AICP Ethics for the 21 st Century

1. AICP Ethics for the 21st Century 2006 FAPA Annual Conference Marco Island Mary Gibbs, , MBA, AICP Director, Lee County Dept. of Community Development Nancy Stroud, AICP, Esq. Founding Partner, Lewis, Stroud, & Deutsch, PL David W. Depew, PhD, AICP President, Morris-Depew Associates, Inc.

2. Ethics • Ethics refers to: • Standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do • Rights • Obligations • Benefits to society • Fairness • Specific virtues • Example—standards that impose obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, & fraud • Example—standards of honesty, compassion, & loyalty • Example—standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy

3. Ethics • Did I practice any virtues today? • Did I do more good than harm today? • Did I treat people with dignity and respect today? • Was I fair and just today? • Was my community better because I was in it? Was I better because I was in my community?

4. Ethics • 5 questions to be asked when trying to resolve a moral issue: • What benefits and what harms will each course of action produce, and which alternative will lead to the best overall consequences? • What moral rights do the affected parties have, and which course of action best respects those rights? • Which course of action treats everyone the same, except where there is a morally justifiable reason not to, and does not show favoritism or discrimination? • Which course of action advances the common good? • Which course of action develops moral virtues?

5. AICP Ethics • If the Ethics Committee determines that the Ethics Officer has demonstrated that the Rules of Conduct have been violated, it shall also determine the appropriate sanction, which shall either be a reprimand, suspension, or expulsion.

6. AICP Ethics • Ethics Cases During 2005 • 7  Total Cases 2  Complaints Resolved 5  Charges Pending (all filed during 2005) • 2 Cases Resolved1 Complaint Resolved by Settlement Agreement Reached by Ethics Committee and Respondent 1 Complaint Resolved by Court Approved Settlement Agreement • 5 Cases Pending3 Charges Under Review by Ethics Officer1 Charge Pending Charging Party's Submission of Additional Information 1 Charge Pending Response from Respondent

7. AICP Ethics • Ethics Committee Actions 5 Ethics Committee Actions in 2 Cases 1 Tabled Action in Settlement Agreement Pending Further Negotiations 1 Approved Settlement Agreement 1 Upheld the Ethics Officer's Partial Dismissal of Charges 1 Determined Member Violated the Code. 1 Made Disciplinary Action Recommendations to the Commission (under old Code rules) • Requests for Formal Advice • No requests

8. AICP Ethics HYPOTHETICAL CASE SITUATIONS

9. AICP Ethics • You are the planning director of a small municipality • The City Manager’s wife has requested a variance that does not meet the technical requirements for approval • The City Manager has called on several occasions urging a positive Staff recommendation

10. AICP Ethics • You are a planning director for a mid-sized coastal county • An applicant, who also happens to have announced that he is a candidate for a county commission seat, submits a rezoning request • After an analysis of the request, you and your staff have determined that the request is consistent with the plan and the LDR’s • You have received a call from the incumbent commissioner, against whom the applicant will run, indicating that the commissioner expects staff to find the request inconsistent with the plan, the LDR’s and generally accepted planning principles and practices

12. AICP Ethics • Planner is aware that transportation corridor is planned in area his jurisdiction • No specific alignment has been chosen • Planner buys property in general area of proposed alignment • Alignment chosen, eminent domain actions initiated • Planner’s property subject of eminent domain action

13. AICP Ethics • Planner retained by local government to defend comprehensive plan challenge • Local Gov’t and some plaintiffs reach agreement and settlement amendments proposed • Other plaintiffs object to settlement • Local Gov’t does not call planner for trial on settlement • Plaintiffs objecting to settlement retain planner to testify at hearing

14. AICP Ethics • Local government planner reviews applications for development project • Planner resigns to accept job in private sector • Developer hires firm and planner represents development project to local government where formerly employed

16. AICP Ethics • Developer files for zoning/development permits on controversial project • Developer requests of reviewing planner to be informed of any objectors and issues raised in order to address at hearing • Planner meets with objectors and is requested not to reveal meeting to developer

17. AICP Ethics • Planner oversees adoption of plan amendment adopting growth management restrictions in area within jurisdiction • Elected body approves development that planner feels is inconsistent with restrictions previously drafted • Planner contacts news media, RPC, FDCA to complain of elected body’s actions