Hayek thought that a well-ordered society planned to compete, but for a person who spends a lifetime as a bureaucrat, it’s more like planning to plan. He also thought that a well-ordered society was one with a vibrant spontaneous order, but after listening to the September 10th meeting of the Whitewater Planning Board, I’d say that the reliance on public regulation is so strong that spontaneity of any kind is unlikely.
Fairhaven. A local nursing home wants to replace some of its signs, and add still another. Two barriers present themselves: the Planning Board feels that it lacks definite information about Fairhaven’s signs, and a citizen — during public comment on the matter — has question after question about R1 and R3 zoning requirements, and how they might affect Fairhaven’s request.
Everyone on the Board is convinced, by all appearances — that Whitewater benefits only if the Board has exquisite detail about Fairhaven’s request. Approval waits on minute detail. They just can’t imagine a society where signs are vandalized, and the property owner replaces them own its own initiative, and with its own aesthetic judgment, without their municipal approval. They presume that situation would represent chaos and disorder and disharmony. I have no reason to think that the aesthetic judgment of the property owner in advertising its own property would ever be less developed that the cumulative judgment of the entire Board.
Sadder still is the resident who asks questions about R1 and R3 zoning requirements, and wonders if the Fairhaven proposal is in compliance. Think about the culture you’ve created: one where residents think in terms of zoning requirements, rather than property rights and aesthetic results. No one suggests the sign proposal looks bad; it’s question after question about whether the sign falls within any number of square footage requirements, lest there be inconsistency. Whitewater will not collapse if there’s a little inconsistency; on the contrary, it will be a more vital place. The worry about consistency and paperwork requirements is typical, but also an example of a petty rationality. No one on the Board seems capable of imagining a place with fewer requirements, and fewer niceties of regulation.
City Planner and His Role. In response to a question from a Board member, initially earlier, our city planner described his role. His main description lasted about eight minutes, and if anyone can glean from those eight minutes even the slightest idea of what vision the city planner actually offers, then your microscopic powers of inference are to be commended. I take it that he conceives the role, however inarticulately described, as — in part — working with applicants to make their applications more suitable to the Board’s standards. Whitewater pays a bureaucrat to facilitate discussions and proposals to a public board. It should not be so hard or intricate. It is, of course, and its one of the reasons that our economy lags neighboring cities. A planner asked a question in advance, and appearing on television to deliver his answer, should at least be able to write and read a reply that more articulate and thoughtful than what one heard. It was not confidence-inspiring.
Meeting More or Less Frequently. Less is more.
The ‘Arbiters of the Community Values.’ Oh, you must be kidding. I understand that this description — attributed to a professor of planning, of course! — refers to design values, not fundamental morality. Nonetheless, it’s an arrogant, proud boast. Not even mediators, but arbiters! Imagine the arrogance of a person so enmeshed in this way of thinking that he might actually see himself as an arbiter in this way. I doubt that many in our community intended to confer that extent of authority. Look how quickly those in public roles, or teaching others about public roles, assume that title for themselves. Arrogance, thy name is planning.