The latest update of the plan to rezone Bangkok has clearly put governor Chadchart Sittipunt in an uncomfortable position.
Usually as cool as cucumber, he apologised last week for rebuffing critics who blasted the proposal for favouring the interests of real estate developers over those of the common folk.
"Please stop using rhetoric to sow hate in society," Mr Chadchart posted earlier on his Facebook account.
He then defended the fourth revision of City Hall's plan for the city as a "complex issue" drawn up by experts.
The city zoning plan is indeed complex as it involves laws, land use and land development policies. However, regardless of how intricate the content is, only genuine public participation will engage community residents, create a better understanding of the plan, and result in a more informed decision being made.
Indeed, in a real democratic society, the citizenry would get a say in designing such a development plan early on in the process.
That is not the case when speaking of the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), however, or any administration in the country, for that matter.
For the past two decades, the BMA has used a top-down policy in drafting its city zoning plan. Like many development projects, the BMA hired a consultant firm and then relied on experts in academic town planning from Chulalongkorn University to draft the latest version.
Yet this has drawn sharp criticism since its first public hearing was scheduled in late December. Some residents were reportedly shocked upon learning their communities and properties are among 148 sois that will be subjected to a road enlargement policy. In other words, these roads are slated to be widened to more than 10 metres.
City Hall claims this will grant communities better access to mass transit systems and result in improved public spaces and pavements.
Critics say the policy could also serve as a pretext for real estate developers to build more high-rise condominiums in local communities. Under the current laws, they are forbidden from constructing buildings higher than eight stories if the road is narrower than 10m.
At the latest public hearing on Jan 6, more residents resisted the plan, and several questioned why they had not been informed or consulted about it earlier. The BMA said it would extend the period during which the hearings are held until the end of next month.
But that is far from enough. The fears of residents reflect the failure of the BMA to engage local people in land use policy.
The people don't want to hear elected politicians and officials telling them to stop worrying. Residents need to be informed and consulted about what lies ahead.
Lest we forget, the Town Planning Act 2019 -- the first time this law has been updated in 44 years -- enshrines a community's right to be informed and participate in such development in a meaningful way.
Section 9 requires the administration to set up education campaigns, public hearings and consultations for affected communities.
Mr Chadchart should make the process more inclusive, and the BMA should ask community residents about their needs.
Both should do better than act like just another top-down provincial bureaucracy.