American Planning Association AICP Exam - Topic 7 Question 42 Discussion

Actual exam question for American Planning Association's AICP exam

Question #: 42
Topic #: 7

[All AICP Questions]

Scenario

A pro-development city manager tells you, the planner, that you must provide findings to support a shift in a natural resources boundary in order to accommodate a particular development. What might you do if your findings do not support the shift but there is pressure from the city manager to provide findings that are contrary to your findings?

AWith data on the regulations as well as on the potential long-term consequences of not complying with the regulations, go to the city manager to explain why you cannot approve the project or alter the facts. This information may be sufficient to resolve the situation.
You might need to look for creative solutions that will allow for a modified project to move forward and bring these to the city manager. For example, alter the location of development and use the area near the natural resource as an open space amenity.
You may need to remove yourself from the situation and refer it to your director. Suppose the city manager goes ahead and approves the project in spite of your findings. Before blowing the whistle, be sure to consult with other planners and other qualified professionals including, if appropriate, the city attorney, to exhaust efforts for reconsideration of the matter. If you should choose to blow the whistle, understand that this may have negative consequences, and so be prepared. Accepting such consequences will be more beneficial to you than behaving unethically.
It is very important throughout this process to document everything. Be sure to keep accurate records showing dates, places and content of any conversations, messages and meetings relative to the issue. Remember that a planner must accept the decision of employers, unless the decision is illegal or unethical. Remember that a planner's first obligation is to the public interest, and a development that will have negative environmental consequences is not in the public interest, but a development that will create jobs may be in the public interest (Ethical Principle 2)

BWith data on the regulations as well as on the potential long-term consequences of not complying with the regulations, go to the city manager to explain why you cannot approve the project or alter the facts. This information may be sufficient to resolve the situation.
You might need to look for creative solutions that will allow for a modified project to move forward and bring these to the city manager. For example, alter the location of development and use the area near the natural resource as an open space amenity.
You may need to remove yourself from the situation and refer it to your director. Suppose the city manager goes ahead and approves the project in spite of your findings. Accepting such consequences will be more beneficial to you than behaving unethically.
It is very important throughout this process to document everything. Be sure to keep accurate records showing dates, places and content of any conversations, messages and meetings relative to the issue. Remember that a planner must accept the decision of employers, unless the decision is illegal or unethical. Remember that a planner's first obligation is to the public interest, and a development that will have negative environmental consequences is not in the public interest, but a development that will create jobs may be in the public interest (Ethical Principle 2)

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: A

by Melissa at Jun 23, 2022, 03:31 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

5 months ago

This is a tricky one. I'll need to review the Wireshark data closely to see the patterns of the traffic and determine the specific threat. I don't want to rush into an answer here.

upvoted 0 times

...