Abstract

This essay examines neoconservative criticisms of equity planning, and the challenges against the right of government to regulate local development and land use. The specific concern of this essay is how, or if, local development administrators (equity planners), should use their discretionary powers to ensure that city officials and private developers promote and protect the interests of urban residents, particularly the poor and disadvantaged. The essay begins by discussing the alleged conflict said to exist between needy urban residents and the more secure urban taxpayers. The contrary views of equity planners are then reviewed, and the tensions within the neoconservative arguments are exposed and critiqued. Finally, the dispute between equity planners and neoconservatives is further explored by examining the dispute over the voucher system to address the problem of equal educational opportunity in urban communities.