What the APA needs to do to get professional planners held in higher regards

[michaelskis]

Great Thread!

I agree with a lot of what is being said above, however with the comparison between planning and engineering they are very different. Engineers deal with a lot of absolutes and physical characteristics of the projects that they work on. The only social element is the amount or way they are used.

Planning is almost entirely social. People and society change directions and patterns, so planners need to accommodate if not guide those changes.

I think that many educational models would be a better example. Many teachers need to continue education, and I think that planners should be required to take x number of credits every year to keep their AICP.

The Michigan Certification thing looks interesting. I think that I will see about taking it as soon as I am eligible.

As for Jaw’s comment, when was the last time you visited a city in Michigan?


Edit:
Maybe they should stop promoting planning in China and start promoting planning in America?

[cololi]

I think placing more emphasis on communication would help. Often times it seems that planners do not do a good job of explaining the benefits of a certain type of development or regulation in a way that is easily understood by others. Our field is so full of jargon, acronyms, etc. that it makes it very difficult for the public to understand what the hell we are talking about.

I think the trainings at APA conferences etc. are geared more towards "look at how good of a project we regulated" and not on how we convinced the public, investors, decision makers, etc. that we need these regulations to foster better development or we need this element in our general plan.

I do think that the AICP thing is cheapened by the lack of continuing education. Some sort of CE should be required, but it has to be applied in such a manner that planners outside of the major US cities can reasonably attend and get the training.

[btrage]

I agree with many of the statements here, but I think this should be looked at from the perspective of the average citizen, because if we are not a legitimate profession in the eyes of John Q. Citizen, then it doesn't matter what happens.

When someone says that they are an architect or an engineer, the average citizen already holds that person in high regards, even though they may not know what that person does on an everyday basis.

Are continuing education credits going to matter if the average citizen still has no idea what a professional planner does?

And I agree with Jaws when he makes the comment about planners not "producing" things" Engineers design a bridge. Architects design a building. Planners design Master Plans, which is not a tangible thing. The effects that a planner has on a community may not come to fruition until after the planner leaves, 20 years down the road.

I'm not sure where I'm goin with all this, just some thoughts off the top of my head.

[Suburb Repairman]

I think the trainings at APA conferences etc. are geared more towards "look at how good of a project we regulated" and not on how we convinced the public, investors, decision makers, etc. that we need these regulations to foster better development or we need this element in our general plan.

slightly off topic... You know, that is something I've had in the back of my mind and never been able to put my finger on. That is something that has always bothered me about how we do awards and sessions and such.

[Budgie]

My $0.02.

If as a profession we don't expect and identify the highest level of professionalism and knowledge amongst our peers, we really don't have a right to be expected to be taken seriously as a profession. This starts with attracting bright kids to consider planning as a profession.

[TOFB]

Planners don't know squat about public relations - it certainly isn't part of the curriculum. Everything I know (and do quite well, I think) my advertising exec wife taught me.

[ssnyderjr]

Planners don't know squat about public relations - it certainly isn't part of the curriculum. Everything I know (and do quite well, I think) my advertising exec wife taught me.

It is not taught in engineering school either, but would have been a great useful tool - for most engineers - in the "real world" for us too. Most engineers are geeky and worse off PR-wise when they get into the field than planners. How does that get added to the planners cirriculum?? I would also like to see more of the business end of it (how loans work, grant apps, etc.) and negotiating for engineers too.

My $0.02.

If as a profession we don't expect and identify the highest level of professionalism and knowledge amongst our peers, we really don't have a right to be expected to be taken seriously as a profession. This starts with attracting bright kids to consider planning as a profession.

Higher salaries will attract brighter kids, dangle that carrot and they will follow. If the salary were more comparable to the common professions, Architecture, engineering, law and healthcare. Higher salaries will not come until the profession of planning is taken seriously. How does the profession of planning gain that "professional" respect is the question of the day.
I know that my dues to the state professional engineering society are going - in part - to our lobbyist that keeps hammering home the importance of professionalism and our profession down at the state level with legislators. It is money well spent. Where does the money for your AICP membership go????

[Budgie]

Planners don't know squat about public relations - it certainly isn't part of the curriculum. Everything I know (and do quite well, I think) my advertising exec wife taught me.

I think public relations, although not taught in a formal setting, it is gained through experience. However, I have found that the personality of the planner has a lot to do with public relations. Some planners work very well with the public by explaining and teaching them about planning, even when they are conducting code enforcement activities. Planners who lack public relations skill generally have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to planning and regulation enforcement. They are the "enforcers" rather than the "teachers" and this can lead to very poor public relations. In some extreme cases, the planner could develop a GOD complex of sorts where they see themselves and the ultimate arbitrater. It becomes a personal game of "me" or "us" against "them" with them being the public.

[NHPlanner]

Planners don't know squat about public relations - it certainly isn't part of the curriculum. Everything I know (and do quite well, I think) my advertising exec wife taught me.

Maybe not your curriculum, but I felt very prepared for public relations after earning my degree at Ball State, and 10 years later, I find public relations to be an essential part of my job that I have been told I do very well.

[TOFB]

I think public relations, although not taught in a formal setting, it is gained through experience. However, I have found that the personality of the planner has a lot to do with public relations. Some planners work very well with the public by explaining and teaching them about planning, even when they are conducting code enforcement activities. Planners who lack public relations skill generally have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to planning and regulation enforcement. They are the "enforcers" rather than the "teachers" and this can lead to very poor public relations. In some extreme cases, the planner could develop a GOD complex of sorts where they see themselves and the ultimate arbitrater. It becomes a personal game of "me" or "us" against "them" with them being the public.

I agree 100% that we can be our own worst enemy. Everybody knows planners like you describe that should not be in the profession, or at least not in the public eye.

"Go down to the basement, Storage Room B, and don't come back until you have researched what every City between 100,000 - 250,000 does to regulate farm animals in residential districts, Milton"

[jaws]

And I agree with Jaws when he makes the comment about planners not "producing" things" Engineers design a bridge. Architects design a building. Planners design Master Plans, which is not a tangible thing. The effects that a planner has on a community may not come to fruition until after the planner leaves, 20 years down the road.

Making it all the more important that the people who hire planners have a 20 year outlook on the value of the work being produced.

[boiker]

Making it all the more important that the people who hire planners have a 20 year outlook on the value of the work being produced.

I think this way all the time. Our department has a history of modifing codes and plans in order to accomodate rather than to dictate. We propose codes to fix things on a reactionary basis rather than looking at the real problem or the long term goals.

A good planner, or any or discipline, looks at all alternatives and explores all possible results. You know. the scientific method. I can't think of another profession that is such a hodge-podge. It is the ultimate Political Social Scientific Study -- a profession that aims to achieve scientifically derrived results through an abstract social theroy which must compliment any political wills at the time.

[Margin Walker]

This is somewhat off-topic, but I thought it was relevant...

For the Transportation Planners there looks to be an opportunity for certification coming that is outside of APA. The ITE is launching a "Professional Transportation Planner" Certification in 2007. What does this mean? I don't know. What limited info there is is here: http://www.ite.org/certification/planner/

I've emailed them to ask for more info but have yet to hear back.

[bluehour]

True, but you don't lose your job for making a bad decision and people don't lose their lives due to poor planning..

Yes, but we all have to live with the results of poor planning... and beyond the eyesores and quality of life issues with poorly planned developments and cities, it is also effecting the earth via pollution, climate change etc.


I have been thinking alot about qualification recently-- there is much to be learned from comparision with the UK. In the UK planners are "chartered" via membership in the Royal Town Planning Institute.

Chartered status is taken seriously, and non-charted planners are few and far between. Detailed professional development plans are required from all members, with criteria for units of professional development. Membership is only via school, or a mutual international organization, or 10 years work experience in the UK with a statement of case, mentors, etc etc.

Generally planners are as respected as Architects and Environmental consultants, (but not engineers...), and have good equal professional pay.

I think that part of the reason why planners are respected in the UK is due to government policy which puts great emphasis on planning (for the greater good), with public acknowledgement of importance. Also Govt policy requires planners for many things, so we're needed as as opposed to optional.

[bud]

IMHO, I think the APA has it all wrong. The AICP test is a start, but only a start. ...

3. Have a lobbyist at the state level that pushes to regulate and promote the importance of the profession. Make it evident to the Governmental "powers that be" that the planning profession is a much needed and useful profession.

... I don't know if this can be accomplished by a simple letter-writing campaign, but it would be a start. It won't happen overnight, but is a worthy cause.

How about a million-man-march on Washington? – to demand they stop funding disorderly development and start funding an orderly and systematic, streamlined plan as Congress has already declared essential to the survival of this Nation, to wit:

(42USCode

Urban Policy
Section 4501
It is the policy of Congress to encourage the rational and orderly (see 13A-11-7) development of our cities, towns and rural areas...
Section 4502(b)
Existing and future programs must be inter-related and coordinated within a system of orderly development... (d) Policy should... (6) Encourage planned communities.
Community Development
Section 5301(b)
The Congress further finds and declares that the future welfare of the Nation and the well being of citizens depend on the establishment and maintenance of viable urban communities, and require... (3) Streamlined planning. (c) The primary objective is ... (5) ...a better arrangement of residential, commercial, industrial ...and other needed activity centers.)

Have plan will travel.

IMHO, I think the APA has it all wrong. The AICP test is a start, but only a start. The members of the APA need to push for stronger regulations and standards for Professional Planners. …

…This would keep planners honest.

I am thinking about an AIA+, i.e., an American Institute of Architecture that would be a Union of all people involved in the building industry? This would be to demand that Politicians follow the Law as it expresses the will of the People, rather than Money as it expresses the Developer’s own sweet will. The fault is with how the government is being run without due regard for the will of the People. As a matter of regulation of Commerce we need more quality and less quantity which would best be left to the Central Federal government, I am sure that is the intent of the Constitution in Article I, Section 8 as explained in the Federalist #17. http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fedpapers.html


Are Lawyers more honest in having a legal monopoly on the trade? They still operate on the principals of the feudalistic Law Merchant. The same goes for other professions that require State Registration as Architects and Engineers; does having a monopoly engender honesty or anything else of real value to society that the law does not already provide? The Guilds were well organized in the Feudal system. This reverts back to the Feudal system where most of the people were slaves – it is no wonder We, the People are growing impatient with such professionalism.

[Rumpy Tunanator]

This is somewhat off-topic, but I thought it was relevant...

For the Transportation Planners there looks to be an opportunity for certification coming that is outside of APA. The ITE is launching a "Professional Transportation Planner" Certification in 2007. What does this mean? I don't know. What limited info there is is here: http://www.ite.org/certification/planner/

I've emailed them to ask for more info but have yet to hear back.

I see they have a test scheduled for March 24th at limited locations. I wonder what's on it and how much it will cost. The same as their other exams maybe? Let us know when they get you more info.

[Big Owl]

This is somewhat off-topic, but I thought it was relevant...

For the Transportation Planners there looks to be an opportunity for certification coming that is outside of APA. The ITE is launching a "Professional Transportation Planner" Certification in 2007. What does this mean? I don't know. What limited info there is is here: http://www.ite.org/certification/planner/

I've emailed them to ask for more info but have yet to hear back.

I just called them... the link you have is the most current info they have. If you sent a email, they have added you to the email list.

[bud]

IMHO, The members of the APA need to push for stronger regulations and standards for Professional Planners. …

How does having a Planners monopoly engender anything of real value to society that the law does not already provide? We already have laws such as, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not deceive; would that not suffice in every case? I think it probably would. Ordinary and existing laws if applied directly to the problem would serve to at least keep the careless or criminal element as well as the incompetent and irresponsible out of the profession.

...True, but you don't lose your job for making a bad decision and people don't lose their lives due to poor planning...

...Planning is almost entirely social.

Doesn’t bad planning result in disorderly development - which contributes to more crimes of every sort as well as traffic congestion (causing car crashes and driver rage) and overall urban confusion? Probably every law on the Books is violated in one way or another by the lack of good Urban Design and Planning. The social costs are practically immeasurable.

_________________________________
Note to Administrator: I notice the edit time previously allowed was reduced when I tried to edit this post last Friday. The title AIA+ came out Aia+; and I meant to say principles of the feudalistic Law Merchant not “principals of the feudalistic Law Merchant”.

[ssnyderjr]

How does having a Planners monopoly engender anything of real value to society that the law does not already provide? We already have laws such as, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not deceive; would that not suffice in every case? I think it probably would. Ordinary and existing laws if applied directly to the problem would serve to at least keep the careless or criminal element as well as the incompetent and irresponsible out of the profession.





Doesn’t bad planning result in disorderly development - which contributes to more crimes of every sort as well as traffic congestion (causing car crashes and driver rage) and overall urban confusion? Probably every law on the Books is violated in one way or another by the lack of good Urban Design and Planning. The social costs are practically immeasurable.

_________________________________
Note to Administrator: I notice the edit time previously allowed was reduced when I tried to edit this post last Friday. The title AIA+ came out Aia+; and I meant to say principles of the feudalistic Law Merchant not “principals of the feudalistic Law Merchant”.

Bud,
If you pass the 10 commandments test, then you will make a good planner??? So you're implying that anyone can do planning (i.e. planning undergrad student) and no certification process for being a "professional" planner? Heck, why even require an undergraduate degree then, for that matter??

You make a good point about societal costs - it should be expressed to lawmakers (at the State and Federal level) and so forth, then your profession would be taken seriously.

[Iron Ring]

As a professional engineer (in Canada), I can clearly state what my stamp/designation/title means to me. Basically, by stamping something I accept personal responsibility for it. It's not my employer accepting responsiblity through me, it is my responsibility. If negligent I could not only lose my job, but my right ever to practice engineering, and even personal assets. It also means that I hold the interest of public safety above all others including the interests of my employer, my client, or any other party.

We know that planners rarely hold the safety of the public in their hands the way an engineer or doctor would, but they often act on behalf of the "public's" interest. Could the "professional planner's" role be to uphold an ethical standard? A planner must often act impartially, without bias or conflict of interest. Could a "planner's stamp" essentially say that "I take responsibility for the process (of a decision/plan...), that it was arrived at ethically and impartially, and that the public's interests were served above all others"?

[Vlaude]

I agree with a lot of what is being said. I am 3 years out of school now and have 6+ years experience as I worked through my masters in a planning capacity. I finally decided to break down and take the AICP so I am studying now, and as I go through study questions, etc... I say to myself "ARE YOU SERIOUS!?!?!" What is the 4th largest pyramid in the world? And population projections for specific cities? Come on in my opinion these are BOGUS questions that really have very little to do with every day planning for vast majority of planners outside these regional areas. Maybe one could have a general idea of growth patterns in the nation but nailing down specific projections for a city over 1,000 miles away??? Come on! I guess my point is though, I don't see this as a measure of one's true planning ability. I'd like to see a better exam, maybe tougher credentials to sit for the exam, and like some have said a more technical approach in certain areas where I believe it is justified! I know someone who I consider to be a good planner who failed the test on her first time. Then I know someone who an undergrad in geography has done some GIS work and was able to sit in with that experience and take the test. The guy nows almost nothing about day to day planning functions from a comp planning or development review side of planning. Its really discouraging to see that, IMO... That is one of the reasons I have really lagged in taking the test. Just doesn't really seem to do much for me other than a resume plug.

[bud]

Bud,
If you pass the 10 commandments test, then you will make a good planner??? So you're implying that anyone can do planning (i.e. planning undergrad student) and no certification process for being a "professional" planner? Heck, why even require an undergraduate degree then, for that matter??

You make a good point about societal costs - it should be expressed to lawmakers (at the State and Federal level) and so forth, then your profession would be taken seriously.

I think you have it backward; I would rather say, a good planner follows those laws to make sure no harm comes to the people or to the planet. I am reminded of the Ayn Rand character, Howard Roark who apparently personified my mentor Frank Lloyd Wright - see how they shunned academia and professionalism. A good encyclopedia, dictionary, an almanac and an atlas, along with the public libraries are adequate tools for building a knowledge base; if you can find a mentor, then that would suffice. Academia is liable to make a robot out of you. A professional organization is only as strong as its weakest member. I heard at the beginning of my career that "no one can design a city"; and that justifies faking it. I could not accept that premise so I went on to learn how on my own after working with Wright. Wright could design a city and so can I; but if you can make money faking it, who cares?

May I let Ralph Waldo Emerson answer your question? And how about a million-man march on Washington; wouldn't that get everyone's attention?

[ssnyderjr]

I think you have it backward; I would rather say, a good planner follows those laws to make sure no harm comes to the people or to the planet. I am reminded of the Ayn Rand character, Howard Roark who apparently personified my mentor Frank Lloyd Wright - see how they shunned academia and professionalism. A good encyclopedia, dictionary, an almanac and an atlas, along with the public libraries are adequate tools for building a knowledge base; if you can find a mentor, then that would suffice. Academia is liable to make a robot out of you. A professional organization is only as strong as its weakest member. I heard at the beginning of my career that "no one can design a city"; and that justifies faking it. I could not accept that premise so I went on to learn how on my own after working with Wright. Wright could design a city and so can I; but if you can make money faking it, who cares?

May I let Ralph Waldo Emerson answer your question? And how about a million-man march on Washington; wouldn't that get everyone's attention?

Point taken Bud, I know where you're coming from now. There are some who are limited by their academia and who hold it in higher regard (with Masters and Doctorate degrees) than practice and training. I was always disturbed by engineering professors who never had "real-world" practice - only theory. I convinced one professor that there were such tools as board stretchers and concrete welders. When he realized that I was joking, he was very embarassed and turned red in front of the class. Obviously, he was embarassed by his own ignorance and lack of practicality as it deals with construction. I was given a D for his "Strengths of Materials" class, likely due in part to my "smart" remark. I graduated undergrad school with a 2.3 average. I concentrated my time at college on internships (working during school), and social interaction - where I met some of my best friends still today. You make a good point that even certification is not enough and does not necessarily "qualify" one. Also, that is great to hear that you worked with the likes of Frank Lloyd Wright. I remember sitting through art class seeing "Fallingwater" for the first time thinking that is amazing....

[Sutra]

I disagree about the standardization and uniformity of planning certifications. Planning related laws are vastly different from state to state - only the consitutional and federal requirements are the same- and on an everyday level most planners are not dealing with those.

The reason (IMO) why planners are generally not held in higher regards and why certfication and a stamp is silly is because planners are by nature not experts at anything - we are supposed to be very knowledgeable about everything but experts in almost nothing. Also- many planning regulations are not clear enough on their face- which not only makes professional planners sound silly sometimes but makes otherwise intelligent people thing we have no idea what we are doing.

State certification is a good thing - but unless federal requirements start to completely supercede all state planning laws there is no need or justification for a national certification.

Having a stamp is silly - should it be required that someone puts his/her official stamp on a policy that says "Connectivity of pedestrian trails should be encouraged"?

Engineering, Architecture, and Landscae Architecture are somewhat sciences and can justify/defend stamping...... Planning in that sense is not really a science.

[zman]

I'd like to see the APA take more of an interest in development review planners. Seems I am ignored while the planners in design firms or the planners spewing out Comp Plans and TOD Design regulations seem to be the "Golden Children" of the industry.

APA had really done nothing for me thus far in my career except for putting my everyday experience at my desk on the back burner.
When I realized that I am more of a Project Manager (City reviews sorts of things), my attitude towards my career changed and work became better. Of course, APA never told me this nor did I get the notion of this side of planning.

Essentially I am wondering... Where's my parade...