Discussion about this post

User's avatar
David Colborne's avatar

Hi! Colborne here. I appreciate your work and thoughtfulness. Your brief has certainly given me, and the rest of the community, a lot to think about through the years.

Regarding this part:

"I'd rather be confident that my city's appointed planning commissioners are knowledgeable about land use planning than expect them to follow the same political motivations as the councilmember who appoints them. I'd even be happy to see the introduction of requirements for planning commissioners to have actual experience with something related to land use planning before they're appointed (which is not the case today)."

I don't disagree, exactly. I just think that, if you want that, the most straightforward way to get it is to hire professional planners as staff and then review their work at the political level where voters are paying attention to it — which is basically what happens to planning commission recommendations anyway.

On a more fundamental level, I just personally think a lot of commissions at the local and state level are neither fish nor fowl — neither political nor technocratic, in other words — and I suspect a lot of voters don't realize how much responsibility has been devolved to groups that, despite the Brief, they may not know exist, much less how they operate, what responsibilities they have, or how they arrive at their decisions. Additionally, I don't think many people appreciate that, historically speaking, how intentional that disconnect was when it was first implemented.

I do wonder what happened to civil grand juries in Nevada, though. That's another rabbit hole I'll need to explore one of these days.

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts