A Development and Planning Bill of Rights

Guest Opinion

By Fred Anderson | Oct. 8, 2022

As a relatively new homeowner in Traverse City, I continue to be amazed by the enormous gulf that exists between the citizens who live here and those in City Hall. It is sad that in a city that prides itself on inclusiveness and transparency, there appears to be an exception to that policy when it relates to anyone who has any different ideas on development.

Developers, special interests, and nonprofits who agree with the non-elected bureaucrats appear to be given open access, while the general public is not consulted until the latest plan is already formulated…and then citizens are given the perfunctory three minutes at the end of the decision-making meeting. I continue to wonder why more inclusiveness and tolerance is not shown to a broader segment of the community. That average citizens are not meaningfully consulted in the policy and development process seems wrong to me.

Two election results and numerous court suits that the city has lost demonstrate the extent of the gap between the city and the public. The tall-building ballot proposal in November is most likely to yield another result contrary to the planning process.

The solution to this problem is an amendment to the City Charter that provides more balance between non-elected officials and those who call Traverse City home. But that will take a long time to achieve. We can continue down the same path that will yield more litigation and ballot proposals, or we can look for a way to be more inclusive of the general public.

In the short term, I would like to propose what I am calling a “Bill of Rights for the Citizens of Traverse City Relative to Planning and Development” with the following steps:

1. Senior-level bureaucrats in the planning process must conduct a series of listening sessions prior to developing new development projects, zoning amendments, or policies.

2. Going forward, the public must be included in all meetings and discussions to the same extent as developers and nonprofit organizations.

3. All senior-level bureaucrats and those involved in the planning and development process must be required to take inclusiveness training with a focus on working with people who have different views and with a special focus on how to work with senior citizens.

4. Prior to the rollout of the Master Plan revision, a renewed inclusion of the public on all issues that are being decided in advance of the Master Plan revision must be implemented.

5. No more use of text amendment changes or other shortcuts which excludes the public from the discussion.

6. More transparency and common sense dialogue on what will be the true height of a building.

7. In an era of increased transparency of public proceedings, senior-level bureaucrats and those involved in the planning and development process should be required to publicly disclose on the city website all meetings, emails, text messages, or communications of any sort regarding planning, zoning, and development issues on a bi-weekly basis. This will allow monitoring of whether the public is being included in policy development to the same extent as special interests.

8. Planning Commission agendas should be reduced in the amount of content included in each meeting. Additional meetings with shorter agendas must be held. Both actions will allow the public to better comprehend the items being discussed. Currently, multiple issues with several hundred pages of documents are often considered in a single meeting, which makes it extremely difficult for the public to digest and follow.

9. All agendas and meeting materials must be publicly disclosed on the city website at least 14 days before meeting on the items included in the materials. While this exceeds the minimum requirements of state law, there would be nothing that would prohibit the city in the spirit of increased transparency to set a higher standard.

10. All senior-level bureaucrats and individuals in all segments of the planning and development process must be required to sign a public statement committing to more inclusiveness on planning and development with the public they serve.

11. We should see a renewed emphasis and expansion of the city’s commitment to historic preservation, including in the older residential neighborhoods. To create a model for such ordinances and programs, city staff would gather such information from older cities throughout the U.S. that have comprehensive historical preservation programs.

12. On all planning and development projects, the Planning Commission and the public should be presented with information on the other side of the issue being debated. No one set of planning ideas or philosophies is perfect, and a wider range of philosophies needs to be examined as it relates to future development. A document on the city’s website already requires this approach, but the planning and development process appears to have ignored this requirement.

Fred Anderson retired from a long career in legislative, political, regulatory, and community affairs in Lansing and Washington, D.C. Now a homeowner in Traverse City, he is concerned about balancing the pressure for growth with protecting the unique nature of what makes Traverse City so special.