vision2020
Re: Comprehensive Planning
Perhaps the core issue of Ken Medlin's posting is not the hugeness of
the task ahead if we want to have a true popular (in the sense of coming
from the people and having that support) comprehensive plan in this
region.
For me the big issue now is: what is Vision 2020?
Is Vision 2020 prepared to accept any kind or role in facilitating such
a comprehensive plan?
I have been thinking lately of this list, and the range of opinions
expressed, as a microcosm of the local community. If that is true,
perhaps we could legitimately speak for the community, as in reflect a
community opinion. And if our collective view is that a comprehensive
plan is vital to us controlling our future, then we should act on that,
and work to support/create this planning process.
Anyway, I would like to hear more discussion. Is there support there
for this concept of Vision 2020 as a more activist organization?
BL
>From vision2020-request@moscow.com Sat Nov 21 14:27:00 1998
>Received: (from slist@localhost) by mail-gw.fsr.net (8.8.7/8.7.3) id
OAA02145; Sat, 21 Nov 1998 14:35:42 -0800 (PST)
>Resent-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1998 14:35:42 -0800 (PST)
>Message-Id: <199811212235.OAA02105@mail-gw.fsr.net>
>Subject: Comprehensive Planning
>Date: Sat, 21 Nov 98 15:43:11 -0700
>x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
>From: Ken Medlin <dev-plan@moscow.com>
>To: "Moscow Vision 2020" <vision2020@moscow.com>,
> "Loreca Stauber" <ljstauber@moscow.com>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>Resent-Message-ID: <"CgIrx1.0.RX.w0qLs"@mail-gw>
>Resent-From: vision2020@moscow.com
>X-Mailing-List: <vision2020@moscow.com> archive/latest/1954
>X-Loop: vision2020@moscow.com
>Precedence: list
>Resent-Sender: vision2020-request@moscow.com
>
>Bill London's note certainly raises the right questions about the
future
>physical and social landscapes of this area which, in terms of its
>contiguity with eastern Whitman Co., ought also to formulate positions
>both within its own political jurisdictions and in collaboration with
the
>Pullman-Colfax region, so it would seem. But leaving that variable
aside
>for the moment, we should ask if it's possible to address a
>"comprehensive land-use plan" without addressing a priori the social
and
>economic constituents that in fact shape land-use configurations? I
>think there should be some discussion about this relationship, for
>without its consideration, the ways "we want to have our landscape"
>develop may be unattainable without influencing those constituents, and
>public policies will probably reflect only certain development
interests.
>Such outcomes in fact clutter the American landscape, from impoverished
>downtowns in the cities, to abandoned rural communites, both shorn of
>economic resources to sustain human life. Recovery, if it ever comes,
>does so at great financial and social costs.
> As of possible interest to this group, allow me to suggest some
>criteria for governing what I would call the "validity" of a
>comprehensive planning activity in which it might engage. These points
>could serve as ones around which to organize discussion groups and
>information gathering work.
> Planning criteria should include:
> 1) Representativeness: Community participation needs to be
>holistic, fair, and equitable; it ought to include persons
knowledgeable
>about economic resources, organization and alternatives for regional
>development
> 2) Goal-setting: Definition of goal-setting methods should be
laid
>out so that procedures can lead to clear identification of the
character
>and dimensions of the region's future and its quality of life. This
>process might be seen as the ":steering mechanism" for the entire
>enterprise.
> 3) Information base: A search for data bases and inventories of
>resources readily available, including attitudinal profiles of the
>community, should precede goal- and decision-making activities, in
order
>to nourish planning work in feasible and functional directions.
> 4) Institutional support: Involvement of civic, political,
economic
>and cultural (incl. moral-spiritual) resources should be encouraged --
>support which should be correlated with representativeness (item 1).
> 5) Functionality: We need to ask, how will planning goals and
>objectives, welded into a strategic plan, promote functional
>(cost-effective, productive) investments and socially acceptable
>development of the region's phyusical and human resources?
> If these criterion-based propositions were to be accepted by
Vision
>2020, I would recommend creating a series of task forces accordingly,
>which would lay out a planning framework and establish a time frame
with
>realistic targets. These groups would also collectively develop
>evaluation instruments for measuring progress toward the larger group's
>goals and objectives as well as those of each task force. To facilitate
>communications in and between groups, a steering committee, both to
>network and to coordinate, would seem highly relevant. Both the city
and
>county planning agencies would be likely partners, but not governors,
in
>the entire effort.
>
> It seems that this kind of "organization" (a nexus of
communication
>activities) faces three options in regard to its stated interests:
> (1) Function as a major citizen interest
group,
>to interface with govt., business-farming, and education -- sort of
>"going it alone" and flexing muscles based on numbers alone
> (2) Form coalitions with other organizations
>to influence development policies and investments that affect land-use;
>having joint meetings, representation on public bodies, etc.
> (3) Serve primarily as a community
education
>forum, with some public policy pronouncements disseminated on the web
and
>through local media
>
> Whichever course may be chosen by this group of people, it ought to
>be guided by criteria which will assure a high level of credibility and
>reality-related activities. Relying on any other level of
participation,
>such as "shooting from the hip" or going by the "seat of the pants"
>(broadly conceived), will not serve much useful purpose. Hopefully
these
>ideas will be useful for discussion.
>
>
>
>------------------------
>William K. Medlin
>dev-plan associates
>930 Kenneth Street
>Moscow ID 83843
>208/892-0148
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Back to TOC