Planning agencies in the Washington area are being offered the opportunity to participate in a training and exchange fellowship program between APA and Senior Chinese Planners. At the request of Jiangsu Province Governor Li Yuan Chao, APA has entered into a training and exchange cooperative agreement with this province adjacent to Shanghai. The agreement calls for APA to provide a variety of training and exchange opportunities for Jiangsu leaders and senior planners.

One type of experience will provide the fellows in depth training in the United States for a period of 6 months. The first months of that time would be spent in intensive English language training to supplement their existing English capability and seminars on planning in America conducted in Washington DC. Following that, the planners will be placed in planning agency offices for a four-month fellowship. They are funded for their living expenses, local transportation, and incidentals. There is no out of pocket expense for the sponsoring agency or firm and the fellows are expected to contribute as regular staff. APA is arranging for appropriate visas as well.

As a local host, you would provide assignments and opportunities for the Chinese fellows to learn the American planning process first-hand. They would be expected to work alongside an assigned partner in completing work projects, getting into the details as part of your own staff. In addition, as any senior staff person would, they should attend public meetings and attend presentations and other events to give them a wide exposure to the day-to-day work of a busy planning agency in this country.

This is an opportunity to provide an exciting and valuable exchange experience for both our Chinese fellows and your staff as you use this new insight and talent to assist you in one or two local projects. Check the NCAC Website for additional information on this program, or contact APA Policy Director Jeff Soule, FAICP at (202) 872-0611.

The justices will decide whether cities must pay damages for blocking expansion of wireless phone networks.

The Supreme Court recently debated the nuisance of cellphones, not their irritating habit of ringing at the wrong time, but rather the need for tens of thousands of towers to transmit their signals.

In the last decade, 140,000 cell towers have sprouted up around the nation, the cell phone industry says, and more are needed to eliminate "dead spots." But in many cities, officials contend the towers are unsightly. And, on occasion, officials have blocked wireless phone companies from erecting more towers.

The high court took up a case from Rancho Palos Verdes, California to decide whether cities can be sued in federal court and forced to pay damages if they stand in the way of creating a wireless phone network. The outcome of the legal battle could affect communities across the nation. The court’s decision would give either city officials or wireless companies the upper hand in disputes over the building and location of towers.

The National League of Cities and the League of California Cities, as well as lawyers for Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco, were among those who urged the justices to block damage suits. They said they feared cities could face millions of dollars in damages if they refused a company’s bid to build a cell tower. Moreover, the potential for a crippling verdict could force city officials to automatically approve requests for new cell phone towers, they said.

However, lawyers for the cell phone industry told the court that Congress’ goal of creating a national cell phone network could not be achieved if local officials could use their zoning power to block new towers. Last year, the cell phone industry won an important victory in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. It ruled that under long-standing principles of civil rights law, persons are free to sue for damages if the government violates their rights. And the Telecommunications Act of 1996 gave providers of wireless phone service a right to build their networks, the appeals court said.

The lawyer who defended Rancho Palos Verdes said wireless phone companies could challenge the zoning board's decision in court, but they should not be able to sue for damages and legal fees. “Very few municipalities could afford to enforce their own zoning laws” if they were subject later to suits for damages, attorney Jeffrey A. Lamken argued. A Bush administration lawyer joined the case on the city's side, arguing that Congress did not intend to authorize money suits over these zoning disputes. None of the justices spoke up to take the side of those arguing for open-ended lawsuits.

Courtesy: Los Angeles Times

The Prince George's County Council - sitting as the District Council - and the Prince George's County Planning Board, M-NCPPC, jointly conducted a public hearing on the County's Preliminary General Plan on March 26, 2002, at the County Administration Building in Upper Marlboro. Over 100 citizens and groups signed up to testify and approximately 71 actually did so. An overflow audience attended the hearing in the first floor County Council chambers.

The Preliminary General Plan represents the culmination of a five year effort dating back to a decision by the County Council to convene an advisory citizen's panel - Commission 2000 - to recommend growth and growth management policies and priorities to take the County into the first part of the 21st Century. Commission 2000 recommended, among other things, creation of a series of Biennial Growth Policies, to be reviewed and revised every 21-24 months, to better time, site and plan desired residential, office and commercial development - as well as environmental and natural resource conservation and protection policies - throughout the County.

Commission 2000 also strongly urged the County Council to comprehensively update the County General Plan which will be 20 years old this summer. The County Council directed the Prince George's Planning Department, M-NCPPC, to update the General Plan, but to do so in the comparatively short time period of 30 months. The Preliminary General Plan that was the subject of the March 26th public hearing is the result of that effort.

The proposed new General Plan fleshes out the new "policy geography" that will guide growth - and growth management policy - in the County for the next 20 to 25 years. The County has been divided into three growth policy tiers: Developed (largely the County inside the Capital Beltway); Developing (the County between the Beltway and US301); and Rural (the rural, agricultural and less developed outermost southern and eastern sections of the County.) Growth is to be encouraged and concentrated in the Developed Tier; managed and sited at growth policy centers and in growth corridors inside the Developing Tier; and strictly limited or actively discouraged in the Rural Tier.

Another core policy of both the Biennial Growth Policy and the new General Plan is that of concentrating both public (capital) improvements and new development in a network of growth policy centers and corridors that have been designated throughout the Developed and Developing Tiers in the County. For example, all of the County's fifteen present or future Metrorail stations are among the 24 growth policy centers recommended in the General Plan. Seven growth policy corridors - including Governor Glendening's proposed Purple Line light rail alignment in the International Corridor from New Carrollton to Bethesda - have also been recommended by the General Plan.

The General Plan proposes to actively encourage investment and development at these centers and in these corridors. In the Developed Tier, centers and corridors are intended to provide a critical mass of investment opportunities for revitalization, infill and major redevelopment initiatives in more mature, built-up, largely urban neighborhoods and commercial centers.

In the Developing Tier, higher densities and transit-supporting mixed uses will be encouraged to capitalize on Maryland's multi-billion investment in regional transit and to reduce both adverse impacts on the County's green infrastructure and the need for additional infrastructure - especially new arterial and major collector roads - to serve development. In this Tier, private sector initiated development outside these centers and corridors will be more characteristically suburban, single purpose developments. Developing Tier centers and corridors, therefore, play a crucial role in concentrating and mixing land uses at a comparatively small number of nodes where it can be most cost-effectively served by existing or future infrastructure.

The Plan also recommends a series of follow-up functional master plans, particularly for Green Infrastructure, Public Facilities and the Countywide Transportation system. These plans will be undertaken by the Planning Department in Fiscal Year 2003, which begins this July 1st.

The Planning Department staff are preparing analyses and comments on the testimony taken at the public hearing and on material submitted for the public hearing record, which closed on Friday, April 5th. The County Planning Board will hold work sessions on the testimony this month, to be followed by County Council work sessions in May. If necessary, a second public hearing on any revisions made to the Preliminary General Plan will be held after these work sessions.

It is expected that the new County General Plan will be adopted by the Planning Board and approved by the County Council by mid-summer.

It is very flattering to be asked for a copy of a talk you have given at a conference. Also this is slightly tough for me since my presentation style is more conversational and based only on general notes. After being asked again, I was encouraged to put my comments in writing on this issue and share them with you.

After September 11th, planning's role in building and rebuilding cities has been on the minds of a lot us. There has been a great deal of press including articles in the New York Times and the Washington Post about the future of skyscrapers and significant architecture. There has also been quite a bit of discussion of how the role of the planner has been affected. As I have visited various chapter conferences this Fall, these issues were as prevalent as the discussion of college football rivalries. Although not the topic I was initially invited to speak on, I found myself incorporating it because it was a subtext to so many discussions.

Truly one of the greatest joys I have as an AICP Commissioner is the opportunity to travel around my region and the country. It is a rare gift to be able to meet so many fellow planners and hear about all of the wonderful things that are being accomplished for our communities. I am exposed to so many things I would never have the chance to experience in my job in Greensboro. It is inspirational on so many levels.

But it has also been a source of concern. Over the three years I have been a Commissioner I have also heard many stories from our fellow planners who have not been supported in their communities, faced unbelievable political or budget situations or had their ethics truly tested. It is heartbreaking to hear of colleagues in despair about their jobs and careers. It is disappointing and frustrating to be in the 21st century and still having to defend planning as a legitimate profession in many places in this country.

What September 11th and the subsequent discussion did was remind me what I deeply love about being a planner. At the very core of what we value in this country is the right for citizens to determine what they want for their future. Everyday, planners help that right to be exercised whether it is assisting with a rezoning application or engaging a neighborhood in developing its first neighborhood plan, we are the cogs for the most basic benefits of democracy. I believe it is an honor to be able to play such a role.

We are a proud and noble profession. Not noble in the sense of arrogance but in its truest sense: with the sense of service, dedication and humility that keeps us searching for ways to do things better for our communities.

I have never been fond of war-like language, such as "fighting the good fight", calling controversies battles or referring to planners as warriors. Like the word "hero", after New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, I think those words are best saved for use in their literal meanings. If we are to fight let it be the battles of arrogance, ignorance or the worst, apathy. Most days we are facilitators, educators, and when at our best, the peacemakers.

A friend of mine used to end his messages with "plan for the best". After September 11th I hope that is how planning has changed, that we reaffirm to ourselves and those we serve that in the end that is our goal, to plan for the best. That ethic will continue to make great communities happen. It will take the skills, talents and dedication of planners to get it done.

APA Board of Directors Meeting

The Board approved changes to the APA dues structure that provides for no dues increase for those salaried below $50,000 annually. This means that 53% of APA members will experience no dues increase in their dues category. They also approved the Awards Program Review Task Force recommendations to streamline the awards program; add a "Use of Technology and Planning" award; clarify the purpose of each award and define eligibility of the recipients; and continue the existing jury process which was reviewed and determined to be working effectively. The International Conference plans were approved in principle.

The Board approved a motion to direct APA staff to clearly indicate that the Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook is a research product and does not necessarily represent the policy of the American Planning Association, unless specifically identified as such in a policy guide or other Board action and referred the review of the Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook to the Legislation and Policy Committee. The Committee will involve members of the APA Board and Chapter Presidents Council with particular interest in this issue.

The AICP Commission requested the APA Board to consider an amendment to the APA bylaws that would change the election of the AICP president by AICP members only. The APA Board of Directors approved the motion that the Board create an opportunity to have an informed discussion with the AICP Commission prior to taking action on the request to consider a bylaw amendment. The APA Board of Directors approved the motion that the AICP Commission will provide written identification of the problem, justification and rationale for the proposed bylaw amendment.

AICP Commission Meeting

The Commission approved the FY '02/03 AICP Budget with a $1,000 special allocation to the New York Metro Chapter for their Chapter Conference in December; and approved the AICP Mission Statement "AICP promotes excellence in the practice of planning by assuring that professional planners have a high level of competence and integrity and by advocating the interests of the professional planner".

The Commission directed the AICP President to request the APA Board of Directors to visit the issue of amending the by-laws concerning the election of the AICP President by just members of AICP; and endorsed the work of the AICP Global Planning Task Force and directed it to continue its mission and report back to the Commission at the Chicago meeting with a work plan.

The Commission directed the Exam Committee to work with ITE and the Transportation Division to develop an outline of a specialization certification for transportation planners and report to the Commission in Chicago.

Chapter Presidents Council Business Meeting

CPC recommended that the APA Board adopt the FY2002-2003 budget, supporting the Option 1 dues increase schedule (over $50,000 income bracket). And the CPC endorsed the recommendations of the Awards Program Subcommittee for approval by the Board: 2 (shorten the awards portion of the luncheon.), 3 (present the AICP Landmark and Pioneer award winners in the video only, with live presentations made only if the award winner is alive and can attend the event), and 4 (start the awards program immediately after the main dish has been served).

CPC endorsed the recommendations of the Awards Categories and Criteria Subcommittee for approval by the Board: 1 (add a "Use of Technology in Planning" award category), 2 (rename those awards named for people to reflect what the award is designed to honor), 3 (clearify in the descriptions of the awards that they are not only for individuals, but that they can be awarded to agencies, departments or organizations as well), 4 (do a better job of integrating the Awards Program with other APA initiatives), and 6 (evaluate the feasibility of making the Jury more regionally diverse by appointing one representative of each region annually and filling out the rest of the Jury with "at-large" members). Item 5 was to be reviewed more thoroughly by the CPC Chapter Services Committee.

CPC recommended to the APA Board that the APA International Conference Task Force move forward in principle to hold the Conference in Hawaii and concurred with the motion language of the APA Legislative and Policy Committee report, agreeing that Growing Smart does not represent an APA Board policy document. The CPC also recommended that staff develop a peer review process to include representation from the CPC regarding the preparation of the implementation mechanism of the policy and that of future Growing Smart issues, which may become part of the policy.

Divisions Council Meetings

The Divisions Council met in sessions in Washington on Friday, which included an Issues Meeting as well as Round Table discussion. At the issues meeting the Council discussed a proposal to establish a new division on New Urbanism. After much lively discussion, it was decided that the question remain open, and be discussed via an electronic forum. The Divisions Council hopes to have a revised proposal or suitable alternate solution ready for the April meeting in Chicago. At the Divisions Council Business Meeting on Saturday, all 17 division chairs signed a proposal to create a new FAICP track to allow individual divisions to nominate a candidate, like chapters do. Also, a new Legislative Task Force and Web Committee were established, in addition to the standing committees of the Council.

Student Representatives Council Meeting

The Student Representatives Council discussed numerous details of the planned student activities at the upcoming National Conference in Chicago, including these highlights: