Scenarios and Discussion Questions

Introduction
This section includes 28 various scenarios. A brief discussion follows each. These
vary in format and those towards the end are written more in the style of exam
questions than those at the beginning of this section.

Scenario 1
You are a planner in a city that has recently opened a new shelter for homeless
people. The shelter opens each evening during the winter and provides a place for
people to sleep during the night in dormitory-style rooms with cots. Some
community members would like the shelter closed because they feel that the large
number of people who congregate on the sidewalks near the shelter as they wait for
it to open pose a threat to public safety. Your planning director decides to address
these concerns by classifying the shelter as a hotel. The planning director knows
that the zoning ordinance specifies that a hotel must provide private sleeping
quarters, which the shelter does not. By classifying the shelter as a hotel, the
planning director is taking steps to close the shelter based on the ground that it is in
violation of the zoning ordinance. What might you do first?

Discussion 1
You might gather additional information about the situation to be sure you fully
understand it.

You might find out if alternative locations for the shelter are feasible and if the
shelter operators are aware of these alternatives. For example, you might locate a
space where people may wait indoors until the shelter opens.

You also might talk to the planning director about the situation so that you
understand the reasoning behind the decision. You base your next move on your
findings

Scenario 2
You are a planner in a city that has recently opened a new shelter for homeless
people. The shelter opens each evening during the winter and provides a place for
people to sleep during the night in dormitory-style rooms with cots. Some
community members would like the shelter closed because they feel that the large
number of people who congregate on the sidewalks near the shelter as they wait for
it to open pose a threat to public safety. Your planning director decides to address
these concerns by classifying the shelter as a hotel. The planning director knows
that the zoning ordinance specifies that a hotel must provide private sleeping
quarters, which the shelter does not. By classifying the shelter as a hotel, the
planning director is taking steps to close the shelter based on the ground that it is in
violation of the zoning ordinance. Suppose you believe that the planning director
has assumed a position that is not politically feasible and consequently will be
reversed. What might you do?

Discussion 2
You might choose to take no action. However, waiting until a higher authority
reverses poor or unethical planning decisions is not the best course of action for a
professional planner. Also, remember that a professional planner does have a
special responsibility to plan for the needs of the disadvantaged (Ethical Principle 1)
Scenario 3
You are a planner in a city that has recently opened a new shelter for homeless
people. The shelter opens each evening during the winter and provides a place for
people to sleep during the night in dormitory-style rooms with cots. Some
community members would like the shelter closed because they feel that the large
number of people who congregate on the sidewalks near the shelter as they wait for
it to open pose a threat to public safety. Your planning director decides to address
these concerns by classifying the shelter as a hotel. The planning director knows
that the zoning ordinance specifies that a hotel must provide private sleeping
quarters, which the shelter does not. By classifying the shelter as a hotel, the
planning director is taking steps to close the shelter based on the ground that it is in
violation of the zoning ordinance. Suppose you have reviewed the situation carefully
and believe that the director made an unethical decision. What might you do?

Discussion 3
If the director is a member of the AICP, then you might discuss the situation with the
AICP Ethics Officer (Procedures 2 and 3)

You may decide to file a charge of unethical conduct with the AICP ethics Officer
(Procedure 5). Beware that this course of action will probably result in a tense work
environment and should only be followed after careful consideration.

Scenario 4
You are a newly hired planner involved in the process of preparing a new recreation
plan for your community. Your supervisor learns that the City Council is anxious to
take action on a recreation plan, and therefore, you are instructed to prepare the
plan without scheduling any time for public participation or public comment. What
might you do first?

Discussion 4
The first step is to be sure you understand the situation completely, and, most
importantly, you must know if public participation required by law. You know that as
a planner, your responsibility is to provide full, clear and accurate information on
planning issues to citizens and governmental decision-makers and to strive to give
citizens the opportunity for meaningful impact on the development of plans (Ethical
Principle 1)

Scenario 5
You are a newly hired planner involved in the process of preparing a new recreation
plan for your community. Your supervisor learns that the City Council is anxious to
take action on a recreation plan, and therefore, you are instructed to prepare the
plan without scheduling any time for public participation or public comment.
Suppose you learn that there is no regulation in place regarding public participation.
What might you do?

Discussion 5
You might mention lack of public participation in the process in your report or
introduction to the plan
Suppose you learn that there was a lengthy and involved process of public
participation in developing an open space plan less than a year ago and that
information gathered in that process will be used to create the recreation plan. You
might mention the lack of public participation in the process in your report but might
also include information about the process that occurred less than a year ago and
explain how that process did (or did not) influence this decision.

Scenario 6
You are a newly hired planner involved in the process of preparing a new recreation
plan for your community. Your supervisor learns that the City Council is anxious to
take action on a recreation plan, and therefore, you are instructed to prepare the
plan without scheduling any time for public participation or public comment.
Suppose you learn that there is a regulation in place and that this is clearly a
violation of the regulation. What might you do?

Discussion 6
When you learn that a violation has occurred, bring it to the attention of your
director or supervisor.

If you learn that the violation has occurred unintentionally, suggest remedies, such
as delaying action on the plan until there is adequate time for a participatory
process, scheduling a number of participatory events quickly, publicizing the events
well, and revising the plan accordingly. It might be a good idea to discuss the
situation with a more experienced planner (Ethical Principle 3)

If the violation has occurred you discover that the violation has occurred
intentionally, this is a very serious situation because as planners we shall not accept
an assignment from an employer when the service to be performed involves conduct
that we know to be illegal (Rule of Conduct 2)

Scenario 7
In one area of your community the population consists largely of relatively recent
immigrants to this country. Population density in the entire community has risen,
and the planning department is under pressure from some members of the
community to reduce density. In response to this pressure, a regulation to prevent
subdividing existing residences into apartments is currently under consideration.
You hold a community meeting to discuss the proposed regulation, and it is
denounced as being discriminatory to the generally low-income, immigrant
population who rent units in subdivided buildings. What might you do?

Discussion 7
Clashing values are not uncommon in the planning process, so you might work to
gather sufficient facts to distinguish between the perception of the problem and the
reality and to fully understand the history of the community. While you are
committed to serving the public interest, this can be difficult when you are serving a
public with opposing points of view

You might write a report that includes arguments for and against the proposed
regulatory changes along with relevant facts that clarify the situation, including a
discussion of housing affordability in your community and how the proposed
regulation may affect the supply of affordable housing. In your report you might
balance concerns about affordable housing with concerns about preserving the
integrity of the built environment

You might recommend that additional meetings be scheduled to ensure opportunity

for further public input that will be seriously considered in making a final
recommendation. Based on these meetings, your report may contain a
recommendation that the jurisdiction develop and support regulations that allow
higher density development on the grounds that such regulations would expand
housing choice, particularly for those of low to moderate income

Scenario 8
You are a planner in a community with a new sign ordinance that prohibits banners
from being strung across the road. The ordinance was adopted in response to
several unattractive advertising banners that had frequently been strung across local
roads and often become entangled with electrical wires. On your way to work one
morning, you see that a community group has strung a banner across the main
street that advertises an upcoming charity event that will generate thousands of
dollars for needy families. You know that the money is greatly needed and that local
officials and residents support the event. What might be your first reaction?

Discussion 8
Whatever your sympathies, you do not have the luxury of ignoring the banner.
Ignoring the banner because it is for a cause that you personally support and
because you personally argue that it is more important for outcomes to be fair than
for processes to be fair, is NOT an option because a planner must obey regulations.

Scenario 9
You are a planner in a community with a new sign ordinance that prohibits banners
from being strung across the road. The ordinance was adopted in response to
several unattractive advertising banners that had frequently been strung across local
roads and often become entangled with electrical wires. On your way to work one
morning, you see that a community group has strung a banner across the main
street that advertises an upcoming charity event that will generate thousands of
dollars for needy families. You know that the money is greatly needed and that local
officials and residents support the event. What might you do in the short term?

Discussion 9
Since it is your duty to enforce the ordinance immediately, you might want to think
of some alternatives to suggest to the event organizers, such as stringing the sign
between two buildings on the same side of the road. However, note that such a
solution might have undesirable ramifications, such as a proliferation of signs being
strung between buildings.

Another way to confront the situation honestly would be to encourage the

community group to apply for a variance. If a variance were granted, then there
would be no question about allowing the banner to remain in place.

Scenario 10
You are a planner in a community with a new sign ordinance that prohibits banners
from being strung across the road. The ordinance was adopted in response to
several unattractive advertising banners that had frequently been strung across local
roads and often become entangled with electrical wires. On your way to work one
morning, you see that a community group has strung a banner across the main
street that advertises an upcoming charity event that will generate thousands of
dollars for needy families. You know that the money is greatly needed and that local
officials and residents support the event. What might you do in the long run?

Discussion 10
If you feel that the ordinance is inappropriate for your community, you might decide
to begin the process of modifying the language of the ordinance. With the approval
of your supervisors, you might work with the city attorney to draft new language for
the ordinance and place the item on the agenda for discussion at the next planning
commission meeting

Scenario 11
You are a planner for a city planning department and you have an old friend who
runs a planning consulting firm in the same city. Your friend submits a competitive
proposal to work as a consultant for your department to you on Friday and while in
your office, asks you to be her guest for dinner at a very fancy restaurant on
Saturday evening. What might you do if you actually have no influence about
awarding the contract?

Discussion 11
You should worry about the appearance of a conflict of interest, even if the invitation
for dinner is not intended to enhance your friend’s chances of being awarded the
contract (Rules of Conduct 5, 8, 19) Because you have no influence about the
decision to award the contract, which would include having no professional contact
with the decision-makers, you might have dinner with your friend, but it might be
safer to postpone the dinner until after the contract has been awarded.

Scenario 12
You are a planner for a city planning department and you have an old friend who
runs a planning consulting firm in the same city. Your friend submits a competitive
proposal to work as a consultant for your department to you on Friday and while in
your office, asks you to be her guest for dinner at a very fancy restaurant on
Saturday evening. What might you do if you actually might have some influence in
awarding the contract?

Discussion 12
If it is possible that you might influence the decision about awarding the contract,
avoid the potential conflict of interest (Ethical Principles 2 and 3; Rules of Conduct 5,
8, 19). Avoid the conflict by telling your friend that you cannot meet with her
socially until after the contract has been awarded, even if the contract will not be
discussed during dinner.

Scenario 13
A site application is complete and is about to go before the planning commission. As
a member of the planning staff, you believe there is the appearance of a conflict of
interest for a planning commissioner who owns property near the proposed site and
stands to benefit from the increase in property value that the new development is
projected to generate. What might you do?

Discussion 13
First, consider what should already have happened before the application was about
to go before the planning commission. Clearly, you should know about any laws in
your state or jurisdiction that apply to such a situation and should follow the law.

The potential conflict should have been identified well before this. After noticing the
conflict, based on office protocol, it must be decided who will approach (or confront)
the commissioner about the conflict of interest. If your boss is unwilling to explain
the conflict of interest, you must decide how you will handle this. You might ask the
APA Ethics Officer for informal advice on what you should do (Procedure 2).
Whoever brings the conflict to the attention of the commissioner should recommend
that the commissioner recuse himself or herself from the planning commission
meeting.

Suppose the potential conflict only became apparent at the time of the meeting. At
that point in time, you should explain the problem to the planning director. Then,
the planning director and the commissioner might consult privately and decide what
to do; if the law is clear, obviously the decision must be to follow the law. If the
decision is made that the commissioner should recuse himself or herself from the
decision-making process, then the commissioner should leave the room. Recusing
oneself means more than just sitting there quietly. In addition, the commissioner
must not engage in future discussions with the board or planning staff about the
application (Ethical Principle 2).

Suppose the law on what constitutes a conflict of interests is not clear or does not
exist and suppose that the commissioner says that this is silly and that there is no
conflict of interest. Then you might go to the jurisdictional attorney for guidance. If
the commissioner continues to participate in the process, you should clearly state the
conflict in your report (Rule of Conduct 19).

Scenario 14
A site application is complete and is about to go before the planning commission.
You have a conflict of interest because you personally own property near the
proposed site and stand to benefit from the increase in property value that the new
development is projected to generate. If you are the only planner in the community
what might you do?

Discussion 14
You are definitely conflicted in this case. So first issue is to recognize this financial
conflict of interest and disclose it. (Rule of Conduct 6) You have 2 options.

One option is to get approval of your supervisor with full written disclosure as to your
personal interest. You may get consent in writing to move forward and complete the
review.

The second option is to hire an independent consultant to review the situation. It is

good policy for a planning department to pre-qualify consultants for such situations
so that the matter can be expeditiously turned over. This may also be a good route
to take if the applicant is a member of the city council and has hiring authority over
the planner.

Scenario 15
The owner of the local NFL football team tells the mayor through the press that he
will relocate his team unless the city builds a new stadium and practice field. The
mayor wants the team to stay because his campaign platform included a promise to
keep the team in the community. He asks you, the planning director, to evaluate the
costs and benefits of building a new stadium. The planning staff does the analysis
and demonstrates that large-scale public investment in a new stadium makes no
economic sense and may lead to bankruptcy. What might you do?

Discussion 15
As with any analysis, verify the facts and assumptions made in the analysis and be
sure that all appropriate procedures were used. Write the report accurately despite
the fact that it may be embarrassing to the mayor. However, before presenting the
report publicly, as with any report and because you are sensitive to the mayor’s
dilemma, it would be best to first to reveal its contents to the mayor.

Should the situation be politically charged, you might recommend having a

consultant revisit the analysis and present the findings to the mayor. The mayor
may be more willing to consider alternatives when they are presented by a paid,
independent, expert consultant rather than by staff (Ethical Principle 2)

Suppose the mayor, upon learning about your report, refuses to make it public and
makes plans to go ahead with the construction of a new stadium. Then, it may be
time to resign. Or, it may be time to release the information to the media because of
your responsibility to the public regarding the long-range consequences of actions,
which may obviously put your job in jeopardy (Ethical Principle 1; Rule of Conduct 7)

Suppose the mayor pressures you to alter your findings and report favorably on the
potential impacts of the stadium. Then you might engage in a frank discussion with
the mayor and suggest some alternatives. The mayor may, for example, discard the
idea in favor of a proposal to conduct significant renovations to the existing facility.

Suppose you see that the information about how bad the new stadium might be for
the community as a whole as well as information about the pressure being applied by
the mayor might be helpful in preventing the mayor from winning reelection. And
suppose you do not personally want to see this mayor reelected. As a planning
director, you may NOT use the information to your personal advantage, and, for
example, go directly to the press with the results of the analysis (Rule of Conduct 7)

Suppose you are indifferent as to the mayor’s election but believe that this course of
action will bankrupt the community. To prevent a substantial injury to the public, you
could still go to the press after verifying all facts and seeking reconsideration of the
matter

Scenario 16
You are responsible for recommending contracts to the city council. Your immediate
supervisor has asked you to prepare a recommendation for a large contract for an
individual you know is a good friend of your supervisor. After reviewing the contract,
you conclude that the contract amount is not commensurate with the scope of work
provided. You believe the contract is a waste of taxpayer dollars if it were to be
granted. What might you do first?

Discussion 16
The first thing to do might be to carefully review the data and procedures used in the
analysis for accuracy and completeness (Ethical Principle 1). You should document
everything during this entire process such as the date and nature of your
supervisor’s request and the sources of data used to draw the conclusion that the
consultant’s price is too high. Then write your report and submit it to your
supervisor.

Scenario 17
You are responsible for recommending contracts to the city council. Your immediate
supervisor has asked you to prepare a recommendation for a large contract for an
individual you know is a good friend of your supervisor. After reviewing the contract,
you conclude that the contract amount is not commensurate with the scope of work
provided. You believe the contract is a waste of taxpayer dollars if it were to be
granted. What might you do if your supervisor pressures you for a favorable
recommendation?

Discussion 17
If you have any doubt about your conclusion, you might present the situation to a
mentor or to a planner who is not involved in the situation (in another jurisdiction,
for example) to discuss it. (Rule of Conduct 18)

Planners are responsible to their employers; you might go to your supervisor with
clear information on which your analysis was based, such as prices asked by other
consultants for similar work, and point out your concerns. Your supervisor may
appreciate your honesty and professionalism and accept your recommendation.

Should you be required to falsify your recommendation, other options might be to

“blow the whistle” or to go to an attorney. If supervisor is member of AICP, file an
ethics charge against your supervisor (Procedure 5) or ask for an advisory ruling
about your own conduct (Procedure 3)

Scenario 18
You work as a city planner in Town X. You recently accepted additional planning
employment in Town Y, which is about 15 miles away and in the next county. Towns
X and Y are similar in many respects.

As a consultant for Town Y, you recommend a 50-foot buffer around a lake to protect
water quality. Town Y is about to take action on this recommendation.

However, in town X there are no buffer regulations and substantial residential

development has been proposed to include construction to within 10 feet of a lake.
The mayor and the council are very supportive of the proposed development, but a
lake conservation group is demanding a buffer of at least 50-feet around the lake.
What might you do?
Discussion 18
First, understand that the moonlighting should have been clearly explained to the
primary and secondary employers and approved in writing (Rule of Conduct 4). Full
written disclosure to both towns prior to accepting work in Town Y should have said
that there might be conflict. Planners should try to foresee consequences, and this
situation is a logical consequence of working in two very similar communities.

Even with full written disclosure before beginning to work for Town Y, as soon as the
potential for conflict became apparent, you should have furnished a second written
disclosure to both employers and received written permission to proceed (Rules of
Conduct 3, 4). However, a planner should not advocate for two opposing positions
simultaneously. (Rule of Conduct 3) So unless there is a very real difference
between the two situations, such as a different geologic structure of the lakes, you
should remove yourself from doing one job or the other. To continue in both
positions and allow the conflicting recommendations to proceed will likely diminish
your reputation and effectiveness in both communities (Ethical Principles 2, 3).

Scenario 19
The local YMCA is proposing to build a swimming pool next to their existing facility in
your medium-sized town. You are a planner and must review the development
proposal. The wife of one of the senior planners is the YMCA director. The husband
of the planning director is the Chair of the Board of Directors for the YMCA.
Everybody on the YMCA board is a family friend to both the senior planner and the
planning director. What might you do?

Discussion 19
You have a job to do, and you are not tainted with the conflict of interest. It is
important to be as open and transparent in review of the proposal as you would be
with any other proposal. You are fortunate in that, according to the scenario, you
have not been asked to favor the proposal. Proceed with your analysis and make a
recommendation on the proposal as usual. You might disclose the potential conflicts
that do exist in your report. You might have your work reviewed by an outside
consultant rather than by the planning director. You might ask that all those
personally involved in the situation recuse themselves from making the final decision
about the proposal.

Your only conflict might be in displeasing your boss. If you are going to shade the
results in order to please your boss, then you have a problem.

Scenario 20
A pro-development city manager tells you, the planner, that you must provide
findings to support a shift in a natural resources boundary in order to accommodate
a particular development. What might you do?

Discussion 20
First, you should clarify all relevant policies and regulations. Suppose the relevant
policies are in conflict or are difficult to interpret. You might ask the planning
director the city attorney for assistance in defining the situation.

Second, determine how the boundary was established and study how it might be
shifted.
Suppose the data that are available for the analysis are unreliable, inconsistent, or
out-of-date. You might ask the planning director, another planner, or another source
(such as the state GIS library) for assistance in obtaining better data. You might
verify the accuracy of the data you collect by learning how it was developed and how
recently it was developed because sometimes data are in error and natural
conditions do change over time (Ethical Principle 1)

Scenario 21
A pro-development city manager tells you, the planner, that you must provide
findings to support a shift in a natural resources boundary in order to accommodate
a particular development. What might you do if your findings do not support the
shift but there is pressure from the city manager to provide findings that are
contrary to your findings?

Discussion 21
With data on the regulations as well as on the potential long-term consequences of
not complying with the regulations, go to the city manager to explain why you
cannot approve the project or alter the facts. This information may be sufficient to
resolve the situation.

You might need to look for creative solutions that will allow for a modified project to
move forward and bring these to the city manager. For example, alter the location
of development and use the area near the natural resource as an open space
amenity.

You may need to remove yourself from the situation and refer it to your director.

Suppose the city manager goes ahead and approves the project in spite of your
findings. Before blowing the whistle, be sure to consult with other planners and
other qualified professionals including, if appropriate, the city attorney, to exhaust
efforts for reconsideration of the matter. If you should choose to blow the whistle,
understand that this may have negative consequences, and so be prepared.
Accepting such consequences will be more beneficial to you than behaving
unethically.

It is very important throughout this process to document everything. Be sure to

keep accurate records showing dates, places and content of any conversations,
messages and meetings relative to the issue.

Remember that a planner must accept the decision of employers, unless the decision
is illegal or unethical. Remember that a planner’s first obligation is to the public
interest, and a development that will have negative environmental consequences is
not in the public interest, but a development that will create jobs may be in the
public interest (Ethical Principle 2)

Scenario 22
An oil company is interested in building a refinery on several thousand acres of
waterfront property that the company owns. The general plan classifies this area as
recreational and residential. The oil company files a re-zoning application to change
this area to a heavy industrial classification.
The planning director opposes the rezoning amendment stating that the scenic area
is a valuable natural resource. Assume that the planning agency acted legally in all
respects (proper notice, etc.). However, the county commissioners approve the
amendment.

A group of residents who live near the proposed refinery site take the case to court
and subpoena the planning director to testify. The planning director provides some
information to the citizens' group as they prepare their case and also testifies
truthfully in court about the value of the property to the community.
Under the AICP Code of Ethics, all the following are true about the behavior of the
planning director EXCEPT:
A. The director was acting in an ethically responsible manner in trying to protect
the integrity of the natural environment.
B. The director should not have testified in court. The Code of Ethics requires
planners to accept the decisions of their employers.
C. The director served the public interest by providing information to citizens
preparing their case.
D. The director exhibited a concern for the long-range consequences of the
proposed land use changes.

Discussion 22
Correct answer: B (See Ethical Principle 1, Rules of Conduct 1 and 25.) Members of
AICP must comply with the law.

Scenario 23
Each of the following may constitute a conflict of interest for a public planner under
the AICP Code of Ethics EXCEPT:
A. Accepting a gift from a local building firm.
B. Working for a developer who has an action before the Planning Board.
C. Applying for a Health Department permit to operate a stall at the Farmers’
Market.
D. Processing a rezoning application for property the public planner owns.

Discussion 23
Correct answer: C

Scenario 24
A private sector planner is preparing a site plan. He intends to secure local
government approval for his client's development project since it could lead to
additional work for him in the subsequent phases of the project. According to the
AICP Code of Ethics:
A. This constitutes a conflict of interest
B. There is no conflict of interest in this case.
C. The Code has no provision for conflict of interest.
D. There is a conflict of interest only if the planner holds a law degree.

Discussion 24
Correct answer: B Note that this definitely does not suggest that a private sector
planner need not comply with the Code of Ethics. (See introduction to AICP Code of
Ethics and Professional Conduct.) All members of the AICP must abide by the
provisions of the Code.
Scenario 25
You are the planning director in a small town. Your husband runs the local country
club and is applying for construction of a new swimming pool. This application will
be reviewed by the planning commission for approval. What will you do?
A. Invite the planning commission to tour the country club to see exactly
where the pool will be built.
B. Ask your husband to offer complimentary memberships to all
commissioners.
C. Inform the commission about your connection to the situation and remove
yourself from the review process.
D. Write an extensive staff report about the benefits of the pool for the
community.

Discussion 25
Correct answer: C (See Rule of Conduct 6.) Remove yourself from the process
completely so that you do not in any way influence the members of your staff or the
consultants who might review the application.

Scenario 26
You are the planning director in a small town. Your husband runs the local country
club and is applying for construction of a new swimming pool. This application will
be reviewed by the planning commission for approval. This situation clearly:
A. Constitutes a conflict of interest according to the AICP Code of Ethics.
B. Happens every time an application for a swimming pool comes before the
planning commission.
C. May lead to your loss of employment.
D. Does not lead to any ethical conflicts.

Discussion 26
Correct answer: A (See Ethical Principle 2 and Rules of Conduct 6 and 19.) When a
decision is presented publicly, you might want to note the situation and to explain
how the potential conflict of interest was addressed.

Scenario 27
You are the planning director in a small town. Your husband runs the local country
club and is applying for construction of a new swimming pool. This application will
be reviewed by the planning commission for approval. Often, planners who are
faced with this type of dilemma:
A. File for divorce
B. File for bankruptcy
C. Hire a consultant
D. Quit their jobs

Discussion 27
Correct answer: C Note that questions on the exam are not likely to be this easy.

Scenario 28
Which of the principles of the AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct are
applicable to instances of sexual harassment?
I) A planner must not commit a deliberately wrongful act, which reflects adversely
on the planner's professional fitness.
II) A planner must respect the rights of others and, must not improperly discriminate
against persons.
III) A planner must have special concern for the long-range consequences of present
action.
A. I and II
B. I, II, and III
C. I and III
D. II and III

Discussion 28
Correct answer: A (See Ethical Principles 1, 3; Rule of Conduct 20.) Having special
concern for the long-range consequences of present actions per Ethical Principle 1
refers to the consequences of planning decisions, not to individual behavior.