3 1293 017

‘mum»mmnm’x‘x'W ‘

 

 

}VI531_} RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
LlanAmas remove this checkout from
.—L‘— your record. FINES win

 

 

 

be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

 

 

WORDS THAT WORK: HOW CITY PLANNERS CAN WRITE MORE CLEARLY

BY

Joseph J. McElroy

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER'S OF URBAN PLANNING
School of Urban Planning & Landscape Architecture

1985

ABSTRACT

WORDS THAT WORK: HOW CITY PLANNERS CAN WRITE MORE CLEARLY

BY
Joseph J. McElroy

City planners often have trouble explaining their work to
the general public. This problem is caused largely by the low
quality of writing in many reports, which often are planners'
primary work products. If planners wrote more clearly, the
public would understand the profession better. This thesis
examines research that explains why planners have difficulty
writing well. Methods for improvement are offered. This
thesis also examines how the planning department in East
Lansing, Michigan worked to produce a clearly written
comprehensive plan.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S

I would like to thank the following peOple for helping
with the thesis and getting me through graduate school: The
members of my thesis committee, Dr. Roger Hamlin, Dr. Carl
Goldschmidt and most especially Professor Keith Honey; Bob
Owen and my other former colleagues at the East Lansing
Department of Planning, Housing and Community Development;
typists Jane Reese and Kathy Beard; Jim Peters, for excellent
editing and moral support; and most of all to my wife, Kay,
who has helped every step of the way.

II.

III.

IV.

V.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Problem and Its Sources ................. ..
The Writing Process .................. ..... ....
How To Develop Good Writing Habits .......... ..
An Example: East Lansing ... ..................
Conclusion . ....... .................. ..... .....

Bibliography ..... . ....... . .......... ..... .....

33
50
58

69

Figure
Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

Figure

One:
Two:

Three:

Four:

Five:

Six:

LIST OF FIGURES

The Process Model of Document Design.....
Audience Chart for Secondary Audience....

An Issue Tree Generated Through the
Questioning Method.......................

Forms for Answering Pre-writing
QuestionSOOOOO......UCOOCCOCOOOOOOOOO....

Replacing Wordy Words....... ...... . ......

Checklist for Language Problems. .........

ll

16

19

21
38

46

Anything that can be said in Planning
can also be said in English.

--Dennis O'Harrow
former director
American Society of
Planning Officials

I

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SOURCES

A planning consultant was trying to sell his services to
the City Council of a small town in northern Michigan. The
council members were leery of spending $20,000 for their first
comprehensive plan, and the consultant was finding it difficult
to explain what they would get for their money. At one point,
he admitted, "Not even my wife knows what planners do."(1)

Most planners have experienced similar frustration. A
planner's work is not as concrete as that of a garbageman or
other municipal employees. Most of the time, the only tangible
product that planning staffs generate are written reports.
Planners often are judged by the quality of these reports, but
how well are they doing? There appears to be a great deal of
room for improvement. If planners would write more clearly, the
public would understand the profession better. This thesis
will describe the sources of the writing problem in planning
and propose methods for improvement.

How serious is the problem? According to consultant
Richard Dymsza:

Our writing is aimed at the public more than our

profession, yet we are apt to write in a way that can be
understood only by other planners. We have to view this

2

situation with alarm. The planning message gets out

mainly by writing. Our failure to write clearly to

legislators and to the general public can only mean that
our ideas will not take hold and will not be put into
effect.(2)

Former MSU Urban Planning Professor Steven Orlick put it
this way:

Planners feel that they have been victimized, both by an

ignorant and greed-ridden public in general, and by

self-serving politicians in particular...(but) the truth
of the matter is that many times planners have been their
own worst enemies simply because they are unable to
communicate their ideas c1early.(3)

As a group, planners probably don't write any less clearly
than members of other professions. Consider the police
officers who write that, "The car was proceeding in a northerly
direction" instead of "The car went north." Lawyers also are
well known for obscure prose, and much of the bad writing done
by planners seems an attempt to legitimize the profession by
giving it a pseudo legalistic tone. Gerald Luedtke, a planning
consultant from Detroit, says that much of the bad writing
found in planning reports comes from the compulsive following
of federal regulations, such as those set forth in the Federal
Register.(4) But he adds that it is still possible for
writers to develop their own focus and style while meeting
governmental requirements. It just takes more work.

On the surface, clear writing appears to be a ”Mom and
apple pie" issue with universal support. But do planners
really mean it, or are they more concerned with sounding

intelligent than getting their point across? According to East

Lansing Planning Administrator Robert Owen, "I think that 20

years ago, planners were more concerned about sounding
professional. Now we're more concerned with people
understanding what we're trying to say."(5)

But Owen, who has emphasized the need for clear writing to
his staff, adds that shades of meaning and intention often
become very important and sometimes it is hard to communicate
these shades without becoming verbose. He thinks that another
part of planning's writing problem is that many planners
consider the planning document a worthwhile end unto itself.
"But I don't think the plan has any value except as it
influences the decision-making process," Owen says. "That's
why it is so crucial that it be written clearly."(6)

The problem of writing intelligent-sounding prose clearly
plagues many professions. People feel they must assume a more
pompous tone than they do in conversation or public speaking.
According to language researcher Linda Flower:

Probably the most frequent complaint made about college

and professional writing is that it is stuffy and inflated

or overly technical and full of jargon. And yet, it is
often written by dynamic people who can think clearly and
speak forcefully when they are face to face. These people
often use inflated or "institutional" language because
they hope it will sound more impressive.(7)

One of the major dilemmas facing those who favor clear
writing is that many people equate superfluous language with
deep thinking. Two English professors from Chicago have done
research indicating that composition teachers, of all people,

give better grades to student papers written in an overblown,

wordy style. Rosemary Hake and Joseph Williams began with the

hypothesis that composition teachers claim they want clear
writing (which the authors refer to as the "verbal" style) but
give higher grades to papers written in a wordy, "nominal"
style.(8) The researchers created several pairs of essays
that differed only in their style and asked high school and
college English teachers to grade them. The essays had the
same number of paragraphs and sentences and were organized the
same way. The following example is from one of the verbally
written papers: "He can always seek out other people who think
more freely." This sentence begins with a subject, followed by
a predicate and concludes with an object. Here is the same
sentence, as it appeared in a paper written in the nominal
style: "Seeking out other people with more freedom of thought
is always a possibility for him.”

The teachers who graded the papers were told they were
rating the essays as part of a study of the competency
examination at a local university. The experiment was
conducted four times, using a total of 67 teachers. According
to the authors, "The graders overwhelmingly preferred the
nominal version of each essay over its paired verbal version
(the X2 test is significant at the two percent level)...graders
preferred the nominal style so strongly that it appears to have
influenced their discursive judgements about other, more
general components of the essays."(9) In the first test, 84
percent of the teachers preferred the nominal form, none

preferred the verbal and 15 percent rated them both the same.

One teacher described a nominal paper as an "intelligent
understanding of the problem" and characterized the clearly
written, verbal version of the same essay as "flippant and
without purpose other than criticism; lacking in
sentence/paragraph structure."(10)

The second, third and fourth experiments used larger
groups. The pretentious, indirectly written papers continued
to receive better grades. The high school teachers
consistently preferred the nominal papers. In one test,
college teachers preferred the good nominal over the good
verbal papers but preferred the bad verbal over the bad
nominal. Commenting on this difference between high school and
college teachers, the authors say, "The least sophisticated
teachers of composition, high school teachers, were the most
impressed with what appears to be verbal sophistication."(11)

But perhaps all this proves is that people can learn to
understand wordy writing just as well as writing done in a more
verbal style. If so, then what is wrong with the type of
writing criticized as stuffy, indirect and hard to comprehend?
To test this, Hake and Williams gave to 73 typists two
passages, one written in a clear, verbal style and another,
with the same content and organization, but written in the
nominal style. The subjects were then given standard typing
tests, first typing the verbal paper, then the nominal, the

results were as follows:

1. 19 high school typists: Verbal, 20 percent faster, 22
percent fewer errors.

2. 26 college typists: Verbal, 13 percent faster; seven
percent more errors. (This discrepancy is based on a single
additional error in the mean of verbal vs. nominal passages;
seven in verbal and six in nominal.)

3. 24 secretarial college typists: Verbal, 12 percent
faster; 43 percent fewer errors.

4. Four professional typists: Verbal, eight percent
faster; no difference in errors.

What we have here is an economic argument for a verbal
style. Apparently, the typists are processing sentences not
just through their eyes directly to their fingers, but
cognitively as we11.(12)

Other research indicates that clear writing saves money.
In 1977, at the height of the CB radio craze, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) re-wrote the Citizens Band
Radio Regulations into plain English, using a question and
answer format. Before the rules were re-written, the FCC
employed five people to answer telephone questions about CB
radio rules. After the regulations were simplified, the calls
stopped. All five employees were transferred to other
jobs.(13)

What does all this mean for planners? In a field where
the public doesn't understand much of our work, it is important

to write as clearly as possible. This thesis will describe how

planners get into trouble when they write, and what they can do
about it. Chapter Two will discuss the process of writing and
describe how planners can produce more organized, thoughtfully
written reports. Chapter Three will offer practical tips for
writing simple, clear sentences, with a special emphasis on
editing. Chapter Four will present a case study of how East
Lansing applied the principles of clear writing when preparing
its comprehensive plan. Chapter Five will describe how a
planning office can implement the guidelines offered in the
earlier chapters.

This paper does not claim that planners should write
everything at the most simple level possible. As Hake and
Williams write: "The eternal problem is to express a series of
propositions so that the content is clear enough to understand
but formal enough to impress."(14) This thesis attempts to

help planners achieve this goal.

II

THE WRITING PROCESS

A Problem Solving Process

 

The introduction of this thesis indicated that planners
have trouble making words work. This chapter will propose some
solutions.

How can planners write more clearly? One answer is to
look at the methods of technical writers, who compose such
things as forms and training manuals. Many planners are
unaware that their writing efforts are often forms of technical
writing. Like technical writers, they must make complex data
understandable, informative and, often, persuasive.

Like planning, technical writing is not a profession of
absolutes. There are no guarantees that the same action will
always generate the same result. Every writing project, every
sentence, in fact, presents different circumstances. This
innate aspect of the writing process will no doubt sound
familiar to planners.

Planners are taught to break large problems into smaller,
manageable components. So are writers. Following is an

overview of technical writing and how it can be useful to

planners. This chapter also will examine the writing process
and propose some ways it can be applied by the planning writer.

The guidelines and research that follow should not be
taken as absolutes, however. In the words of the poet William
Yeats, "The correcting of prose is endless, because it has no
fixed 1aws."(1)

These are wise words, but by understanding the writing
process better, planners will at least know how to begin the
endless search for perfect prose.

Getting Ready To Write

 

Most of the writing planners do, such as a staff report or
comprehensive plan, is more technical than a newspaper but less
technical than an article for a professional academic journal.
The goal of these semi-technical writing efforts is to provide
the readers with information they did not previously have in a
form they can understand easily.(2) Because most people do
not understand planning very well, the first part, providing
new information, is not that much of a problem. But presenting
the information in an understandable manner proves more
difficult.

Many modern books on writing sound much like efforts to
describe community planning. Author Linda Flowers puts it this
way:

"Writing is a thinking process. To be more specific, it

is a problem solving process...Good problem-solvers

typically have a great deal of knowledge and a large

repertory of powerful strategies to use in attacking their
problems. Good writers are the same."(3)

10

Planners use strategies and techniques such as subdivision
regulations and capital improvement programs to reach their
goals. They can do the same thing when they write. The first
writing technique is dividing the project into logical steps.
There are various ways to do this, but the format chosen
probably isn't as important as the very process of going
through the mental exercise. The writing process can be broken
up into three steps: The pre-writing stage; the actual writing
steps; and the post-writing steps.(4) As Figure One
demonstrates, these three steps are further subdivided, but
first it is important to realize that the pre-writing and
post-writing stages even exist. From the poor organization of
many planning reports it appears, ironically enough, that many
planners just start writing without planning what they are
going to do. This makes no more sense than proposing a major
expressway through a community without first investigating the
potential technical and political difficulties. Notice that in
Figure One, the actual writing stage is relatively brief. Most
of the work is in the pre-writing and post-writing stages.
People who spend the vast majority of their time in the actual
composition stage have a problem-~they run the risk of

producing a poorly organized, sloppy document.

I. Pre-Writing Steps

 

Determine
scope
(what
message
you want
to
convey)

 

11

FIGURE ONE

II. Writing Steps

 

 

 

Determine
task
.fill out
form
.read and
act
.read and
remember
.1ocate
informa-
tion

 

 

Define
purpose
(why do
you need
a docu-
ment?)

 

 

 

Define
audience
who will
use your
document?
(What are
their
needs?)

 

Source:

THE PROCESS MODEL OF DOCUMENT DESIGN

III. Post-Writing Steps

 

 

Draft document
.select appro-

 

 

 

 

 

priate
content
.organize
for your
audience
.write
clearly
use graphics
to help
clarify
your
message

Determine

constraints

posed by

.the system

.how the

document

is used

.how the

document

is distri-

buted

 

 

Writing in the Professions

Review
revise
and
edit

 

 

 

Evaluate
(does
your doc-
ument
achieve
its
purpose
for its
audi-
ence?)

by the Document Design Center

 

HZMIIGOOU

12

The writing model in Figure One can be used for any type
of writing project, from a short memo to the boss to a new
comprehensive plan.

In the pre-writing stage, begin by determining the scope
of the project. Ask:

*Who will be reading the document?

*Why is it being written?

*What message do you want to convey?

*What specific questions is this writing project supposed

to answer?

*Is the assignment clear to the writer?(5)

Even if the writer has trouble answering the questions,
just thinking through them will sharpen the focus of the
project. Answering them can help the writer avoid a rambling,
disjointed product.

One of the questions: "Is the assignment clear?" deserves
some special consideration here.

The writer must understand the assignment before the
actual writing begins. All too often this is not clear in the
writer's mind. It ends up being unclear to the reader as well.

The problem might be caused by supervisors who don't spell
out instructions clearly. Solving this problem is beyond the
scope of clear writing, but even in self-generated assignments,
the topic and format usually are dictated by the situation.
There almost always will be some gaps in the writer's
understanding of the situation, which should become apparent

during the actual composition. This is why a writer shouldn't

hesitate to do additional research at any step in the writing

13

process. Even at the best newspapers, editors must constantly
discern important information that is missing from the
reporters' stories. This can be kept to a minimum by asking as
many questions as possible before actual writing begins.

Once the scope of the writing project has been determined,
it is time to decide why the proposed document is needed.

Maybe it isn't. Maybe a telephone call or a meeting would be a
more effective form of communication. Most writing done by
planners is what technical writing scholars call
"transactional," meaning that information is being exchanged
between people. This is the writing that gets the work of the
world done, as opposed to writing which entertains (humorists
such as Art Buchwald), or uplifts and makes a philosophical
statement, such as a great novel or poem. (If a reader doesn't
understand a great, but obscure poem such as T. S. Elliot's
"The Wasteland,” that certainly doesn't mean Elliot failed.
Elliot wrote the poem for himself, without any audience in
mind. If you understand it, fine. If not, read a different
poem.)

But transactional writing, which informs and/or persuades,
is held up to a different test. If the reader doesn't
understand it, the writing project hasn't been successful. A
memo summarizing a meeting is an example of writing which
informs, while a job seeker's letter is an example of writing
which is meant to persuade. When writers ask themselves the

purpose of what they are about to write, the reader will

14

probably have a better chance to understand it as well. Many
writing projects, such as comprehensive plans, attempt both to
explain and persuade.(6)

Who will read what you plan to write? The answer to that
question plays a major role in the process of solving a writing
problem. In much of the research on planning communication,
planners are urged to avoid using jargon.(7) Just for the
sake of forming good habits, avoid phrases like, "Disseminate
RFPs to do a TIF project in the CBD." Jargon and acronyms are
verbal shorthand and have their place. In a memo to another
planner, there is really no need to tell the reader that RFP
means request for proposal. But if the memo is going to a
citizen's group, the readers wouldn't know what the initials
meant. This doesn't mean there is no room for personal style,
but it does mean you have to gauge your writing to the
audience. People don't talk the same way to a three-year-old
as they do to professional colleagues, and planners should not
write for the general populace the way they would write for
each other. Writers can still make strong points without

becoming obtuse.(8) As the authors of Writing In the

 

Professions put it:

 

Writers in organizations write to people inside the
organization and outside. A major problem in much
organizational writing is that the writer acts as if the
readers are insiders even when they are not. (Another
problem is that even people inside the organization or the
profession may not be as much insiders as the writer
thinks.)(9)

15

The last point is important for planners to remember
because the field is so diverse. The staff transportation
planner and the economic development planner could have trouble
communicating with each other if they forget that their areas
of specialization have very different jargon.

Author Flowers writes that the best way to analyze your
audience is to "gauge the distance between the two of you."(10)
For example, there is much more distance between a planner and
a typical homeowner than between the planner and a land use
lawyer. But in addition to comparing levels of knowledge, it
is also important to keep the reader's attitudes in mind as
well. To some people, the term "land use control" conjures up
images of socialism, while to others, the term describes needed
regulations which make communities better places to_live. Once
a writer starts to consider the reader's attitudes, it becomes
easier to predict how the reader will react - always an
advantage to the writer. Closely related to the readers'
attitudes are their needs. Flowers suggests analyzing the
reader through the use of an audience chart such as the one
shown in Figure Two.(11) This enables the writer to examine
the components which cause the differences between different

types of audiences.

16

FIGURE TWO

AUDIENCE CHART FOR SECONDARY AUDIENCE: THE NEW TRAINEE

CRITICAL FEATURES OF THE READER

KNOWLEDGE ATTITUDES NEEDS
Probably won't know May think of it as a Needs to know what to do
basic terms or "simple" part-time job. and how to do it: an
procedures. operational description
Might not recognize of the job.

the opportunites or
demands really involved.

Source: Problem-Solving Strategies For Writing, by Linda Flower

In the process model shown in Figure One, the last step in
the pre-writing stage is to determine what constraints the
author must face.(12) Most planners face many such
constraints on almost every project. Thinking this through
early in the process can save effort and prevent problems
later. For example, a proposal for strict design controls in a
commercial district should probably be phrased somewhat more
delicately when presented to a chamber of commerce than when it
is suggested to other staff planners. But constraints are not
always political. Writers should consider constraints such as

length (interoffice memos to the boss should be shorter than

17

more formal, public documents), format (will it be typed or
typeset? in a binder?) and budget (how much will it cost to
reproduce this?). These considerations might seem mundane, but
they can save a good deal of trouble if considered well before
the project's deadline. For example, as will be discussed in a
later chapter, East Lansing's planning staff decided to make
many last minute changes in its 1980 comprehensive plan shortly
before it was to be published. The plan had not been typed on
a word processor, so it had to be entirely re-typed, even
though some sections were changed only slightly. ,Today, the
secretary who had to do all that last minute work sits next to
word processor, which will save the City staff a great deal of
time the next time they decide to make eleventh hour changes.

A final constraint worth considering is the reaction your
writing will get from its internal reviewers, such as a boss
who approves writing projects before they are distributed to
the public. If for example, your boss demands a formal writing
style, then you probably should avoid personal pronouns (I, we,
they, your, etc.) or contractions.

This first stage of the writing process, the planning
phase, is crucial to the success of the final written product.
Those who are new to the idea of planning before they write may
find an issue tree helpful. As proposed by Linda Flowers and
illustrated in Figure Three, an issue tree is a sketch that
looks like an upside-down tree and helps put ideas into a

hierarchical order.(13) The top-level idea, such as "Planners

18

have trouble being understood largely because they don't write
well" should be the most broad and inclusive. All the other
ideas, such as "Avoid excessive jargon," are responses to the
main idea and subsystems of it. An issue tree lets the writer
test out ideas and relationships and helps make the total
picture easier to see. This prevents the "can't see the forest
for the trees" syndrome that can so easily befall a planner,
who usually must present a great many facts and details on any

given project.

19

FIGURE THREE

 

An Issue Tree Generated Through the Questioning Method

RUNNING IS A GOOD INVESTMENT OF TIME

MEANING MEANING MEANING MEANING
A limited It affects It affects A better source of exercise
effort has health morale than other sports
a large effect
SUCH AS? HOW SO? HOW 80? HOW SO? WHY? WHY NOT?
30 min. a Tones Increases Uses more Needs Not com-
day, muscles energy calories little petitive
4 times Improves Improves per hour equip- Not a social
a week cardio- sleep than other ment sport
vascular Offers forms of Good at
and res- visible exercise any age
piratory accomplish- Do any
system ment. No place
special talent
needed to
succeed
SO WHAT? HOW SO ? SUCH AS? SO WHAT?
1/6 of Strengthens heart Running 600 Leads to
Americans lowers blood pressure Tennis 420 giving up
have cardi- increases red blood Golf 150
ovascular cells. Improves
disease oxygen capacity
HOW DO YOU KNOW?
Aerobic research
Am. Heart Assoc.
Source: Problem-Solving Strategies for Writing by Linda Flower

 

I

20

Another way to formalize the pre-writing planning process
is to fill out a form that asks specific questions dealing with
the issues raised here, such as the scope, message and
audience. One of the more comprehensive is published by the
Document Design Center and shown in Figure Four. Some modern
technical writing researchers prefer alternatives to the
traditional outlines, which they feel inhibit the writer from
fully seeing how the entire writing project should tie together
and how the different parts of the document can relate to each
other.(l4) Others, such as the writers at the Document Design
Project, encourage outlining but don't insist on the
traditional, formal outline with Roman and Arabic numbers.
Instead, they see the outline, especially in the early stages
of a project, as an ordered list with phrases for the points
the writer knows come under each heading.(15) The first step
in an outline is to find the unifying organizing principle for
the major sections. That makes it easier later to organize the

points within each section.

21

FIGURE FOUR

 

FORM FOR ANSWERING PRE-WRITING QUESTIONS

Pre-Writing Decisions

 

Ask yourself these pre-design questions about your document. If you
don't know the answers, discuss the questions with appropriate others
to find the answers.

Brief Statement:

 

(type of document and what it is about)

Scope: What is the topic? the message? Where did you go to find
out information?

 

 

 

 

 

Purpose: What purposes will your document serve?

 

 

 

 

 

Audiences: Who will read your document? Who else is concerned about
what your document is like?

The (primary) readers who are most important to you are:

1. 2.

 

 

22

Figure Four (cont'd)

The (secondary) readers who are also important to you are:

l. 2.

 

 

3. 4.

 

Some important characteristics of the primary audiences that might
affect how you write the document are:

 

 

 

 

 

O‘U'Inh-WNH

 

For the secondary audiences, you should be concerned about these
specific points:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

audience concerns
audience concerns
audience concerns
audience concerns

 

 

 

Tasks: What does your primary audience have to be able to do to use
your document?

 

 

 

 

 

23

Constraints: What else must you keep in mind when writing?
Is it an impediment to your purpose? What can
you do about it?

constraint OK? yes no

If it is not OK, what can you do about it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Writing in the Professions by the Document Design Project

24

The Writing Stage

 

The planning segment of a writing project tends to merge
together with the organizational stage. But, while the
document should be well-planned and organized before actual
writing begins, the writer should be careful not to get carried
away. Excessive effort at planning and organizing can lead to
serious deadline problems. This thesis is a perfect example of
that. So much effort was put into planning and organizing that
now the time remaining to write is short. Writers should
remember that when they plan projects, they are not etching
them in stone. As new ideas and relationships come to light,
it is fine to include them, as long as they don't upset the
general organization of the product. The above comment is an
example of a thought that didn't occur in the planning process,
but seems to fit well in the introduction to this section on
the writing phase.

Before the actual writing begins, the writer should deal
with the question of tone. Observe the daily newspaper. Both
the editorials and the columnists on the editorial pages
express opinions, but the tone is different. The editorials
are more impersonal--they never refer to the writer as "I." The
columnists, on the other hand, often interject themselves into

the story ("I was sitting in this bar and a cab driver started

25

telling me that Reagan ought to..."). The difference is a
matter of tone. The editorials are more formal and less
personal than the columns, but are still less formal than the
opinions found in professional publications such as the Journal
of the American Planning Association. The APA Journal,
however, is deliberately more formal than APA's Planning
Advisory Service Reports, which in turn are deliberately more
formal than Planning magazine. All are published by the same
organization and have planners as their main audience. But the
tones of the publications differ so the parent organization can
offer greater variety. It takes more effort to wade through an
issue of the APA Journal than to read Planning. The tone of
this thesis, for example, is aimed to be approximately on the
level of the PAS Reports--more formal and technical than the
magazine but less formal than the Journal.

Most books on writing well caution against what author
Jacques Barzun calls "pseudo-technical tone." This is the tone
often found in many planning reports. What causes it? Barzun
says:

The attitude that produces the pseudo-technical tone is

made up of a desire to dignify the subject and the writer,

coupled with the belief that important matters require a

special vocabulary. Since most matters neither have nor

need one, the vocabulary is made up of nouns and verbs
used metaphorically."(16)

Barzun goes on to quote a scientist who declines committee

membership by saying, "I am sorry not to be able to accept the

experience of a more intensive interaction with your group and

26

its constituency."(l7) The next chapter will discuss the
specific problems that lead to a stilted, overblown tone, but
it is important that the writer begin considering the tone of
the writing product in the earliest part of the writing stage.
If you decide halfway through writing that your tone is wrong,
it is going to take a good deal of re-writing to make up for
not planning better at the outset.

Is the planner now finally ready to write? Not quite.
First the writer must decide what organizing principle to use.
Different documents require different organizing principles.
They can include:

-— a time sequence (often good in background sections of
staff reports);

-- steps in a logical process (the organizing principle being
used in this chapter on the writing process);

-- issues raised and discussed in order of importance or
relevance;

-- elements or objects being compared on several factors;

-- a chain of cause and effect (if the shopping center is
expanded, traffic will become congested);

-- sources of information (heavily used in term papers);

-- audiences or roles;

-— the format of the document the writer is responding to; or

-- any traditional format that the audience will

recognize.(18)

27

Another aspect of tone which must be considered early is
length. Many writers don't think about how long their projects
should be and just include everything they think is important,
even at risk of producing something nobody will have time to
read. Even worse are writers who include extensive details
just to impress the reader with their knowledge. As Richard
Dymsza wrote:

Most planning reports are much too long for their readers.

Part of the problem is that the reports try to serve both

technical and public information purposes. Unfortunately,

both purposes cannot be well served within the same
report. Planning offices would do well to publish their
plans in two reports, one for the technician, the other
for the general public. Few planning offices, though find
the time to do this.(l9)

Dymsza's comment about lack of time is true, but planning
staffs can address this problem by publishing different types
of documents with different tones at various stages of a
planning process. East Lansing publishes fairly technical
updates to its 1980 Comprehensive Plan. But in 1978, when the
planning staff was trying to generate public interest, the City
published "Plan It Again, Sam," a well done brochure that
explained the upcoming comprehensive planning effort in almost
comic book terms.(20) But while it was an unusually casual
approach, the humorous tone helped create interest in the
process.

While it is important to organize the entire project, each

section must also have an organizational framework. It helps

if each section is organized along the same principles. In

28

some cases, every section of a comprehensive plan (land use,
transportation, economic development, parks and recreation,
etc.) is written by the staff member who specializes in a
particular area. This leads to plans with wide variety between
sections. This is what happened in East Lansing's plan, which
was then re-written and will be examined in a later chapter.

When writing comprehensive plans, it is fairly easy for
planners to organize within the sections, because the sections
typically are divided into goals, objectives and policies. But
in more everyday writing, the planner doesn't have this formula
and has to use other organizing techniques. In a memo, for
example, when comparing several possible options, the best
internal organization is usually to repeat the same structure
for every section. If several potential development sites for
new fire stations are being considered, include land costs for
all of the sites, not just for some.

When addressing the actual writing stage, technical
writing researchers stress the need to "Organize for your
audience."(21) Author Linda Flower calls for "Writing
reader-based prose."(22) Many books on writing offer good
suggestions that planners could use in their work, but Flower
is one of the few who provides clear benchmarks that the reader
can follow without having much writing experience. Flower
suggests that a writer can create reader-based prose by
following several strategies. The first is to set up a shared

goal. Try to determine what you and your reader have in

29

common. Is there something that makes the reader want to read
the paper and makes you want to write it? If there is a shared
goal, persuasion is much easier. Once the shared goal is
determined, it is easier to decide what approach to take,
especially if the writer has decided how to convince the reader
to read the piece and to follow its suggestions.

For example, consider a booklet promoting housing
rehabilitation in older neighborhoods. One possible
introduction would be, "This booklet will help you create civic
pride and preserve our city's heritage." Another way to
approach it would be to begin with, "If you own an older home,
there are a number of ways you can preserve its beauty and
historical value. At the same time, you can increase its
market value and decrease its maintenance costs." The second
approach is more reader—based because it identifies a shared
goal - the city wants housing rehabilitation and the homeowners
want increased value and decreased costs.

The second strategy is to develop a reader-based
structure. The classic example of this is a job-hunting
letter. Don't tell the reader this job would be the chance of
your lifetime. Employers want to know what you can do for
them. Always consider the needs of the reader. This is often
difficult for planners, who must present the same comprehensive
plan to homeowners associations and real estate speculators.

But planners can at least try to consider the public point of

30

view (diverse though that may be) as opposed to their
professional, technical point of view.

This is not an easy task. Researchers Charlotte Linde and
William Labov found that 97 percent of their subjects respond
to questions in a self-centered point of View, which they
called a narrative point of view. When asked to describe their
apartments, almost all responded by giving a verbal tour. "You
go in the front door through a hallway into the living room,
which is the biggest. Then there is a kitchen and bedroom."
Only three percent gave an overview by saying something like,
"The apartment is basically a square." But the overview,
although seldom used, is usually more effective.(23) It is less
important to give a blow-by-blow report than to summarize.
Start with the main idea and then explain it. Flowers suggests
three ways to develop this type of reader-based prose:

1. Organize your paper around a problem, a thesis, or a
purpose you share with the reader - not around your own
discovery process or the topic itself.

2. With a goal or thesis as the top level of the issue tree,
organize your ideas in a hierarchy. Distinguish between
major and minor ideas and make the relationship between
them explicit to the reader. You can use this technique
to organize not only an entire paper but sections and
paragraphs.

3. If you are hoping that your reader will draw certain

conclusions from your paper, or even from a portion of it,

31

make those conclusions explicit. Don't leave the work of

drawing inferences and forming concepts up to your reader.

He or she might draw a different set of conclusions.(24)

The next strategy is giving the reader cues. Cues help
the reader see what is coming and how it will be organized.
Cues can be problem/purpose statements such as, "This report
will project the effects of various land uses in the
northwestern section of the city." Some cues summarize. In a
typical paragraph, the first sentence will summarize the main
idea. The following sentences explain the point in more detail
and the last sentence again summarizes the main point and often
serves as a transition cue to the next paragraph.

The last strategy espoused by Flowers is to develop a
persuasive argument.(25) The best way for planners to do this
is not by engaging in debates, but by attempting to modify the
other side's point of View through the communication process.
The writer's goal, then, is to convince the reader to at least
see the other side, to acknowledge that there might be more
than one logical way of viewing the same situation. The best
way to do this is first to demonstrate a firm understanding of
the reader's position. This can be done by stressing shared
goals and making an attempt to acknowledge the reader's point
of view. It also helps not to categorize people or issues. If
planners simply view all real estate developers as "villians,"
polarization will emerge. In public, planners usually act as

though they respect the other point of view, but many office

32

meetings are filled with discussions of the inadequacies of
aldermen, other city departments and the general public. By
putting themselves in the readers' shoes while writing,
planners can become much better problem-solvers.

The writing model shown in Figure One offers a general
process for effective written communication. This chapter has
focused on writing as a process, much the way planning is
viewed as a problem-solving process. Now that the general,
broad-based guidelines for successful writing have been
addressed, the next chapter will examine specific problems in
planners' writing, such as cluttered sentences, improper

grammar, and the unnecessary use of big words.

III

HOW TO DEVELOP GOOD WRITING HABITS

Writing Clearly

 

Now that we have examined the entire writing process, it
is appropriate to discuss how planners can improve individual
paragraphs and sentences. The research on this topic, although
somewhat limited, identifies several problems that lead to
unclear paragraphs and sentences. This chapter largely will be
prescriptive in nature, identifying these problem areas and
suggesting ways to improve.

Former MSU Planning Professor, Steven Orlick tells the
story of a city planning department staff that wanted citizen
reaction to a proposed revision in its comprehensive plan. So
the staff published an announcement which read, in part:

"...In prescribing urban land uses, the land use element
defines population distribution, residential density
standards and non-residential intensity or character for
various categories of use which, collectively, determine
land use capacity...Although the City, County and region
are relatively rural and appear capable of providing ample
room for new residents, commerce and industry, each is
confronted with some known and several undefined finite
resources...While additional water supplies, which may be
partially available to the City, have been allocated to
the County and region, these limited sources must be
imported or redistributed to portions of the region and
conserved considering competing demands and potential,
adverse impacts still not fully defined."(l)

34

conserved considering competing demands and potential,
adverse impacts still not fully defined."(l)

How did the readers react? Orlick reports that the
planning staff received just one response, a note from a woman
who wrote, "I have just read your report. What's it say?"(2)

That piece of writing, and the response, are all too
typical. What causes the problem? The research indicates some
common themes, Orlick says:

The communication problem in planning can be traced to the

following general sources: (1) The overuse of jargon; (2)

verbosity; (3) illiteracy; (4) carelessness; and (5) a

lack of planning skills or knowledge.(3)

APA researcher Duncan Erley cites the prime culprits as
poor organization, mixing facts with subjective information,
and redundancy.(4) Planning consultant Richard Dymsza cites
clutter, lack of specificity, and trying to say too much as the
three worst problems.(5) Dymsza considers clutter a broad
category that includes excessive jargon and the use of
complicated words when simple words will do the job.

But, however the problems are described, the important
thing is to keep writing principles in mind, especially when
writing for the general public. The remainder of this chapter
consists of guidelines for writing more clearly, with a special
emphasis on editing. Planners who follow these guidelines, and
the organizational principles cited in the preceding chapter,
will find that the public will understand better the messages

they wish to convey.

35

Guidelines For Clarity

 

GUIDELINE 1: Keep Jargon to a Minimum. This suggestion
comes up in almost everything written on technical writing,
especially in research done for or by planners. As mentioned
earlier, jargon is appropriate as a method of verbal shorthand
used by people who can understand each other. But jargon is
seldom kept in its place. Here is a classic example of the
wrong way to write a planning report:

The appropriate concepts of cost and gain depend on the

level of optimization and the alternative policies that

are admissible. The appropriate level of optimization and

the alternatives that should be compared depend on a

general acceptance of suitable criterion.(6)

The above passage could have read:

The notion of an optimum cost-benefit ratio really depends

on how one defines a benefit. The level of benefits from

various alternatives depends on the standards accepted for
use as a comparison.(7)

Planners can keep jargon to a minimum by having somebody
from a non-planning background read their work. Spouses are
great for this. But remember that, after several years, family
members might pick up some of the lingo themselves. If you
tell your children to stay on the "pedestrian-oriented
facilities" and they know you mean the sidewalk, be careful.

If family or friends can't help, try your organization's public
information director, who probably is a generalist with a
background in communications. But planners should teach

themselves how to recognize jargon and translate it into plain

English. Here are some examples:

36
A. Infrastructure = public facilities;
B. Facilitate = help;
C. Significantly severe topography = steep slopes, hills;
D. The subject parcel = this parcel;
E. Utilize = Use.(8)

GUIDELINE 2: Prune Unnecessary Words. This guideline is
related to the first one, but employs a slightly different
test. Jargon is professional shorthand. Unneeded words, on
the other hand, are essentially longhand. By definition, there
is never any place for them. The test for unnecessary words is
whether the sentence makes as much sense without a particular
word as it does with it. If it does, the word is unnecessary.
Often, entire expressions, such as, "This is to inform you
that..." or "It may be necessary to..." can be eliminated.

Many of these are just cliches, such as, "forward the same," or
"favor of an early reply."(9) If writers can simply recognize
these cliches, they can eliminate them without too much
difficulty.

The key to eliminating needless words is practice.
Planning magazine editor Sylvia Lewis has developed a simple
exercise, which consists of reading wordy sentences and then
re-writing them. One of her sample sentences is: "One major
area, however, is notably devoid of easy, short-distance access
to recreational facilities; that is the area immediately north
of the Eisenhower Expressway and immediately west of Harlem

Avenue."(10) This sentence could be re-written into: "Only

37

the area immediately north of the Eisenhower Expressway and
Harlem Avenue lacks nearby parks and playgrounds."

Another related problem is the complicated word. A
thesaurus can prove helpful here. Sometimes a complicated word
is needed to say what the writer means. But there is very
little difference between the words "aggregate" and "total" or
between "effectuate" and "carry out." Figure Five comes from a
book written for all technical writers, but planners will see
many familiar words and phrases under the column headlined

"Difficult."

Source:

38

FIGURE FIVE: REPLACING WORDY WORDS

The list below contains unnecessarily difficult words that
writers commonly use and simple words that you can use to

replace them.

The list is by no means complete.

Its purpose

is to give you an idea of what unnecessarily difficult words

look like.

DIFFICULT

administer
aggregate
allocate
constitute

deem

effectuate

enter (on a form)
for the duration of
herein

heretofore
implement
indicate

initiate

in lieu of

in the event that
issue

on behalf of

per annum

prior to

proceed

procure
promulgate
provided that
pursuant to
render

represents

said, same, such
solely

submit

subsequent to
terminate

to the extent that
utilize

with regard/respect to

Writing

Notice that some of these words are legal terms.

SIMPLE

manage

total

give, divide
make up
consider
carry out
write
during
here
until now
carry out
show
begin
instead of
if
give

for

a year
before

go ahead
get

make, issue
if (or change sentence)
under

make, give
is

the, this, that
only

send

after

end

if, when
use

for

in the Professions, by the Document Design Center

39

GUIDELINE 3: Do Not Put Too Much Information Into a
Sentence. Sentences become too difficult for the reader when
the writer tries to cram too much information into them. The
problem usually is caused by inserting too much explanation
between the subject, verb, and object of a sentence. Another
cause can be too much introduction before the main parts of the
sentence (the subject, verb, and object) or too much
explanation at the end of the sentence. Here is a sentence
with too much information between the subject and the verb:
"All the procedural steps from the first to the last, as well
as the policies, resources, structure, personnel, and
organizational factors, which also impinge on the prOposed
system, must be evaluated in terms of their effects on each
other.“(1l) The subject clause is "All the procedural steps"
and the predicate clause is "must be evaluated." There is much
too much information between them. Sentences like this are
hard to read and will discourage readers.

The best idea is to use just one idea per sentence.
Explanations and modifying statements, if more than a few
words, can be divided into sentences of their own. Sylvia
Lewis has also developed an exercise to help writers learn to
use just one major idea in any sentence. One of her examples

is

"The planning director, long in favor of growth management,
who risked public censure for opposing a large subdivision,

privately conceded that the development was well designed."(12)

40

She says this could be re-written to say: "The planning
director privately conceded that the development was well
designed. Long an advocate of growth management, he had risked
public censure for opposing a large subdivision."

GUIDELINE 4: Don't Try To Say Too Much. Planners work so
hard on research that they often cannot resist bombarding the
reader with too much information. One way to address this
problem is to write the text of the report in general terms, if
the public will be reading it. The report then can conclude
with appendices that provide more technical information. This
guideline is closely related to the preceding one, but
addresses entire reports, not just sentences. If your report
consists of simple, one-idea sentences but still contains too
much detail, the writing project has not succeeded. Planners
often provide the same level of detail regardless of the
audience. This gets back to the concept of gauging your
audience, which was discussed in the previous chapter. As
Duncan Erley, the author of "Writing Better Zoning Reports,"
wrote, "The amount of detail required also depends on the type
and scale of each case. Particularly complex cases often
require not only more kinds of information, but also a greater
depth of information."(13)

GUIDELINE 5: Don't Mix Facts With Opinion. Planners
should keep their facts separate from their analysis and
recommendations.(l4) Often, in a staff report, information on

location and adjacent land is will not separated from such

41

opinions as what effect the staff thinks the project will have
or what the planning commission should recommend. Not only is
this bad writing, but it is bad politics, particularly if
opponents figure out what is happening. In the following staff
report, fact and opinion have become blurred. The underlined
sentence is opinion, and should be identified as such and
separated from the information section:
Adjacent Land Use. To the north is agricultural land. To
the south, east, and west are single-family homes. There
are a barn and three smaller out-buildings on the agricul-
tural land to the north. The applicant should be required

to remove all four structures upon completion of the new
facility.(15)

 

GUIDELINE 6: Be Concrete. Planning is a very abstract
field. Planners don't fight fires, build roads, or perform any
of the other easily comprehensible governmental functions.
Instead, planners study, recommend, promote, and expedite. But
that is all the more reason why planners, of all people, should
make sure their prose is not loaded with abstractions. Here is
an example of a paragraph that does not use concrete,
easy-to-understand language:

There are three basic dimensions to the housing problem:

(1) inadequate conditions, (2) affordability, and (3)

locational concentration due to price discrimination.

These dimensions combine to make housing one of the most

significant problems in our metropolitan area.

This isn't terrible, but it could be re-written to say:

In this county many people live in dilapidated,

overcrowded housing. They live there not by choice, but

by necessity; they cannot afford housing that meets
acceptable standards. Further, they are denied the

opportunity to live in most areas of the county because
these areas offer no low-cost housing.(16)

42

Both paragraphs explain the same three housing problems:
bad conditions, affordability and location concentration. But
the second is easier to understand because it uses specific
terms.

GUIDELINE 7: Use Personal Pronouns. This one is often
very hard for planners to accept, but you can do it. I largely
have avoided using the first person singular pronoun because I
felt it might bother some of my readers. But personal pronouns
clarify who does what in a sentence and are especially helpful
for prescriptive, how-to-do-it writing projects such as this
thesis. That is why the word "you" has been used so often, as
in the sentence, "What message do you wish to convey?" from the
preceding chapter. Personal pronouns are especially helpful in
giving instructions. Here is a sentence in the impersonal,
nominal style: "A zoning variance will not be granted until
evidence is submitted to show that the request will not
negatively impact adjacent land uses." Using personal pronouns,
you can write: "We will not grant a zoning variance until you
prove that the request will not harm your neighbors.” If "we"
is too casual, substitute the name of the municipality or the
words "Planning Department."

GUIDELINE 8: Use the Active Voice. Planners often avoid
the active voice in the quest for impersonality. But active
sentences help make it clear to the reader exactly who did what
to whom.(17) The voice of the sentence explains the

relationship between the subject and the verb. When the

43

subject does the action described by the verb, the sentence is
active. When the action is done t9 the subject, the sentence
is passive. "A $50 fee is to be paid by the applicant for a
zoning variance" is a passive sentence, while "The applicant
for a zoning variance must pay a $50 fee" is active. The
active voice is more action-oriented and usually makes for
better reading. For variety, in some sentences, the passive
voice is appropriate.

GUIDELINE 9: Unstring Noun Strings. Noun strings are long
sequences of nouns in which the first ones modify later ones.
They are hard for readers to understand, but they do give
documents a bureaucratic tone. It is another example of a
writer choosing between sounding important or being understood.
Here are some noun strings, along with translations:

-- Citizen information seeking behavior (Consumers' behavior
in seeking information);
-- land use impaction analysis (analysis of land use effect).

Notice that in noun strings the connecting words, such as
"in" or "of," are missing. These connecting words clarify how
the nouns relate to each other. Most readers, researchers say,
can handle two-noun strings (planning office) without much
problem. But the longer they get, the harder it is for noun
strings to be understood.(18)

GUIDELINE 10: Avoid "Whiz Deletions." One of the most
basic writing guidelines is to avoid unnecessary words. But

this guideline calls for the writer to insert some words that

44

might have been omitted. Many subordinate clauses are
introduced by the words "who are," "which is," "that are," etc.
These words help the reader understand how the subordinate
clauses relate to the rest of the sentence. Removing these
words is called a “whiz deletion.”(19) This makes a sentence
harder to read by making it unclear. For example, consider the
sentence, "The Mayor wants the land-use plan written by the
Community Development Department.” Does this mean that he wants
the Community Development Department (as opposed to somebody
else) to write a land use plan? Or does the mayor want
somebody to bring him a land-use plan that the Community
Development department has already written? The sentence
should read either, "The Mayor wants the land-use plan, that
was written by the Community Development Department," or "The
Mayor wants the Community Development Department to write a
land-use plan."

Restore the missing connecting words to increase

readability and to avoid ambiguity.

Editing

The writing process does not end with the first draft.
Many technical writing researchers advocate "turning off the
internal editor" during the first draft in order to avoid
writer's block.(20) If you follow this strategy, there is even
more reason for serious editing after the first draft. Many

basic editing principles, such as eliminating needless words

45

and unstringing noun strings, were discussed above in the ten
guidelines. But to write effectively, planners need at least a
basic understanding of editing.

Editing is really just another form of feedback, such as
the feedback a planner gets when the planning director says,
"Don't smirk when the aldermen ask inane questions." All good
employees evaluate their own work constantly, searching for
ways to improve. They should do the same thing when they
write.

Researchers at the Document Design Center offer the
following suggestions for writers who must edit their own work,
which is harder than editing another's writing:

1. Put aside what you have written for a day, or at least a
few hours. This will help bring a fresh perspective.

2. Read the document aloud, noting instances where you
stumble or are forced to pause because you can't follow
what you have written. This will give a good clue as to
where the audience will have problems;

3. Write a plan for revision before starting a second list.
This does not have to be anything elaborate-~a simple
checklist of possible improvements will help a great deal.

4. Use a checklist, such as the one shown in Figure Six, to

focus on specific problems.(21)

Yes
(Faulty)

mummwaH
o o o o o o o o

Hp...
H00
0 O

12.
13.

14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

19.
20.
21.

Source:

46

FIGURE SIX

 

CHECKLIST FOR LANGUAGE PROBLEMS

A. Paragraphs and Sentences

Document is impersonal (doesn't use "you")
Paragraphs are too long

Paragraphs cover unrelated topics

Main idea of paragraph is buried

Writer changes focus within paragraph
Transitions between paragraphs are unclear
Passive is overused--sentences have no actors
Sentences are too complex to understand easily
(too many embedded or relative clauses)
Negative sentences could be stated positively
Sentences are ambiguous

Lists lack parallelism

Uses nominalizations instead of action verbs
Uses nouns to modify nouns when they should be
possessives or prepositional phrases

Uses jargon without defining it

Uses two words where one would do (redundant)
Uses unnecessary legalisms (herein, said)

Uses more than one name for the same object
Uses the same name for more than one object

Makes grammatical errors:

 

dangling participles
misplaced modifiers
sentence fragments

Other language (style) problems:

Writing in the ProfessiongL by the Document Design Project

 

47

Another editing technique is Key-word Editing,(22) which
can be used in place of or in addition to the above
suggestions. This method has five steps:

1. Divide the sentence into meaningful units;

2. Identify the key words or phrases in each unit;

3. Cut out unnecessary words, and build your statement
around the key terms;

4. Pack in more concrete words when possible;

5. Let the actors act.

Consider this sentence:

The condition of excessive redundancy that exists to such

a great degree in the writing assignments produced by

members of the planning profession should be eliminated by

stricter standards and the example-setting capabilities
that lie at the disposal of those who supervise such
planners.

The first step is to divide the sentence into its natural
units. The next step is to identify the key words or phrases
in each. Here is the same sentence, with the units divided by
slashes and the key words underlined:

The condition of excessive redundancy / that exists in

such a great degree in the writin assignments / produced

by members of the planning profession / should be
eliminated by stricter standards and the example-setting

capabilities / that lie at the disposal of those who
supervise such planners.

 

 

 

The next step is to eliminate the unnecessary words and
write a sentence dominated by the key words;

Redundancy in planner's writing should be eliminated by
stricter standards and the example set by supervisors.

48

This is much better, but the fourth step is to insert
concrete information, replacing abstractions with more specific
words. What does "redundancy" mean? This sentence is more
specific if it reads:

Wordiness and repetition in planners' writing should be

eliminated by stricter standards and the example set by

the instructor.

The final step is to let the actors act, which means the
person or thing that carries out the action of the sentence
should also be the grammatical subject. So the sample sentence
can be improved again by writing:

Supervisors should use strict standards and their own

examples to eliminate wordiness and repetition in

planners' writing.

The key-word editing system and the checklists are
helpful, but they won't mean much without the most important
prerequisite for successful editing: determination. Editing
is very hard work, especially for people re-reading their own
prose. By the time writers are through with the first draft,
they are tired and find it hard to critique their own work.
That is why it is such a good idea to wait a while before
editing. When editing, it is also a good idea to consider the
final step in the writing process outlined by the Document
Design Center: Evaluation. Does the writing project achieve

its purpose for its audience? Have you met your original

planning goals and objectives?

49

In many planning efforts, circumstances and time make it
difficult to keep the original goal in mind. The same thing
can happen with a writing project. But if writers consider
their original goals as they edit, they can see where they got
sidetracked and make the necessary changes. By working hard to
write clearly and edit carefully and keeping the original
project goals in mind, planners can make great strides towards
improving their writing products.

This chapter has offered specific proposals for how
planners can write more clearly. The next chapter will
describe how one city tried to follow these guidelines in its

comprehensive plan.

IV

AN EXAMPLE: EAST LANSING

The Background

 

Bob Owen was not happy. He had brought home a copy of
what he thought was the final draft of his city's new com-
prehensive plan. The East Lansing planning administrator
and his staff had been working on the new plan since early
1978. It was now November of 1980. Over the weekend, Owen
had asked his wife to read the plan to give him the opinion
of a layperson. She had told him that the plan was hard to
understand, that parts of it were not written clearly. But
that wasn't what made Owen upset. Owen was mad because he
knew, after reviewing the plan again, that his wife was

correct.

Owen had just hired a former newspaper editor as a part-

time planner. Me. One Monday, a note from Owen was on my

desk. It said, "Review this from an editor's point of view."

The note was clipped to a copy of the new comprehensive plan,

which I had never seen before. When Owen was asked to ela-

borate on these rather terse orders, he said, "You know, words

51

that work." That conversation led to the beginning of three
amazing weeks for a neophyte planner. Owen had put a newcomer
in the role of reviewing and revising work done by talented
planners who had worked together for several years. The
situation was awkward, but the plan clearly needed editing.

The challenge was to simplify the language without changing the
content.

East Lansing's Department of Planning, Housing and
Community Development had gone to a great deal of effort to
produce a plan that was bold but diplomatic, action-oriented
but politically feasible. Unlike many communities, the people
and elected officials of East Lansing understand planning and
accept it as good for the community. But the community is
highly educated and has an extremely active electorate, which
is organized into neighborhood groups quick to express their
Opinions on anything. The planning staff, on the other hand,
is very pro-active and not content to wait for orders from the
city manager or city council. So, while the staff had many
ideas for the plan, they also went through an elaborate citizen
participation process, which produced many worthwhile
suggestions. But when the staff had to gather all these
divergent opinions into one cohesive document, they had trouble
communicating their ideas clearly. Owen realized that in a
city as literate as East Lansing, the plan needed to be

well-written.

52

The Editing Process

 

Owen and his boss, department head Brad Pryce, wanted the
planning commissioners and council members to have the new plan
before Christmas, which meant any revisions would have to be
made in approximately three weeks. Upon first reading, the
plan's writing quality seemed quite inconsistent. Some
sections, such as the one on Neighborhoods, were quite well
written. Others were very awkward. Unlike some plans, which
are full of vague generalities, this one was packed with solid
ideas. Most plans begin with goals and objectives and then
prepose policies. East Lansing went one step further by
listing recommended actions for every proposed objective.

Every action also estimated how much it would cost to implement
and when it would get done.

In short, the plan was full of good ideas, and in the
final draft there weren't many changes in the Objectives,
Policies and Recommended Actions sections. But each group of
objectives, policies and actions was preceded by background
sections that the plan labeled "Strategies." These needed work,
as did the introductory sections. The plan began with a
summary of its goals. This was followed by an introduction
that explained the reason for a new plan and some constraints
the city faced in the comprehensive planning process. This
section also explained the planning process undertaken by the

city, with its heavy emphasis on citizen involvement.

53

When revising a document, two issues must be addressed.
One is the overall organization of the document, discussed in
Chapter Two. The other is the clarity of the language. East
Lansing's plan had minor organizational problems but some
sections had serious clarity problems. We addressed the
language first. In retrospect, it would have better to look at
the format first, then worry about the words.

The East Lansing Comprehensive Plan went through the
following revision process:

1. Entire plan was edited for minor grammatical and
clarity problems by two journalists, me and my wife, who at
that time was a magazine editor;

2. The first sections, titled Summary, Introduction, and
The Plan Format were re-written by me and edited by my wife.
The lengthy Introduction section was divided into three
sections - Introduction, The Planning Process and Assumptions.
Some of the Assessment sections, which began each section of
the plan, also were re-written.

3. At this stage, the plan was in its most simply worded
form, but it didn't stay that way. Before turning in my
suggested revisions, I read the revised version once more and
eliminated some changes that significantly altered the meaning.
The revisions were then further edited by Bob Owen and Brad
Pryce. Pryce made more changes than Owen, because he felt that
we had lost some content in our quest for clarity. Here is an

example of the changes one sentence encountered:

54

Original: "A larger proportion of public capital
investment will be devoted to the maintenance of existing city
infrastructure (utilities, streets, parks) and a smaller
proportion will be devoted to support new development."(l)

Editor's Version: "More money will be devoted to existing
city public facilities such as parks and streets and less money
will be spent on new development."

Final Version: "More public funds will be used to maintain
existing city infrastructure (utilities, streets, parks) and
less money will be spent to support new development."(2)

In most cases, the two administrators did not change the
revised version as much as they did the above sentence. Here
is an example of a revision they did not change:

Original: "Second, the recommendations in the plan should
be formulated with sufficient specificity so that their costs
would be clearly understood."(3)

Final Version: "The second (goal) was to make the Plan's
recommendations specific enough so that costs would be clearly
understood."(4)

As the editing process continued, it became clear why some
sections were so much better than others. Different planners
had written different sections. While they are all excellent
planners, there is a wide range in their writing abilities.
There didn't appear to be any correlation between writing

ability and overall talent. In fact, one of the brightest,

55

verbally articulate staff members turned out to be the worst
writer.

Since this thesis is being written by an economic
development planner, let us examine how one paragraph was
revised in the City Center & Commercial chapter of the plan.
This is the original version of the third paragraph of the
Strategy section:

The most visible and pronounced commercial area of the
city is the Central Business District. Long regarded as
the center, or focal point for the community, the CBD has
been able to maintain its position as the predominant
commercial center for the City. Maintaining this posture
has been difficult, however, as the downtown has endured
many changes over the years. Both the array of businesses
and the clientele they serve have changed. Where there
were once grocery and hardware stores, there are now
restaurants and specialty shops. Where there once was a
community shopping focus, there is now a more general
orientation towards restaurants, entertainment, and the
student shopper. Thus, while it is true that the CBD
remains dominant in the community, its overall character
has changed significantly.(S)

This is certainly not terrible writing, but here is how it
was changed:

The city's most visible commercial area is the Central
Business District. Long regarded as the center of the
community, the CBD is still the city's dominant commercial
area. But the downtown has gone through many changes over
the years, as both the types of businesses and the
clientele they serve have changed. Where there were once
grocery and hardware stores, there now are restaurants and
specialty shops. Where there was once a community
shopping focus, there is now a more general orientation
towards food service, entertainment, and the student
consumer. The overall character of the CBD has changed
significantly.(6)

Several principles mentioned in earlier chapters were

applied in the revision of this paragraph. One guideline is to

56

prune unnecessary words. In the original paragraph, the first
sentence is 15 words long. The revised version has 11 words.
The paragraph originally had 129 words, but was edited down to
100 words without any discernable loss in content. This was
done partially by eliminating unnecessary phrases. For
example, the second sentence of the original paragraph quoted
above describes the downtown as "Long regarded as the center,
or focal point for the community." In the revised version, the
words "or the focal point" are eliminated because "center" and
"focal point" mean the same thing, at least in this context.
In her Key-Word Editing technique, Linda Flowers
encourages writers to "Let the actors act."(7) One way to do
this is to get the important words up front, starting with the
subject of the sentence. Consider the first sentence of the
quoted paragraph. The original is "The most visible and
pronounced area of the City is the Central Business District."
The modifiers come before the important words, namely "City”
and "Central Business District." The revised version, "The
City's most visible commercial area is the Central Business
District,” is somewhat better. But the main "actor" in this
sentence is "Central Business District." This sentence could be
improved further by putting the subject up front: "The Central
Business District is the City's most visible commercial area."
In conclusion it would be nice to report that everyone
thought the last-minute revisions were a big success, but that

was not the case. Brad Pryce, the department head, felt that

57

some subtle points and shades of meaning got lost in the
translation. My position was that subleties don't mean much if
the reader is confused or bored. In an interview in fall of
1984, Bob Owen said, "Looking back, I feel very good about the
writing quality of the plan, all things considered. After all,
I didn't have forever to edit it.

"I don't think that most people understand most of the
document, but many people understand a good deal of it. I
think we communicated a great deal of information. You always
have to ask yourself, 'How will this be interpreted?’ People
see what they want to see. They ask how the plan will affect
their neighborhood--that's the level of concern that you need

to write to."(8)

V.

CONCLUSION

Planners truly concerned about communicating more
effectively must establish clarity as an important goal. Since
effective communication is a goal that everyone professes to
favor, it should be fairly easy to sell politically. Imagine
the Mayor telling an approving audience, "We're going to make
sure those bureaucrats quit writing in gobbledygook." If
planning directors truly want to improve writing quality, it
should be possible for them to get support, and perhaps
additional funding from elected officials.

But success begins at the top. A planning agency can
improve the quality of its writing only if the director or
another top administrator conveys to the staff that this is an
important goal, one which should permeate everything they do.

The place for this to begin is in the hiring process. The
phrase, "excellent oral and writing skills a must," is a cliche
in help wanted ads for planners. But when the time comes to
make a decision, many organizations don't give writing tests.
Senior staff members will spend many hours on interviews, which
in effect are long, high-pressure verbal presentations. Most

people who come across well in a stressful situation like a job

59

people who come across well in a stressful situation like a job
interview will be able to conduct themselves well in public.
But that doesn't prove they can write, as is evidenced by the
many planners who write poor staff reports but give lucid
public presentations. Some cities give written tests for
planning positions the same day as the interview. This
guarantees that applicants can't bring the test home and have
somebody help them. Some agencies require applicants to present
written work samples. This is much better than nothing, but
the work sample might have been edited heavily by the
applicant's supervisor. If an agency is going to require
written work samples, it would be helpful to examine something
short, like a letter, as well as a major project. On the job,
planners will write more short letters and memos than they will
long reports. If an applicant can't produce an acceptable
letter or memo, he or she is going to have problems with all
types of writing. The on-the-spot writing test seems like the
best solution.

Two-Part Process

 

If clear writing is to be an important agency goal, the
implementation process should be divided into two parts,
improvement of existing writing abilities and monitoring of
written materials. To encourage improvement among existing
staff, directors might encourage the staff to read E.B.

White's The Elements of Style. It is one of the best books on

I

writing and is very short. The agency also could establish

 

60

writing guidelines such as those described in Chapters Two and
Three. The need for identifying the audience and for
pre-writing planning should be re-emphasized in this
publication. Such a booklet also could address questions of
style, such as whether the term "low-to-mod-housing" should be
hyphenated and whether "moderate" should be spelled out or
abbreviated. The stylebook also could include a list of jargon
words which should be avoided in publications for the general
public. Computers also can be programmed to flag jargon, as
was done by former Secretary of Commerce Malcolm Baldridge, who
developed a list of forbidden jargon words which were never to
appear in departmental writing products.

When work begins on a new subject, the staff discusses
what they want to accomplish and how they will meet their
goals. Usually, they don't think much about how the project
will be presented until the work nears completion. This is a
mistake. When work begins, discussion should include how the
written part of the project will be approached. You can always
change your mind later, but discussing it early will produce a
better report. Once the data have been gathered, the goals
defined, and the recommendations developed, it is again time to
discuss how the written report should be handled. The staff
members writing the final report would meet with their
supervisor to discuss how the report will be written, using the
guidelines in the department stylebook as the basis for their

discussion.

61

Before this meeting, the lead writer should write an
abstract of not more than 100 words. Abstracts usually are
written at the last minute after the writing project is done.
Writing the abstract beforehand forces the writer to look at
the project in a very straightforward manner. No matter how
complicated the project, it can be condensed into a few words.
The City of Aurora, Illinois has a 14 page ordinance which
established the City's historic preservation commission. It is
considered an excellent framework for local preservation and
has been used as a model by other communities and regional
preservation organizations. But the former director of the
preservation commission says that this detailed piece of
writing can be summarized in these 24 words, "We want to
establish a commission which will control and limit the
alteration and demolition of historically and architecturally
significant buildings in this area."(1) Making this drill a
part of every writing project will help planners focus on their
major goals and avoid needless tangents. For truly major
projects, summaries for each section could also be developed
before writing begins.

Training efforts will be much less effective if the system
for promoting clarity does not include a monitoring component.
Somebody in a position of authority has to be in charge of
promoting effective writing. Personal work habits must be
changed. In many agencies, the planning director is in charge

of quality control on documents. But planning directors are

62

not necessarily the best writers on the staff. A better idea
is to choose the best-qualified person on the staff to monitor
writing quality and give that person the authority needed to
enforce their standards. In East Lansing, it was difficult for
a new staff member to revise the work of experienced planners,
and the situation would have been worse if there had been any
prima donnas on the staff. Putting a staff editor in charge
earlier would have helped solve the problem of several
different writing styles in the plan.

This staff editor would be involved in staff meetings for
new projects and help decide how the final report would be
written. This person could also monitor how staff reports are
received by the media and the public. Planners who want to
know what the public considers important should look to
newspaper coverage. The press, which represents the public,
often focuses on something completely different than what the
planner thought was important. The staff editor could help the
other planners learn to communicate more effectively.

Newspaper and magazine editors spend a great deal of time
looking back, critiquing their work. At many papers, an editor
spends a large amount of time reviewing each day's stories and
suggesting ways to write better. But this rarely takes place
in a planning department. Certainly, there are other projects
to move on to, but that's not a good enough reason to skip the
review process. An important part of the staff editor's job

would be to look at finished writing projects and determine

63

what recurring problems show up in the writing done by
different staff members.

Another problem is that planners usually are not in a
position to get steady public feedback. When newspaper
reporters write stories, they usually talk with their sources
soon after the stories are printed. The reporter covering City
Hall should talk with local officials regularly. This gives
the sources ample opportunity to tell the reporters what was
wrong with their last story. Newspapers also print letters to
the editor, another source of feedback. But planners, who
spend much of their time doing research, have little time to
ask if the public is getting the message. It doesn't have to
be that way. Planning staffs could use written questionnaires
or telephone surveys to determine what people think about local
planning issues. Cities that publish newsletters, such as East
Lansing, could encourage letters to the editor. This
combination of staff education and monitoring eventually will
lead to higher quality in written reports.

Future Research

 

Communication, as a component of the planning process,
clearly needs to be researched more thoroughly. This becomes
increasingly obvious every time a financially-strapped city
decides to lay off a large number of its planners. There are
many avenues for future research. For example, this thesis has
barely touched on the necessity of effective publication

design, which is extremely important in presenting written

64

material. Another subject mentioned briefly is the use of
computers to foster effective communication. Many
organizations now have software programs which check writing
for grammar, excessive jargon and other problems. There is a
need for such a program for planning offices.

Future research is also needed to quantify the benefits of
clear writing in the planning profession. How could this be
done? Obviously, East Lansing could not send the original
version of its comprehensive plan to half the city council
members and the more a poorly-written revision to the other
half. But it is possible to find a group of peOple with
approximately the same background (college planning students,
for example) and divide them into two groups. One group could
read the first written version of a plan while the other half
reads a well-written version. Both groups could then take the
same test to find out how well they understood what they had
read. It would also be interesting to see which version they
considered the most "professional" and esoteric.

In the era of tax revolts and public intolerance of
government, it is more important than ever for planners to get
their message across. Clearly written documents can help
accomplish this. When clear writing becomes a specific goal
within the planning process, planners will have taken the first
step towards producing better public documents. The public
deserves no less. The result can only be an increased

understanding of what planners do.

65

NOTES

Chapter I

 

(1)Presentation by Johnson, Johnson & Roy, Inc. to the Boyne
City Commission, Boyne City, Michigan, July, 1979.

(2)Richard B. Dymsza, "Say It In English," Planning, August
1981, p. 23.

 

(3)Steven Orlick, ”Promoting the Three Cs of Effective Commu-
nication," Practicing Planner, December 1978, p. 6.

 

(4)Gera1d Luedtke, "Why Should Master Plans Make Dull Reading?"
Practicing Planner, March 1978, p. 17.

 

(5)Interview with Robert Owen, East Lansing, Michigan, Septem-
ber 5, 1984.

(6)Ibid.

(7)Linda Flower, Problem-Solving Strategies For Writing, (New
York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981), p. 173.

 

(8)Rosemary Hake and Joseph Williams, "Style and Its Conse-
quences: Do As I Do, Not As I Say," College English (September
1981): 434. '

 

(9)1bid., p. 437.
(10)Ibid.

(11)Ibid., p. 440.
(12)Ibid., p. 446.

(l3)Robbin Battison, ed., Simply Stated, (Washington , D.C.:
American Insitute For Research,FI981), p. 1.

 

(14)Hake and Williams, p. 445.

Chapter II

 

(1)W.B. Yeats as quoted by Jacques Barzun, Simple & Direct-
A Rhetoric For WritersL (New York: Harper & Row, 1975), p. ix.

 

 

66

(2)Clifford Baker, A Guide to Technical Writing, (New York:
Pitman Publishing, 1961), p. 229.

(3)Flower, p. 3.

(4)Dixie Goswami et a1., Writing In the Professions,
(Washington, D.C.: American Institute For Research, 1981) p. 7.

 

(5)Ibid., p. 39.
(6)Ibid., p. 49.

(7)Warren Jones and Albert Solnit, What Do I Do Next? (Chicago:
American Planning Association, 1980), p. 37.

 

(8)Wi11iam Zinsser, On Writing Well, (New York: Harper & Row,
1976), P. 23.

 

(9)Goswami, p. 52.

(10)Flower, p. 123.

(11)Ibid., p. 127.

(12)Ibid., p. 62.

(13)Ibid., p. 99.

(14)Ibid., p. 87.

(15)Goswami, p. 87.

(16)Barzun, p. 90.

(17)Ibid.

(18)Goswami, p. 84.

(l9)Dymsza, p. 26.

(20)City of East Lansing Department of Planning, Housing and
Community Development, ”Plan It Again, Sam," (East Lansing, Mi-
chigan: City of East Lansing, 1978).

(21)Goswami, p. 40.

(22)Flower, 143.

(23)Charlotte Linde and William Labov, "Spatial Networks

as a Site for the Study of Language," Language 51 (1975): PP.
924-939.

67
(24)Flower, pp. 157-158.

(25)Ibid., p. 162.

Chapter III

 

(1)Orlick, p. 6.
(2)Ibid.
(3)Ibid.

(4)Duncan Erley, Writing Better Zoning Reports (Chicago:
American Society of Planning Officials, 1976), p. 1.

 

(5)Dymsza, p. 23.

(6)Jones and Solnit, p. 37.
(7)Ibid.

(8)Ibid., p. 40.

(9)Baker, p. 48.

(10)Sylvia Lewis, "Writing Well- The Basics and Beyond," a
presentation at Michigan State University, June 15, 1982.

(11)Daniel Felker, et all., Guidelines For Document De-
si ners, (Washington, D.C.: American Insitute For Research,
1981), p.45.

 

(12)Lewis, "Writing Well- The Basics and Beyond."
(13)Erley, p. 3.

(14)Ibid., p. 2.

(15)Ibid.

(16)Dymsza, p. 26.

(17)Joseph N. Ulman and Jay R. Gould, Technical Reporting,
(New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965), p. 131.

 

(18)Felker, et all., p. 63.
(19)Ibid., p. 39.

(20)Flower, p. 72.

68
(21)Goswami, p. 164.

(22)Flower, p. 175.

Chapter IV

 

(1)City of East Lansing Department of Planning, Housing and
Community Development, City of East Lansing Comprehensive Plan,
(Draft), (East Lansing, Michigan, 1980), p. 5.

 

(2)City of East Lansing Department of Planning, Housing and
Community Development, City of East Lansing Comprehensive Plag,
(Final version), (East Lansing, Michigan, 1981), p. 2.

 

(3)East Lansing Comprehensive Plan (Draft), p. 6.
(4)East Lansing Comprehensive Plan, p. 3.

(5)East Lansing Comprehensive Plan (Draft), p. 15.
(6)East Lansing Comprehensive Plan, p. 13.
(7)Flower, p. 175.

(8)Bob Owen interview.

Chapter V

 

(1) Interview with Community Development Director Patricia
Casler, July 18, 1985.

69

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

Primary Sources 9

 

Baker, Clifford. A Guide To Technical Writing. New York:
Pitman Publishing, 1961.

 

Barzun, Jacques. Simple & Direct - A Rhetoric For Writers.
New York: Harper & Row, 1975.

 

Battison, Robbin. "Another Look at Gobbledygook," Simply
Stated (June-July 1982): pp. 1-2.

Battison, Robbin. "The Process Model of Document Design,"
Simply Stated (July 1981): pp. 1-2

 

City of East Lansing. City of East Lansing Comprehensive Plan.
East Lansing, Michigan: I981.

 

City of East Lansing. "Play It Again, Sam." East Lansing,
Michigan: 1978.

 

City of Del Mar. City of Del Mar Comprehensive Plan. Del Mar,
California: 1975.

 

Dymsza, Richard B. "Say It In English," Planning, August 1981,
pp. 23-26.

 

Erley, Duncan. Writing Better Zoning Reports. (Chicago:
American SoEiety of Planning Officials, 1976).

 

Felker, Daniel 3., ed. Document Design: A Review of_the
Relevant Research. Washington, D.C.: American Institute
For Research, 1980.

 

 

Felker, Daniel B.; Pickering, Frances; Charrow, Veda R.; eds.
Guidelines For Document Designers. Washington, D.C.:
American Institute For Research, 1981.

 

Flower, Linda. Problem Solving Strategies For Writing. New
York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1981.

 

General Motors Corporation. "S.T.A.R." (Test Approach to
Readability.) Detroit.

Goswami, Dixie; Redish, Janice C.; Felker, Daniel B.; Siegel,
Alan. Writing In The Professions. Washington, D.C.:
American Institute For Research, 1981.

 

Hake, Rosemary L., and Williams, Joseph M. "Style and Its
Consequences: Do As I Do, Not As I Say." College English,
September 1981, pp. 433-451.

 

70

"If Only Politicians' Verbiage Were Cash.“ Lansing State
Journal. 5 January 1981, sec. B, p. 1.

 

Jones, Warren W., and Solnit, Albert. What Do I Do Next?
Chicago: American Planning Association, 1980.

 

Lewis, Sylvia. "Writing Well — The Basics and Beyond."
Presentation at Michigan State University, June 15, 1982.

Luedtke, Gerald. "Why Should Master Plans Make Dull Reading?"
Practicing Planner, March 1978, p. 17.

 

Orlick, Steve. "Promoting the Three Cs of Effective
Communication." Practicing Planner, December 1978, pp.
6-14.

 

Owen, Robert. City of East Lansing Planning Administrator.
Interview, 5 September 1984.

Sarasota County. Apoxsge: Sarasota County's Comprehensive
Framework For the Future. Sarasota, Florida: 1981.

 

 

Sledd, James. A Short Introduction to English Grammar.
Chicago: Scot, Foresman & Company, 1959.

 

Ulman, Joseph N., and Gould, Jay R. Technical Reporting. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965.

 

White, E.B. The Elements of Style. New York: MacMillan, 1972.

 

Zall, Paul. Elements of Technical Reporting. Harper &
Brothers, 1982.

 

Zinsser, William. On Writing Well. New York: Harper & Row,
1976.

 

Secondary Sources

 

Abrams, Charles. The Language of Cities. New York: Viking
Press, 1971.

Flesch, Rudolf. The ABCs of Style: A Guide to Plain English.
New York: Harper & Row, 1964.

 

Freed, Karl, and Howell, John. "Consensus Planning, Or Making
Planning Understandable." Unpublished paper written for
Michigan Planner, 1981.

 

Hake, Rosemary. "With No Apology." Basic Writing, 1978, p. 15.

71

Hall, Donald. Writing Well. New York: Little, Brown Co.,
1979.

 

Lantham, Richard. Style: An Anti-Textbook. New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1974.

 

Levin, Gerald. Prose Models: An Approach to Writing: New
York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1970.

 

Meshenberg, Michael. The Language of Zoning: A Selected
Bibliography, Planning Advisory Service Report 322.
(Chicago: American Society for Planning Officials,
November, 1976).

 

 

"Plain Language Law Proposed By National Consumer Council,"
Plain English Campaign, Stockport, England, July 1984. p.
1.

Smith, Terry. How To Write Better and Faster. New York:
Thomas Crowell Co., 1965.

 

ICHIGRN STR

mum 191mlumillir’liiflflwfllfififli‘flf

312 3017