Financial Statement and Gaap

Social Issues in Public Planning
a.
Public planning is an important aspect that defines how services are delivered in any given society. The different approaches to planning dictate the motivation behind a planner’s work and how he or she executives the planning two examples of the planning styles include the planner as an advocate and the planner as a neutral servant. There are several differences as well as the similarity between these two approaches to planning. The major difference between the two planners is that no other external forces in the course of his work rather than his expertise only influence the planner as a neutral public servant. However, the planner as an advocate stands for a particular ideology, fact or political affiliation among other external factors that drive his planning profession and motivates the approach that he takes.
Subsequently, the planner as advocate carries out his work to conform to a particular conviction that he/she believes will serve the interest of the majority. Conversely, the planner as a neutral servant is strictly guided by his professional understanding. In fact, the major similarity between the two types of planning is that both approaches advance a level of ethics and professionalism in their approach to planning. The planner as a neutral servant will strictly adhere to the professional guidelines and ethical code of conduct (Levy, 2016). Similarly, the advocacy role requires the adherence to a particular moral issue that he believes in while carrying out the planning work.
b.
The two styles will deal with the problem of homelessness in two different ways. With activism in play, the planner supports plans that serve the interests of the community. Notably, the planner considers their view of the people on specific civil rights issues and incorporates them in their planning. In addressing the problem of homelessness, the planner will get out of the documented planning to execute a plan that is responsive to the issue of homelessness. Such a plan may not necessarily reflect the professional requirements but will be one that can dress the issue of homelessness (Levy, 2016). However, the planner as a neutral servant may not largely base his plan on the view of the people but will restrict him or herself to professional dictates of planning. Such a planner will strike a balance between addressing the problem of homelessness and adhering to the dictates of the planning profession. Therefore, it forms the difference between the way the two approaches to planning.
c.
The three primary goals that a planner s a neutral public servant will consider in dealing with the problem of homelessness include creating neighborhoods, economic development, and transportation. Such a professional planner will be more concerned with creating sustainable communities and with great diversity. Secondly, transport will be a key factor for this planner while solving the problem of homelessness (Levy, 2016). The planning for homes will not interfere with the transport infrastructure in such cities because the planner is not skewed only to the problem in question but considers all other planning factors.
Lastly, the planner will not ignore factors affecting economic development while solving the problem of homelessness. For instance, the planner may not reduce of land for industrial parks while creating homes. Therefore, thus director will keep the need for economic development in mind while solving the problem (Couch, 2016). In fact, with the advocacy role, he/she will consider housing, citizen involvement, and public facilities as the three comprehensive planning goals. He will seek to address the apparent problem of homelessness by focusing on increasing housing. Furthermore, he will take into consideration the view of the people.



References
Levy, J. M. (2016). Contemporary Urban Planning (10th Edition) (10th ed., Vol. 1). Routledge.
Couch, C. (2016). Placemaking: Approach to Urban Planning. Urban Planning, 1(4), 240-268