The video watched for the purpose of this assignment is about the proceeding of North Miami Council Meeting that was held on Tuesday 27th March, 2018. The item discussed in this meeting was the future land use of the Northern Transit corridor of the city. There are concerns that the proposed changes in policies regarding the future land use in the Northern M1 district and 7th Avenue are likely to impact on the residents negatively. This is especially true of the residents that live in single family units in the area. Changes in the policies intend to allow the developers to increase the density and height of the apartment buildings to house the persons that will be working in the industrial complex that is anticipated to be set up in the nearby industrial zone. The present residents in the area affected are concerned that changes in the planning and building policies could result in slum-like dwellings being constructed, and this will negatively affect the value of their property.
Another pertinent issue in the proceedings is the extreme legal jargon and acronyms used to describe the changes in policies and plans for future land use. One of the councilmen is concerned that the language used is not simple enough to be understood by the common residents that are going to be affected directly by the developments in their neighborhoods. The residents are given an opportunity to air their views regarding the changes in the building and planning policies. One prevailing complaint is that the process of making changes in the policies has not involved their input, and that the proposed changes mentioned are new to them. The council representatives unanimously decide to let the debate on the proposal to continue for one month during which the input from the residents will be considered.
Arguments Regarding the Policy Change
Using the consequentialist approach, this policy change is going to have positive and negative impacts on the residents and the council government. First, the increased density and height of the buildings will lead to increased number of residents, and in effect widen the tax base for the city’s government. On the other hand, it is likely to result in the development of a slum area, making insecurity an issue. The current residents in the area might get disappointed and move out of the city to other areas that are more conducive for single family residences. If the change in policy results in acceptable developments, it will result in a better and a robust economy in the neighborhood. It will also be conducive for the setting up of new industries that will by now have enough people with accommodations to work with them and at a convenient distance.
The categorical approach is dependent on what the residents consider moral regarding the changes in the policy. Most of the members of the public that have made submissions in the proceeding have expressed disappointment at not having been consulted when the changes were proposed by the city planners and representatives of the council. They seem opposed to the changes in policy and possible developments in their neighborhood. It is not right to proceed with the intended changes until dialogue and public education about the policy has taken place. Failure to do that might result in conflicts between the residents, the council government and the developers. Such a conflict might stall the intended developments and progress, leading to losses for all the concerned parties.