Over the past 30 years that I have been involved in civic affairs, I have watched plans and proposals come and go. In 1975-76 I personally collected transportation planning documents from, what I believed to be, every available source. Even limiting my search to those affecting the San Fernando Valley, I was still able to harvest about four shelves full of planning pulp. That was 25 years ago, and we’re still having trouble getting anything off the drawing board. In the bureaucratic world, this is exactly what is supposed to happen lots of planning, but no action. This is partly because nobody can be held accountable unless planning is implemented. We’ll never know if it was a good plan or a bad plan. But try building something, like the Valley Circle-U.S. 101 interchange in Calabasas, and we find out soon enough what bad planning really looks like. As president of the L.A. City Planning Commission, I presided over the adoption of the city’s new General Plan in the mid-1990s. At that time, I criticized the lack of sufficient transportation infrastructure to support the plan. Recently, homeowners were successful in a valiant lawsuit on that very point. The solution? Something called a “Statement of Overriding Considerations.” In plain English this means we recognize the problem but we aren’t going to fix it. These Statements are available under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) for individual projects, but it is hard to imagine them being used as justification to correct the faults of an entire General Plan. Clearly, what affects the Los Angeles portion of the Valley also impacts L.A.’s neighboring jurisdictions. But past regional planning in the San Fernando Valley has not included our cities of Burbank, Calabasas, Glendale, San Fernando or Hidden Hills. Nor has it included the many unincorporated areas of Los Angeles and Ventura counties such as Bell Canyon, Chatsworth Lake and portions of Sylmar and Universal City. Jurisdictional lines have always been barriers to holistic planning. At times, it can take more than an hour to drive from Woodland Hills to Glendale. Yet, transportation planners have chosen to focus on getting people from North Hollywood to downtown Los Angeles at a capital cost of $300 million-plus per mile, and do little or nothing about intra-valley transit. Some would argue that even the proposed at-grade busway falls short of a real east-west solution for the 101 Corridor. Twenty-five percent of the residents of Ventura County are cross-county commuters. This would help explain the overload on the Valley portion of Ventura and 118 Freeways. Little or no consideration has been given to Ventura County when making local planning decisions in L.A. and the Valley. Transportation is only one element of a planning/visioning process, albeit an important one. The same types of issues can be raised in other areas, such as housing, resources, environment, recreation and even governance in general. This is not to criticize our planners since they are only executing policies established by the officials we ourselves have elected. We need to recognize that this process ultimately is the responsibility of the residents of the San Fernando Valley, and it is critical that we develop consensus and provide our input in a constructive, orderly and meaningful fashion. But what makes Vision2020 different from any other visioning project? What will keep this ambitious plan for the San Fernando Valley from ending up gathering dust like its forerunners? Many excellent ideas and innovations have been lost because there was no orderly process to capture them, to develop them, and ultimately to fold them into the planning process. Many more have been discarded during heated discussions or because of personal rivalries. On the other hand, faulty elements have been adopted where there was poor judgment, inaccurate information or insufficient public input. Boards, commissions and councils are limited in their ability to conduct hearings or to make personal investigations. Not everything can be explained or adequately debated in the few short minutes available for discussion and input at public forums. On top of this is the fact that a large percentage of the population is unable to participate because of calendar conflicts, physical inconvenience, poor communications skills or lack of understanding of the arcane public process. Thus, we lose out on the wisdom of most of the population, and only hear from a dedicated few. The Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, established in response to the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, has been able to act as a convener and mediator of important Valley issues. In this role, and with the support of The James Irvine Foundation and the Pepperdine University School of Public Policy, we are working to bring together the diverse factions of Valley leadership. These range from people who invest in development, to those who fight to protect the environment from those who pack public hearings to those who serve in official public posts. It is a challenge to bring these outspoken leaders and activists together, but it is essential to a credible product. Vision2020 establishes an innovative forum where all can be heard, and ideas and concerns can be discussed proactively. Beginning with the Vision2020 Kickoff conference on Sept. 11, we are engaged in a four-month-long series of live meetings and 24-hour-a-day electronic e-dialogues. Participants are able to voice concerns, make proposals, and share ideas with the group that now numbers over 200. At the Vision2020 Forum to be held in January 2002, participants will reconvene to review the draft consensus plan, to present and debate some of the more controversial proposals, and to move into the implementation phase. This is the biggest difference from prior initiatives. The Alliance is already committed to providing long-term resources and facilitation to several initial implementation workgroups and to establishing programs to make Vision2020 a reality. The Alliance’s record of real tangible achievement is remarkable. In the last few years the organization has helped establish a sense of place with hundreds of “Valley of the Stars” light pole banners. It has defined the Valley in new ways with its Valley Information Project, and has made a commitment to livable communities with it Community Indicators Project and Livable Communities Council. It has served as a catalyst for millions of dollars in transportation improvements now underway, resulting from meetings where the Alliance has “set the table” and convened a broad group of experts, leaders and community stakeholders as participants. Commitment to implementation of the vision is what makes the difference. If you would like to participate or learn more, log on to Vision2020: San Fernando Valley at http://www.economicalliance.org. Bob Scott is the executive vice chair of the Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, member of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission, and director of CivicCenter Group, a Calabasas-based civic consulting and public policy firm.