be elected Region IV AICP Commissioner in 1992, died on April 20, 2013 at the age of 63. One of the bravest and most courageous people we have ever known, Charley succumbed after than a decade of battling heart disease, lung cancer, and a lifetime of diabetes. His resiliency, both in his personal and professional lives, reflect that he really did live up to his name: Wunder.

Few APAers know that in addition to his planning career, Charley was an accomplished artist in several mediums. His self-portrait in cast paper appears on the left. He also worked in sheet paper and paintings.

With a B.S. in Urban Planning (1972) and graduate work in community and regional planning at Iowa State University, Charley  served as a design consultant in Bettendorf, IA and as a planner with the Davenport, IA Department of Community Devleopment. He became a project manager/planner for the Facilities Development Company in Bettendorf before serving as a land use planner II in Jefferson County, CO. He was Planning Director for Bolingbrook, IL  when he literally appeared out of nowhere to run for the ACIP Region IV seat as a petition candidate in 1992. He won the seat following a recount by three votes. He was supported by our print predecessor Inside APA in an election where every candidate Inside APA supported was elected.

While on the AICP Commission, Charley survived a quadruple bypass operation, a challenge for anybody with his type of lifelong diabetes. He later developed inoperable lung cancer. For the past 10 years or so, Charley overcame one illness after another, as he maintained an amazingly positive determination to keep going in the face of everthing.

He was aided in his battles by his wife Carol Wunder who survives him.

A celebration of his wunderous life was held Sunday, April 28, 2013 at the restaurant where he and Carol first met. Internment of his ashes was May 4, 2013 at Davenport Memorial Park.

— Daniel Lauber, AICP

Coming soon:

Why Does APA Ignore Fair Housing and the Legal Obligation of
Every Jurisdiction that Receives Federal Funds to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing?

April is Fair Housing Month throughout the nation — except at APA’s National Conference where fair housing and the obligation of every jurisdiction that receives federal funds to affirmatively further fair housing are routinely ignored. Proposed conference sessions on these topics have consistently been rejected.

We’ll be exploring this issue here soon.

2012 APA/AICP Election Results

APA President–Elect
William Raymond Anderson, FAICP

APA Director, Region 2
Rodger Lentz, AICP

APA Director, Region 3
Whit Blanton, AICP

APA Director, Region 4
Cynthia Bowen, AICP

APA Director at Large
Kara Drane, AICP

APA Director at Large for a seat focused for a Minority Member
Angela Brooks, AICP

AICP President–Elect
Lee Brown, FAICP

AICP Commissioner, Region 2
Glenn Larson, AICP

AICP Commissioner, Region 3
Valerie Hubbard, FAICP

AICP Commissioner, Region 4
Cynthia Hoyle, FAICP

*****************************************************

The committee recommended taking the proposal discussed below off the table for now — and the AICP Commission did withdraw the proposal for now. But the Comission seems to think the problem rests in communicating the need for it to AICP members, not in the faulty premise of the proposal. More to come as information comes in.

Don’t Let AICP Cheapen the AICP Credential

Proposed By–Law To Make Tenured Professors AICP Members
— Without Taking AICP Exam

The American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Commission is trying to pull a fast one with a proposed bylaw amendment that would waive the requirement of taking the written computerized examination for tenured faculty members who are in planning programs that are accredited by the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB). All others who want certification will still have to take the examination. We believe this action will degrade and cheapen AICP certification and we urge AICP members to contact the Commission to oppose it as well.

The Commission is calling this the “Tenured Faculty Membership Program.” In the works for at least six months, AICP members first learned about it only if they read to the end of the November 2011 AICP Interact, AICP’s electronic member newsletter, where the request for “feedback” was buried near the bottom. There is nothing about this on the home pages of American Planning Association (APA) or AICP and its hidden deep in the AICP website. The deadline for submitted comments was “no later than December 1, 2011.” The short time frame in the middle of the busy holiday season makes it impossible for AICP members as well as Chapter boards to respond and comment intelligently. We think the AICP Commission is going through the motions of asking for input that it really doesn't want to hear.

Noting that Ph.D.s dominate planning faculty today, AICP argues that a university's grant of tenure to a faculty member "must be approved through a rigorous process that includes votes of approval at several stages. This will be considered as an alternative to a written examination." Part of that process includes evidence of "[r]esearch and publication."

Click here for AICP’s Nov. 30 email response to a member. Click here to see positions APA chapters and past presidents of APA and AICP have taken.

Unfortunately, AICP does not appear to have conducted any kind of survey of university tenure practices. If it had, it would find out that the requirements for tenure differ, including the number of publications in refereed journals, the "prestige" of the publication, the quality of teaching evaluations, and service, if any. Academic politics occasionally raises its ugly head. Moreover, the final arbiter of tenure is not the planning faculty itself, but a university's president or its board of trustees.

Modern planning faculties are filled with people who have never practiced planning at all and do not have planning degrees. It is common to find planning faculties with doctoral degrees in history, political science, economics, environmental science, geography, and similar academic disciplines. There's nothing wrong with that (in fact it’s good), but they are not planners.

Further, granting tenure has absolutely nothing to do with capacity for practice, which is what AICP is about. The message the Commission is sending with this idiotic proposal is that while you can spend thousands of dollars to earn a planning degree (often going into considerable debt) and take a test after a certain period of experience, the people who teach you really never have to prove what they know in an objective test. Nor, more critically, would these faculty members have to show, for example, that they could understand and apply the AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct or that they knew the basics of American planning law, topics that the examination tests for and the AICP certification maintenance program requires special attention to.

What a fraud and insult this proposal represents to the hard–working planners who have dutifully followed the rules, gotten their education and experience, and have taken and passed the certification examination (and for the planning faculty who did likewise)!

“Tenure is no proxy for the knowledge and skills the AICP exam tests. If anybody should have to pass the AICP exam, it’s university professors because so few of them have any real world experience. Teaching is no substitute for actually doing planning. Why are these professors so afraid to take the AICP exam?”
— Daniel Lauber, AICP, the only twice–elected President of AICP
Some type of examination has always been part of certification. The predecessor to AICP, the American Institute of Planners (AIP), used an oral examination in which the candidate for AIP certification was quizzed by a trio of largely male senior planners. But the examination process was tainted by the biases of the examiners and, frankly, whether or not one or more of them had a grudge against the hapless examinee. Because of serious questions about its objectivity and ability to test planning knowledge fairly, AIP discontinued the oral examination about a year before the merger with the American Society of Planning Officials in 1978 that created APA. AICP has administered a multiple choice written examination since 1979.

In a November 13, 2011, email to AICP President Anna Breinich  and Region 1 AICP Commissioner Deborah Lawlor (NJ, work phone: 201–438–1245), Dwight Merriam, a former AICP president himself and a nationally recognized land use attorney, raised this uncomfortable question: "Does the professional engineering association or AIA [American Institute of Architects] or ASLA [American Society of Landscape Architects] or the medical schools give tenured professors in accredited schools certifications to practice? Is there any profession that does this? Law schools certainly don't."

If you agree with us that tenured faculty members at PAB –accredited planning programs should not have the luster of AICP certification without taking the examination like the rest of us, fire up your word processor and email at AICP’s site and let AICP President Anna Breinich (Maine, work phone: 207–725–6660) and the rest of the AICP Commission know exactly how you feel. Turn up the heat! Don’t let these people off the hook —  they are accountable to you.


The above is an edited version of the article originally published Nov. 28, 2011 at Planetizen. Stuart Meck, FAICP, is an associate research professor in the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, in New Brunswick. He is a former APA National President and Commissioner on the AICP Commission. Rebecca Retzlaff, AICP, , is an assistant professor in the School of Architecture, Planning, and Landscape Architecture, at Auburn University, Auburn, AL. Both have taken and passed the AICP examination.

 

Put Aside Your Politics for a Moment on Proposed NY “Mosque”

What About RLUIPA & the Mosques?

Aren’t we all supposed to follow the law? Not just when it’s convenient, but all the time? Doesn’t the AICP Code of Professional Conduct require us as professional planners to comply with the law?

Then why is there such a deafening silence from the planning community when it comes to the proposed Muslim cultural center two and a half blocks from Ground Zero? Since we are committed to following the law, we don’t have to engage in the moralistic and philosophical debates over this issue that dominate the media and Internet. We just need to follow the law.

And that law is the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) passed unanimously by both houses of Congress in July 2000. It clearly states:

“No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation that discriminates against any assembly or institution on the basis of religion or religious denomination.”

It doesn’t get much clearer than that. RLUIPA explicitly applies to zoning and landmarking decisions by all governments. It states that:

“No government shall impose or implement a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution—

“(A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
“(B) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”

Now I personally agree that the decision to locate at this spot was incredibly callous, insensitive, and thoughtless despite the proposers’ claimed good intentions. The feelings of millions of Americans are badly hurt by this proposal. It has got to be incredibly painful for those who lost a loved one in the September 11 attack or subsequent wars.

The proposed building is also butt–ugly. But none of these factors is a legal basis for denying the zoning. There is no legal standard under which any of these concerns expressed in opposition to this cultural center rises to the level of a “compelling governmental interest.” What you or  I personally think is not determinative of whether this cultural center should receive zoning approval (as it legally has) or whether landmark status should have been denied (as it legally was denied). And that’s the point. We, as professional planners, must comply with the law.

In fact, the Muslim cultural center (and “mosque”) is a permitted use allowed as of right in the zoning district in which it seeks to locate. New York zoning officials recognize this and have approved its zoning application. For them to have arrived at any other conclusion would have been a pretty blatant violation of New York City zoning law as well as RLUIPA.

As so many politicians who describe themselves as supporters of “law and order” have pointed out so often, you don’t get to pick and choose which laws you obey.

Nor do all the incredibly hypocritical politicians who voted for or supported RLUIPA ten years get to pick and choose. Few have had the guts of its primary sponsor Senator Orrin Hatch (R–UT) who finally came out on August 31 in support of allowing this cultural center. Even fewer have had the courage of President Obama who long ago voiced his support for following the law. I know it was politically damaging for him to take a position, but it was the Presidential thing to do (I know, we’re not used to that during the past 20 years or so).

But simply ignoring RLUIPA — as does the media, mainstream and otherwise — in favor of divisive moralistic and philosophical arguments is not the way to go. Since earyl August, I’ve sent out dozens of emails to network news, CNN, websites, newspapers, and political television programs — and with the exception of Lynn Sweet, Chicago Sun–Times Washington Bureau Chief, and a September 4, 2010 New York Times article, nobody in the news media seems to care. But I’m just a solitary planner and zoning attorney. Why would any media outlet listen to what I have to say?

And that’s why APA/AICP as the nation’s leading planning organization needs to speak up now. The silence from our executive director and the elected leadership of national APA/AICP is deafening. When I was AICP President after the turn of the century, AICP leadership did not hesitate to condemn then–Senator Trent Lott for his endorsement of racial segregation — a position that is most unethical under the AICP Code of Professional Conduct and most abhorrent to sound planning principles and practice.

Ignoring RLUIPA is also most unethical and abhorrent to sound planning principles and practice.

And if there was ever a great teaching moment, this is it. APA/AICP can use this controversy to better educate the public about how zoning actually is supposed to work.

Now is the time for APA/AICP as an organization and for its leadership to speak out against the efforts to violate RLUIPA in Manhattan and across the country. I realize that APA/AICP members are as politically divided as the rest of the nation. But APA/AICP has got to rise above our political partisanship and — with apologies to Clark Kent’s alter ego — speak out for truth, justice, and the American way.

Now is the time for APA/AICP to take the politics out of this discussion and bring to the nation’s attention that a federal law, which every Republican and Democrat in Congress voted for, is the basis for how localities address zoning and landmark status for proposed mosques and Muslim cultural centers throughout the nation. Now is the time for APA/AICP to stand proud and support law and order in the face of the political demagoguery that has turned this debate into a mockery of all that is right about America.

— Daniel Lauber, AICP, August 31, 2010
APA President, 1985–1986
AICP President, 1992–1994, 2003–2005

Share your thoughts on this issue. Click here to send an email which will be posted on our comments page.

2010 APA/AICP Election Winners

APA President: Mitch Silver, AICP

AICP President: Anna Breinich, AICP

Board Director at Large: Ann Bagley, AICP

APA Board Director at Large (Planning Commissioner): Shedrick Coleman

APA Board Director, Region 1: Angela Vincent

APA Board Director Region 5: Kelli Sertich

APA Board Director, Region 6: William Anderson, FAICP

AICP Commissioner, Region 1: Debbie Lawlor, AICP

AICP Commissioner, Region 5:Phil Farrington, AICP

AICP Commissioner, Region 6: Lance Schulte, AICP

Vote totals not available as of September 1, 2010.

 

Landmark Settlement Should Change the Way We Plan

On Monday, August 10, 2009, U.S. District Judge Denise Cote approved an historic $62.5 million settlement agreement in U.S. ex rel. Anti–Discrimination Center v. Westchester County. The ground–breaking litigation is the first to employ the federal False Claims Act (FCA) to enforce a County's obligation to "affirmatively further fair housing."  The landmark settlement combines FCA remedies with those traditionally used in housing desegregation litigation. With close oversight by a federal monitor, Westchester will be required to appropriate and spend nearly $52 million in County funds to develop at least 750 affordable housing units in Westchester neighborhoods with very small African–American and Latino populations.

HOT FLASH! In mid–November 2009 HUD rejected Hurricane Katrina Recovery Plans from the State of Texas due to the absence of a required fair housing element that met minimal standards. HUD is rightfully withholding $1.8 billion in funds.

This settlement could help revolutionize planning in America. The vast majority of the planning community has steadfastly refused to address the racial and socioeconomic segregation that the CDBG program was created to end. It’s even been a tumultuous battle to get the APA Board of Directors to support racial and socioeconomic integration. You’ll find little in APA publications and nothing in its continuing education program about the role planning has played in forcing racial segregation on communities or what planning can do to promote racial integration. (For a comprehensive examination of the causes of racial segregation and how to combat them, click here for the PDF file.) If HUD continues to be serious about following the law, the 1,200 local and state governments that receive CDBG funds will, for the first time, have to incorporate fair housing concerns into their planning process, policies, and practices. This settlement could have a greater impact on planning practice than the U.S. Supreme Court‘s Kelo decision on eminent domain.
 
The Anti–Discrimination Center (ADC) filed its complaint, under seal, in April 2006, alleging that Westchester had, over a period of six years, received $52 million in HUD and other government funds under false pretenses. ADC alleged that during this period, Westchester falsely certified that it had complied with its obligation under the federal Fair Housing Act to affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) in order to obtain the funds.  Specifically, ADC alleged that the County failed to consider race–based impediments to fair housing choice; failed to identify and take steps to overcome impediments; and failed to meet its obligation to maintain records concerning its efforts.  Under the Bush Administration, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) initially declined to intervene in the litigation, and the complaint was unsealed and served on Westchester in January 2007.  Judge Cote denied the County's motion to dismiss in a published ruling on July 13, 2007. 495 F.Supp.2d 375 (S.D.N.Y. 2007)].  In that ruling, Judge Cote found that an interpretation of “affirmatively further fair housing” that excludes consideration of race would be an “absurd result.”
Model Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice
Relator’s attorney Michael Allen has recommended the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice for the City of Naperville, Illinois, 2007 to HUD as a model AI.

“Because I believe the Naperville AI establishes a ‘gold standard,’ reinventing and reinvigorating this important community planning process, I have encouraged HUD to use it as a model for other communities.” — Michael Allen

Download a copy of the AI by clicking here and following the links.

 
After extensive discovery, in February of this year, Judge Cote granted partial summary judgment for ADC, 2009 WL 455269 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 24, 2009)], holding that the County had made false certifications on seven annual AFFH certifications and on more than a thousand implied certifications of compliance when it requested a drawdown of HUD funds. Judge Cote found that the AFFH certification was not a mere boilerplate formality, but rather was a substantive requirement, rooted in the history and purpose of the fair housing laws and regulations, requiring the County to conduct an analysis of impediments, take appropriate actions in response, and to document its analysis and actions.
 
Last April, following the summary judgment decision, the Obama Administration took a new look at the case and decided to intervene to help get the parties to settle the case. In addition to the $52 million in funds that the County must spend to develop new affordable housing in white municipalities of the County, the agreement requires the County to pay $7.5 million as a relator's share under the FCA to the ADC, and $2.5 million in attorney's fees.
 
“This case represents a victory for the residents of Westchester and for the entire fair housing movement,” said Michael Allen of Relman & Dane. “Not only must Westchester adopt a policy committing the County to eliminating de facto residential segregation, but we have helped to breathe new life into the obligation to ‘affirmatively further fair housing,’ which will apply to more than 1,200 state and local governments that receive federal housing funds. With HUD proposing new regulations this fall, private fair housing advocates will have strong tools to enforce the promises of the Fair Housing Act and to fulfill Dr. King's dream of promoting integration.”
 
Relman & Dane represented ADC along with co–counsel Craig Gurian, the Executive Director of ADC who conceptualized and briefed ADC’s successful motion for partial summary judgment.  The Relman & Dane legal team was led by Michael Allen, John Relman, Steve Dane, Reed Colfax and Tom Keary. 

North America’s Mayor

At 88 years young, Mississauga’s mayor Hazel McCallion not only plays hockey and bowls, but she’s in her 31st year as mayor of the only major city in North America that is debt–free. In fact, Mississauga, the sixth largest city in Canada, has $700 million in reserves. So while Richie Daley continues to sell off Chicago’s assets and build a huge debt, this incredible mayor shows him and everybody else what good government is all about. Her approval rating: well, she got 92 percent of the vote in the last election, her 11th consecutive win.

Enjoy an incredibly informative and entertaining 6 minute report about her at YouTube called Welcome Mississauga.

 

2008 APA/AICP Election Results

APA/AICP continued its painful and hurtful new way of announcing election results at its annual meeting at the national conference in Las Vegas on Wednesday, April 30, 2008.

The only vote counts we have are for Region 4 AICP where Lee Brown won with 294 votes to petitioner Charles Wunder’s 234 and Dale Powers’ 194 votes. Wunder was the only candidate in the election who opposes Certification Maintenance, although his position statement did not explicitly state his opposition. APA/AICP continues to make it very hard to get actual vote counts, which is typical of the lack of transparency in the way APA/AICP works these days.

APA Board Winners: (vote counts not available)

APA President–Elect: Bruce Knight, FAICP

APA Director at–Large: Mitzi Barker, FAICP (incumbent)

APA Director at–Large Focused: Irayda Ruiz, AICP

APA Director, Region II: Carol Rhea, AICP (incumbent)

APA Director, Region III: Marie York, FAICP

APA Director, Region IV: Cynthia Bowen, AICP

AICP Commission Winners: (vote counts not available)

AICP President–Elect: Paul Inghram, AICP

AICP Commissioner, Region II: Terrance Harrington, AICP (incumbent)

AICP Commissioner, Region III: Valerie Hubbard, AICP

AICP Commissioner, Region IV: Lee Brown, FAICP

And for what’s wrong about CM from the AICP members’ standpoint, click here and see the links to the left.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   OLD BUSINESS             

 Don’t Quit AICP!  Achieve Repeal With New Commissioners

AICP Commission Amending Bylaws to Prevent Repeal of
Certification Maintenance by Next Commission?

The AICP Commission approved “mandatory continuing education” under the guise of “Certification Maintenance” at its April 13, 2007 meeting in Philadelphia, despite massive opposition to the certification maintenance requirement the AICP Commission proposed and the Commission’s own survey showing that 27% of AICP members would quit AICP if CM is adopted. Members are ticked off and next year could very well could elect 4 Commissioners pledged to repealing Certification Maintenance — half of the 8–member Commission.

Why is the Commission amending the bylaws? Apparently there’s a strong belief among the AICP Commissioners that certification maintenance must stay in place for a few years in order to properly gauge its value to the Institute. That’s a fair motive. No complaint about that. But bylaw amendments aren’t needed to keep CM in place for a few years no matter what. And what about the practical effect?

These bylaws aren’t needed! If that’s the only reason the Commission is considering these bylaws, then they should be rejected because they aren’t needed. The CM program is in place for a couple of years whether or not the bylaw amendments are adopted. Even if anti–CM members were to sweep the 2008 election, that would give them just half of the Commission — not enough to repeal CM by a simple majority vote. So it would still take until mid–2010 for enough anti–CM members to be elected to the Commission to repeal CM — even without the bylaw amendments!

What is the perhaps unintended effect of the bylaw amendment? Opponents of CM would have to win 6 of 8 seats in the next two AICP elections to build the supermajority needed to repeal CM because it takes a 2/3 vote of the Commission to amend the bylaws. We think that the Commissioners are unaware that the effect of these bylaw amendments will be to prevent democracy from working in AICP by making it nearly impossible to achieve an AICP Commission with enough members to repeal the bylaw amendments and terminate the ill–conceived Certification Maintenance requirements. Even though the Commissioners supporting the bylaw amendments may not intend to produce this result, this is the practical consequence of the proposed bylaw amendments. Click here to see the amendments below.

We had until May 26,2006 to tell the Commissioners to heal this organization by rejecting these bylaw amendments. CM is in place for the next four years even if supporters of voluntary continuing education were to be elected to all four Commissioner seats in 2008. The bylaw amendments are unnecessary. To those who favor voluntary continuing education, these amendments are like rubbing salt into an open wound.

There's no good reason to amend the bylaws when CM hasn’t even been tested. This would be like amending the U.S. Constitution when only a statute need be adopted. Amending the bylaws now would undermine the electoral process in AICP and deny members their democratic voice.

Former Assistant Secretary of HUD Quits AICP Due to Certification Maintenance

Don’ quit AICP — it’s worth saving. It’s been an honorable and valuable institute usually governed with sound, rational reasoning based on facts. But if those of us who favor voluntary continuing education and who recognize CM for the black hole it is were to quit, AICP could never recover. It will continue its downhill slide in which it ignores sound planning practices in its own governance and turns into an onerous, oppressive organization like so many other professional associations. It can change, but only if you get active and recognize that genuine reform is possible through the electoral process just like in the real world.

No AICP member can be expelled for failure to complete the CM requirements for four years (assuming we’re reading the complicated rules correctly). So the bylaws could be amended before anybody could be expelled — but only if there is an opponent to CM in every Commission contest in both of the next two elections (this is just an observation; I cannot get involved in the election myself). In the 2006 election, no candidate came out against mandatory continuing education — with no choice, it’s no surprise that the proponents of mandatory continuing education took over the Commission in an election with an extremely low voter turnout. (Losing AICP President–Elect candidate Alan Canter favored voluntary continuing education, but he did not mention this position in his position statement or elsewhere.)

We are deeply saddened by the actions the Commission took. Members will be required to take 32 hours of AICP–approved mandatory continuing education over a two–year period in order to remain an AICP member. Nowhere in the Commission’s actions is there any indication of how the Commission realistically plans to pay to administer this requirement. The massive dues increases that will likely be required to pay for administering this requirement, coupled with the cost of the mandatory courses, will likely raise the cost of being an AICP member to over $1,000 a year.

Get full details of the Commission’s action by clicking here to view the PDF file the Commission released that details the requirements and plans to amend the bylaws to prevent repeal.

The Proposed Bylaw Amendments

Motion:
That the AICP Commission approve the publication of the following proposed amendment to the AICP Bylaws, to institute the maintenance of AICP certification through a minimum standard of continuing education (language to be inserted is underlined):
AICP Bylaws Section 2.34 — Membership: Certification Maintenance. Members shall be required to abide by continuing education requirements as established by the Commission through the standards of Certification Maintenance.

Motion:
That the AICP Commission approve the publication of the following proposed amendment to the AICP Bylaws (language to be inserted is underlined):
AICP Bylaws — Section 2.35 — Membership: Certification Maintenance Standards. Certified planners are required to take professional development courses throughout their careers in a program of Certification Maintenance (CM). The reporting period for Certification Maintenance will be established by the Commission and will be in the range of every one to three years. The annual average number of credits required will be established by the Commission and will be in the range of twelve to twenty–four credits.

See the “Argument Against Certification Maintenance” for ideas you can use to make the case against these bylaw amendments in addition to them being a very anti–democratic set of amendments.

Planning and Social Responsibility

It took three years, but Norm Krumholz’ efforts to get AICP to conduct a symposium on Planning and Social Responsibility finally bore fruit last November.
Norman Krumholz, FAICP, reports on the results of AICP’s Symposium on Planning and Social Responsibility in the current issue of Practicing Planner. These excerpts from his comments and introduction are reprinted with his permission.
Of greatest importance to us are the following recommendations that Norm proffers:
“APA and AICP should: (1) Seek to incorporate social impact analysis into the core of planning practice. The AICP Code of Professional Conduct and Responsibility should require AICP members to include the identification of social impacts on housing cost, racial and economic segregation, mobility, etc., in all aspects of planning and zoning. Failure to do this would constitute a violation of the code.”

Efforts to actually add this to the new AICP Code were voted down by the AICP Commission when it adopted the new Code in 2005. Hopefully this symposium will revive the issue and lead to its addition to the Code. The one big “gottcha” is the need for a provision to protect planners who face the threat of losing their jobs because they comply with this amendment to the Code if it were to be adopted.

“Practicing planners should: (A) Incorporate social responsibility analysis as part of all plans, environmental impact statements and zoning proposals. Place special emphasis on reducing racial isolation and inequality.”

Click here to see excerpts from Norm’s comments and introduction to the report. The entire report and papers are available to AICP members in the Spring 2007 issue of Practicing Planner, posted on APA¹s website.

For decades many planners have concluded that the profession needs to incorporate social responsibility into the planning process. We have several thorough discussions of this topic here — just click on the three links marked with an asterisk on the left–hand side of this page.
This isn’t a “liberal’s” planning issue — planners of all political persuasions should be supporting the incorporation of social impact analysis into all planning activities since the impact of planning decisions on people’s lives rests at the heart of planning practice. Maybe some planners don’t want to explicitly identify the impacts of their planning decisions because that might reveal some very undesirable impacts. Who knows? This practice simply fits within the long–held APA adage, “The better informed decision makers are, presumably the better decisions they will make.”

Planning Giant Jerry Kaufman Succumbs to Cancer

“Jerry Kaufman taught urban planning for 30 years at UW–Madison, focusing his restless intellect on research into racial segregation and poverty in cities. Later, he shifted focus to urban agriculture, starting courses on community food systems and putting his knowledge to use on projects including Troy Gardens on the North Side.

“No one (in urban planning) was really working on where people get the most important thing in their lives, which is food,” said Will Allen, a MacArthur "genius grant" recipient in 2008 and founder of Growing Power in Milwaukee. "He was the first to get his students to start thinking about that."

“Kaufman, who died of cancer in his Madison home Thursday [January 10, 2013] at age 79, served from 2000 to 2012 as board president of Growing Power, a national nonprofit based in Milwaukee that promotes urban agriculture. Allen called him a father figure and "probably the most positive person" he's met.

“Kaufman started as a professor at UW-Madison in 1971 and retired in 2001. While teaching and publishing research, he also played an active role in the Madison community, doing surveys and serving on city and county committees studying race, poverty and land use — important issues as Dane County's population grew larger and more diverse.

“"He was always interested in community engagement," said his son, Dan, a New York Times reporter who lives in Brooklyn. "He didn't want to retreat into the ivory tower."

“A 1991 study by Kaufman and Charles Pfeifer, then executive director of Madison Urban Ministries, found a widespread gap in native Madisonians' knowledge of their new, more diverse neighbors from Chicago and foreign countries. It spawned a renewed focus by community groups and politicians on closing that gap.”

Click here to continue the article from the Wisconsin State Journal.

I can’t adequately express the loss the planning community feels with the passing of Jerry Kaufman. He was a giant among planners who often served as the conscience of the planning profession. My greatest regret is I didn’t accept the offer the get my masters at U of WI-Madison and went to U of Illinois-Urbana instead back in 1970 because I missed the opportunity to have Jerry Kaufman as one of my teachers. And one of my greatest joys is that I later had the privilege and pleasure of getting to know Jerry as a planning colleague. So on behalf of all of us in the city and regional planning profession, let me say, “Thank you Jerry Kaufman for a life well lived and for all you have contributed to the planning profession that has made the lives of countless Americans better. We miss you.” — Daniel Lauber, AICP

 

 Cancer Claims Don Krueckeberg

One of planning’s brightest lights died at age 68 on December 15, 2006, after a 18–bout with pancreatic cancer. It’s unbelievably hard to write this, but Don Krueckeberg, FAICP, with whom we had the honor and pleasure of serving on the AICP Commission, taught urban planning and policy at Rutgers University nearly 40 years. But his knowledge of planning extended far beyond the academic world and deep into practical planning practice.

My greatest regret is getting to know Don only when we both ran for the AICP Commission in 2000. Frank Popper recommended Don as a candidate — one of the best recommendations ever. After being elected in a landslide, Don served with integrity, honesty, and great insight. He had an innate ability to cut through the B.S. and get to the heart of any issue. He did an incredible job as chair of AICP’s Exam Committee, guiding its major rewrite and computerization of the entire exam. While he was particularly proud of the new continuing education program established at Rutgers, he strongly opposed mandatory continuing education like that proposed above, in part because he understood that adults rarely learn when forced take continuing education courses. Like Joe Flynn, Jr. (see story below), Don was a truthsayer and dear friend. He will be dearly missed. For more details on Don’s wonderful life and accomplishments, click here. — Daniel Lauber, AICP

 Joe Flynn, Jr.’s Battle Versus Cancer Ends

Since early 2002 we knew this day would come. On October 9, 2006, our dear friend, professional colleague, truthsayer, and frequent editor and contributor to this newsletter, Joseph Flynn, Jr, FIACP, PCP, succumbed to complications from inoperable lung cancer at age 64 after a courageous 4 1/2 year battle.

Joe was a remarkable planner and individual. Pictured here in a Sept. 2005 photo with his wife Dixie (without whom he could never have survived as long as he did) and an unidentified friend with a wooden personality, Joe lived a professional life that reflected his great moral courage and dedication to sound planning principles.

More than once, Joe risked his job to do the right thing, including his position as Director of Planning for the City of Detroit (which honored him with “Spirit of Detroit Award” a year later). Joe’s career illustrated the wide variety of positions professional planners could hold (as long as there’s no state licensing to limit our job options). In addition to heading several planning departments, Joe served as a city administrator and as general manager of a property owners association. Joe served on the APA Board and AICP Commission from 1985 to 1988 and was Vice–President of AICP from 1986 to 1988. Joe was Missouri Chapter President 1987 to 1991. In 2005, Joe and Charles Wunder received the AICP President’s Award as representatives of all the courageous planners in the planning trenches who seek to do the right thing everyday.

Joe applied his planning skills to the communities in which he lived. He served as a planning commissioner and on the Development Advisory Board for Blue Springs, MO this entire millennium; and was elected by the public as chair of its Charter Commission in 1993. He chaired the Planning Commission in Jackson County, MO in the early 1990s.

Unlike so many others, Joe did not hide his alcoholism. Dixie told me that Joe was determined to make it to this autumn so he could celebrate his 32nd year of sobriety and say he lived most of his life sober. I’d have to say his was a complete and total triumph  over the condition. In the 20+ years I had the privilege of knowing him, Joe never exhibited any of the inhibiting personality characteristics typical of people in recovery (and doing so much zoning work for recovery communities, you better believe I’ve seen those characteristics time and again).

For all of us who had the pleasure and distinct privilege of serving with, working with, or just knowing Joe, I thank him for welcoming us into his life. And for all of us, I thank his wife Dixie (whom Joe inspired to go to planning school in her 40s), for enriching his life and caring for him through his illness. You, too, Dixie are an inspiration to us all. It’s not likely that we’ll the likes of Joe Flynn, Jr. again. — Daniel Lauber, AICP

 Fred Bair, Jr. Planning Pioneer Dies

Our colleague, good friend, and co–founder of Inside APA, the predecessor to APAWatchDog, Fred Bair, Jr., died February 14, 2005 in Auburndale, Florida, at age 89. With his best buddy and colleague, the late Robert Leary, Bair brought sound planning practices to communities throughout the South — and the rest of the nation — well before anybody ever imagined calling them “Smart Growth.”

Fred was anointed a “Planning Landmark” by AICP at the APA National Conference in April 2006. Rarely has somebody been so deserving of this posthumous honor.

He is “part of a disappearing breed of generalist planners,” I wrote in 2000 when I nominated Fred for APA’s Distinguished Leadership by a Planner Award. “Few planners have influenced the practice of planning to the degree that Fred Bair has,” said Dennis Andrew Gordon, AICP, chair of the 2000 APA awards jury which conveyed the award to Fred. “His pioneering work helped to define the rational, progressive, humane side of planning that so many members of our profession aspire to implement.”

Much of today's planning theory and practice is based on Fred’s 40 years of professional practice with the Florida Development Commission, and then as an independent consultant at his own firm, Bair & Abernathy. His three editions of The Text of a Model Zoning Ordinance guided several decades of planners as they introduced modern zoning to their communities. For 30 years, Fred served as a reporter and editorial board member for Zoning Digest and its successor, Land Use Law and Zoning Digest, where his commentaries helped advance sound zoning practices before a national audience. Indeed, most of today's zoning for mobile and manufactured homes, recreational equipment storage, trailer and truck rentals, and signage, and other issues, is based in Fred’s work in these areas.

You can read the full details of Fred's remarkable career at APA’s official website. For a more concise discussion of Fred’s influence, click here and see why Fred was honored with APA’s Distinguished Leadership Award in 2000. For a one–page summary of his career, click here.

A personal note. I first got to know Fred only by phone long ago when I worked in ASPO’s Planning Advisory Service. He was the person you called when everybody was stumped trying to answer a PAS inquiry. He always steered you to the right solution. After being elected to the ASPO Board of Directors, I convinced a very reluctant Fred to run the next year. Naturally he was elected. Serving with Fred was a sheer joy. And getting to know him and becoming actual friends was one of the greatest experiences of my life. Little did I know then that we had both received sociology degrees from the University of Chicago, although 35 years apart. I strongly suspect that’s why we both recognized the close connection between the two professions and the need to keep planning practice focused on its impacts on people. I guess he was a mentor long before the term became a cliche.

Fred was so far ahead of his time it was scary. Grab a copy of Planning Cities: Selected Writings on Principles and Practice by Frederick H. Bair, Jr. that ASPO published in 1970. You’ll find his writings from the 1950s that called for planning to support racial and socio–economic integration (“Planning for protection against difference”), his insightful criticisms of zoning practice that still hold water today, and the heartbreaking article “… and a little child shall lead them” that moves me as much today as when I first read it 35 years ago.

The last time I saw Fred, he was calling himself the “Six Million Dollar Man” with all the artificial joints he had acquired in his later years. I am eternally grateful that APA finally saw fit to recognize his incredible contributions to the profession and humanity with its award in 2000 — and I am incredibly grateful that I had the honor and pleasure to call Fred “friend.” Our deepest condolences to his widow Margaret and his family. We’ll not see his like again. — Daniel Lauber, AICP

 Sam Cullers Dies at Age 70

It’s with stunned sadness that we have to report that our old friend Sam Cullers died after a rough bout with cancer on September 28, 2005. Politically conservative as he had become, Sam was consistently a sheer delight to speak and correspond with and always a true professional and a gentleman in the best sense of the word.

I was privileged to be able to appoint Sam to several key APA and AICP committees when I served as APA and later AICP President. He always brought a fresh perspective and insights that broadened the understanding of issues by all around him. I’m only grateful to have had the honor of speaking with him so often the last 10 years and enjoying his frequent politically–tinged emails. Like Fred Bair, Jr., Sam will be sorely missed. Our most sincere condolences to his widow Geraldine and his four children.
Daniel Lauber,
AICP

From the Sacramento Bee:

Samuel J. Cullers, who passed away on September 28, 2005, was born in Chicago, IL, and attended Tilden Technical High School, then Roosevelt College and Fisk University, Nashville, TN. With the support of a John Hay Whitney fellowship, he entered the graduate program in city and regional planning at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was the first African–American graduate. While at MIT, he was active in the New England Chapter of the American Institute of Planners (now APA). He has continued to be active in Association affairs throughout the years and formerly was a member of the Board, then First Vice President, and most recently continued to serve as a member of AICP Exam Specifications Committee and of APA Community Planning Team for Greensboro, NC.

His professional career had been outstanding in terms of variety and accomplishment. Starting as Deputy Director of Redevelopment in Hartford, CT, he then went overseas as Senior Planner and subsequently Chief of Party for the Bangkok, Thailand, City Planning Project team. This was followed by an assignment as City Planning Advisor to the Ministry of Interior of Thailand. He then returned to Chicago as Director of the Community Renewal Program. He then was recruited to bring U.S. techniques to Canada and direct an Urban Renewal Study for the Metropolitan Toronto Planning Board for three years. At completion of this project he became Chief of Urban Planning for the State of Calif. State Office of Planning. After serving as Acting Director of the office, he was offered the position of Vice President, Planning and Environmental Affairs for Engineering Science, Inc. In 1972 he resigned to open the firm of Samuel J. Cullers & Assoc.

Other professional activities have included Jury of Awards, CalChapter, APA Director, Sacramento Valley Section, Task Force of ALI Code, APA, Board of Directors, Council of State Planning Agencies, among others. He was elected to Lambda Alpha International, Honorary Land Economics Society, and was the founder of the Sacramento Chapter and served as International Vice President, West.

Numerous community activities have included board membership and chairing such entities as the Red Cross, United Way, YMCA, Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, the Urban League, NAACP, Symphony Board, and others. He has served as a Visiting Executive, International Executive Service Corps, to assist with economic development in Ozd, Hungary.

He is survived by his wife of 55 years, Geraldine Lewis Cullers, his sons Jim and Mark, and his daughters Jackie, and Adrienne.
 

 Zoning Boards Found Biased

The composition of zoning boards leads to a bias in favor of developers according to a new in–depth study of 177 cities and towns in Iowa by Drake University Law School Professor Jerry Anderson and Drake Law School graduate Erin Sass in the Summer 2004 issue of The Urban Lawyer, the American Bar Association’s national quarterly of state and local government law. Click here for more details on the article. As the authors found, professionals involved in development (attorneys, architects, real estate brokers) have a disproportionately high presence on zoning boards which all too often results in a bias toward developers. (Is anybody is surprised by this?) See the link just above for more details.

Then–AICP President Daniel Lauber called these findings to the attention of the APA Board and AICP Commission and suggested that APA/AICP seek to correct this imbalance and eliminate developer bias from zoning boards.

APA/AICP Gets Serious About
Planning Practice — We Hope…

With its Development Plan for 2003–2005, APA/AICP really got serious about changing the way we plan in America. Click here to see the plan and learn how APA/AICP is changing to support inclusionary and discrimination–free planning. Click here for Professional Planners Doing the Right Thing?

The 2004 APA National Conference saw the introduction of the “Socially–Informed Planning Track” with 15 sessions. Click here to see what was covered and what we hope the future will bring.

We hope that the current APA/AICP leadership will continue to support the substantive policies contained in this development plan.

Return to top of this page

Contact us by email

This site is operated completely independently of
the American Planning Association
and American Institute of Certified Planners.

Get Firefox