Language matters with the General Plan update

The city of Encinitas has been going through the process of updating its General Plan with a series of public workshops encouraging citizen participation. “This is your General Plan,” we are told. The draft revisions have finally been released. Already there is grumbling, especially about raising density through mixed use and higher height limitations in the El Camino Real corridor.
A perusal of the proposed changes shows a more insidious change which is very unsettling. This is a change in language, and language matters. The word “shall” has been almost completely eliminated and replaced by the word “endorse” in Policies.
Why does this matter? Because “shall” is an important word used in legal documents. It is defined as “an imperative command; has a duty to or is required to; is mandatory.” Court decisions have said the term “shall” is a word of command, and one which has always, or which must be given a compulsory meaning; as denoting obligation. Additionally, “It has the invariable significance of excluding the idea of discretion, and the significance of operating to impose a duty….”
On the other hand, the word “endorse” simply means to express approval or support. It doesn’t carry much weight legally.
The “State of California General Plan Guidelines” publication warns about the danger when writing policies: “A policy is a specific statement that guides decision-making. It indicates a commitment of the local legislative body to a particular course of action…. When writing policies, be aware of the difference between ‘shall’ and ‘should.’ ‘Shall’ indicates an unequivocal directive. ‘Should’ signifies a less rigid directive, to be honored in the absence of compelling or contravening considerations. Use of the word ‘should’ to give the impression of more commitment than actually intended is a common but unacceptable practice. It is better to adopt no policy than to adopt a policy with no backbone.” (Chapter 1, page 15)
The word “endorse” isn’t even mentioned because legally, it is so much weaker as a command. Its use in the General Plan update takes the “backbone” out of our governing document. Or more bluntly, it totally eviscerates it.
Too much discretion is given to policies that citizens will think are fixed, but turn out not to be. With a whim, or even favoritism, a council majority could very easily find a justification to violate the policy.
Additionally the word “is” is frequently replaced with the words “generally is.” This simply means that a policy that is, sometimes isn’t. The Guidelines say, “For a policy to be useful as a guide to action it must be clear and unambiguous.”
What we are getting in the update is ambiguity and fuzziness. It looks intentional. The clincher is that at this time the Planning Director Patrick Murphy and Update Consultant Daniel Iacofano are refusing to supply a draft to the public showing our present General Plan with changes clearly indicated by strikeouts, additions, changes in location, or complete deletions.
All of this looks like it isn’t our General Plan, but somebody else’s. It suggests Cole Porter’s famous song “Anything Goes.” There is stubbornness in the persons controlling the process and their unwillingness to listen to informed citizens.
If we are truly to celebrate this new plan, there “shall” be necessary changes to what we have been given so far. We can endorse these changes, of course, but we have no way to command that they be made. Only the consultant, staff and council can do this. Let it be a real celebration.


Filed Under: News

RSSComments (4)

Leave a Reply | Trackback URL

  1. invertibrate plan says:

    To describe this plan as lacking backbone is a compliment! It is a huge document whose only purpose is to away any responsibility of oversight, professional judgement, or ethical behavior from the Encinitas Planning Department in terms of standards that they claim are upheld on our behalf.

    It is now official. If this blob of a plan is passed, developers will have the freedom to do as they please, and Encinitas Planners can throw their hands in the air and say that there is nothing that they can do because it is allowed in the Updated General Plan. Their only responsibility will be to sign off on projects, collect their checks, and wait it out until their pensions kick in!

    Planning Department, either show some standards that you claim makes you deserving of the jobs you have, or close up shop and get out of town! You have managed to offend everyone from the City Council to the business community to any resident who has heard about this mockery of a document.

  2. barbill2 says:

    typical double speak. the staff at the city of encinitas have a remarkable talent to appear intelligent, while covering up their incompetence . next stop—-washington ,dc !

  3. patrick o'connor says:

    Why all the General Plan games? Comparative analysis of land use .is what the discussion is all about . Mixed use is a financial hybrid and lenders eat these loans and carry them until maturity. The staff should get off the hierarchy throne and open the discussion.

  4. Illegal Removal says:

    Patrick Murphy decided that he should hide the Current General Plan from citizens and had it taken from the Encinitas and Cardiff Libraries and had it taken off of the City Web Pages and replaced the current, General Plan with the unadopted, Draft Plan until this was reported to the our new City Manager.

    Patrick has said that the Draft City Plan is better. If this is so, why has he broken the law and deprived Encinitas citizens who are researching lawsuits from the adopted code that everyone–including Murphy, is supposed to be working from? If the plan he wants to pass is so good, why is he prepared to violate the code of ethics for his profession and break the law by removing the code we are operating under and misrespresting his draft as our current plan?

    What other workplace would allow someone who is so dishonest and is such a poor model for his staff to continue service in a Director position? Only in Encinitas would they keep someone like this in a 6-figure job.

    If his plan is so superior, why can’t HE show us the differences and explain how these weasle words will benefit citizens? Jerry Sodomka has identified the problem. They have created a code that is for the Planning Department to shed responsibility for their pattern of violating their own rules. Take away the rules, and they can get away with their poor standards more often!

Leave a Reply

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.