Unwritten Land Use Rules

I had a conversation with a developer the other day, which got me
thinking in what I think are interesting ways about unwritten land use rules.<br>
<br>

<b>Pressures on Developers</b><br>
One thing the developer emphasized is how much pressure buyers of parcels often
put on a developer to cut through all the land use procedures, which
can take many months or even years. On the other side are officials who
have a way of doing things that can speed up the process. These ways
are part of doing business in the city or county, not something out of
the ordinary done by a bad apple on a dark and stormy night.<br>
<br>
The parcel owner doesn't care if the developer makes use of the unwritten rules. And the
officials are happy if the developer makes use of them. How many
developers are going to have enough integrity to tell their parcel
owners that they're going to have to wait because the developer wants
to do things by the book?<br>
<br>
I'm not saying that developers are always merely complicit. There are many occasions
where the only pressure is money pressure on them, and where they are the ones
pushing the envelope. What I am saying is that it's important to look at things
from the developer's point of view, and to see how a poor ethics environment can
make it hard on them to play by the written rules rather than the
unwritten rules.<br>
<br>
<b>Unethical Warnings</b><br>
Another thing the developer said really got me thinking. He said that
there are occasions — I assume when an investigation is on, or there
has been a land use scandal — when the unwritten rules no longer work,
and you have to follow the written rules, because they're being
enforced. He said that, when this happens, they let you know.<br>
<br>
Think about it. Letting you know is a very ethical act. It's watching
out for others, preventing them from getting into trouble. It makes people follow the rules.<br>
<br>
It is also perfectly legal. There is no rule against letting permit
seekers know what the rules are and that they must be followed. It is
the last thing that would ever be prohibited.<br>
<br>
And yet it is deeply unethical, because it is also protecting the
unwritten rules from being discovered, and a lot of others from getting
caught. It's effectively the call of the crooks' lookout man, letting
everyone know the cops are coming and they better stash away the guns
and the loot.<br>
<br>
That's a good thing for the gang, and anyone who might be hanging
around with them, but it's a way to preserve the gang, not a way to
move forward toward a good ethics environment. And it's a way to
provide security to those, like developers, who hang around with the
gang and would not do so if they knew the jig might be up any minute.
If they know they'll be given warning, then they can more comfortably
go along with the unwritten rules.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---