Comprehensive plans are tools adopted by government, its agencies, partners, and/or proxies (including task forces, working groups, stakeholder councils, community organizations, civil society partners and the like) to establish the language, goals, and strategies for transforming all aspects of existing social, political, and economic structures and their operations to conform to the United Nations’ 1974 Resolution on Establishing a New International Economic Order (NIEO).

In 1992, the contours of the NIEO were elaborated and specified as Sustainable Development, or Agenda 21, and in 2015, its programmatic vision for the reinvention of society, politics, and the economy was crystallized into 17 Global Goals in the 2030 Agenda. 

The NIEO and its Sustainable Development Goals are the impetus behind myriad change-oriented policy frameworks and have many monikers to appeal to a variety of audiences.  Among the most familiar iterations of the NIEO are “Smart Growth” policy, advocated by academic and non-governmental organizations, the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) “Great Reset” manifesto (“Reset,” for short) and the “Build Back Better” (“BBB”) efforts currently underway by governments across the world.  In order for the NIEO to replace the status quo, it must be established at local, regional, and national levels of government, and it must become the governing rubric for all sectors of human interaction and organization. 

Comprehensive plans are the mechanisms for manifesting the NIEO throughout the various levels of government and society, especially at the level of local government and public services administration.

The following bullet-point list summarizes the essential features of a comprehensive plan.  It is copied from a paradigmatic example of comprehensive planning, the Moving McAlester Forward plan for 2040, developed by Guernsey, Nealon Planning, Butzer Architects and Urbanism, and adopted by the City of McAlester, Oklahoma.  All comprehensive plans – regardless of location or sector – follow this template.

A comprehensive plan:

• provides a common framework for addressing issues pertaining to growth and development

• seeks to strike a balance among the many competing demands on land resources by creating development patterns that are orderly and rational, provides the greatest benefits for individuals and the community as a whole and avoids nuisance conflicts between land uses

• will help the community protect public investments since well-planned, orderly, and phased development patterns are less expensive for a community to provide with public services than low-density, scattered development

• will allow this community to plan development in a way that protects valued resources such as identified environmental features

• provides guidance for shaping the appearance of the community and fosters a sense of place

• promotes economic development

• provides an objective basis to support zoning and other decisions, particularly if legally challenged

–Adapted from definition authored by Gary D. Taylor, Iowa State University[1]

Comprehensive planning is taught in colleges, universities, professional schools and training institutes, and leadership-development organizations.  It is advocated by high-level, well-endowed, and influential think-tanks and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and by proponents of globalization and sustainability in both the public and private sectors.  Although comprehensive planning may be adapted to suit particular circumstances, its overall approach and aims are conspicuously uniform regardless of who promotes it or where it is taught or implemented.  This is because comprehensive planning follows the United Nations’ template for establishing the NIEO.

[1] Moving McAlester Forward Comprehensive Plan 2040. Prepared for John Browne, Mayor of McAlester by Guernsey, Nealon Planning, and Butzer Architects and Urbanism, and adopted September 25, 2019. PDF available here.

The following terms are of particular importance in comprehensive planning documents and are evidence of the Reset template:

Quality of Life / Vibrant City – these phrases indicate that the aim of the plan is to promote the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals through the delivery of publicly-funded services and social interventions (e.g., healthcare, education, workforce development, housing, etc.) that are continuously monitored in order to determine “impact” – the measurable change from a pre-intervention baseline situation to a post-intervention situation. The new economy is based on a shift “from fixed capital to human capital” – in other words, from trading in goods and services to trading in human behavioral outcomes. Therefore, progress toward the SDGs (quantified in an impact report) is analogous to the change in price of a share of stock in a publicly-traded company. The new economic order is based on value-creation through improvements to individual and community quality of life.

Economic Development – this phrase denotes a developed economy that conforms to the new international economic order in being globalized, privatized, and data-driven. At the highest levels, the designers of the new economy are financial industry owners and executives who incentivize public- and private-sector agents to implement it. Economic development policies prioritize targeted industries and sectors and align all resources – natural, physical, social, and human – toward their economic advantage.

Innovative Financing – this phrase signals the shift from public funding (i.e., tax revenues, which are subject to public oversight) to private investments or a mix of public and private contributions. Green Bonds and infrastructure bonds are common examples. Most innovative financing mechanisms (public debts) are secured on the basis of projections of future-growth or future-savings (cost offsets). The risk of under-performing investments is shouldered by the public, while the reward of well-performing investments belongs to the private sector.

Fiscal Responsibility – an approach to “rational, well-designed” planning that prioritizes the “best use” or “targeted use” of financial resources to develop or maintain existing assets such as infrastructure and land, according to future projections of economic growth and operational efficiency. In plain terms, this means that comprehensive planners have a vision for a specific development scenario (compact, high-density, mixed-use developments clustered around shared transportation hubs), and they use fiscal policy to control the supply of infrastructure (e.g., water service lines, roads, other utilities) so that development must occur within the parameters of that vision.

Placemaking / Neighborhood Identity – this is a strategy to create a narrative that governs what people think and how they feel about a particular place. It is designed to create pockets of special identity through an array of branding, public art and cultural offerings, historic preservation, micro-localization, design and building codes, and other mechanisms to “foster a sense of place” and create “unique destinations” and “eco-tourism” as drivers of employment. Moreover, these strategies encourage residents to prefer to stay-in-place rather than cross district lines and provide a justification for restrictions on activities and enterprise that fails to conform to the established vision. Paradoxically, the implementation of Universal Design Principles, Green Building Standards, and Inclusive Cultural Experiences factor heavily into placemaking strategies.

Connectivity – this term designates the imposition of a systems-wide approach to measuring and managing all resources, especially transportation/mobility options and the exchange of information through communications technologies. Broadband infrastructure, street design, supply chains, and social and cultural opportunities are key areas of introducing connectivity into the larger “ecosystem” of “human settlements” and balancing 1) economic growth with environmental protection, and 2) individual interests with the “needs of the community.”

Here is a link to a presentation I gave on comprehensive planning and smart cities:

The slide deck and supporting documents are available here:

In August, I posted a draft of collected terms associated with the Reset to Facebook. Many people suggested additions to that collection, and I thought of several of my own, which I’ve incorporated here, in Draft 2.0. This list – loosely organized by topic – still doesn’t include many tech-related terms.

Here is a link to the Word file:


Learn to spot the jargon. They use the SAME WORDS for EVERY PROJECT. You don’t even need to know what they mean. If the buzzwords are there, it’s a 4IR/NWO SCAM.

Agenda 21 buzzwords. Just a few…


Environmental Protection, Conservation, Preservation, Preserving Resources into the Future, for Future Generations, for All; Climate Risk is Business Risk, Preserve the unique, rural, natural character/way of life, Ecosystems, Biodiversity, Nature Conservancies, Land Trusts, Green Spaces, Privately-Operated Public Open Spaces (POPOS), Active/Healthy Lifestyles (w/ Parks and Recreation), Floodplains, Watersheds, Environmentally-sensitive areas, Riparian Buffers, Regenerative/Organic Agriculture, Regional Trusts/Compacts/Agreements, Zero-Emissions/Waste, Carbon Neutral, Low-Carbon, Alternative Energy/Fuels, Active Transportation (Walkable, Bicycle-Friendly, Trails, etc.), Scope 3 Emissions, Wildlife/Nature Corridors,

Change-Agents, Thought-Leaders, Social Entrepreneurs, Community Leaders/Partners, Task Force, Focus Groups, Listening Sessions, Community-engagement surveys, Leadership, Capacity-building, Talent-building, Community Conveners, Backbone Organizations, Facilitators, Global Leaders/Shapers, Futurists, Representatives from Business and Industry, Vulnerable and Underserved Populations, Visionary Leadership, Bold Leadership, Innovative Thinkers, Collective Impact Strategies, Disruption, Shocks, Headwinds, Tailwinds, “a Growing demand for …,” Council of Governments, Federal Grants, Grantmakers, Founders, Start-ups

New Economy, Circular Economy, Economy for the 21st Century, Economy of True Value, Regenerative Capitalism, Stakeholder Capitalism, Multicultural Capitalism, Inclusive Capitalism, Reimagined Capitalism, Economy that works for all, Circular Economy, Sharing Economy, Socially-Responsible Investing, Corporate Responsibility, ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance), Build Back Better, Public Benefit Corporations (B-Corps), Prosperity for all, “People, Planet, Prosperity,” Governance, Global Value Chains, Shared Value,

Social Impact Finance, “Big Bets” (investments made to promote behavioral outcomes), Gaps (to be filled by social service delivery), Opportunities (for Impact Investing), “Doing Well by Doing Good,” Faith-based investing, Values-based investing, Responsible investing, Triple Bottom Line, Pursue Value rather than Profits, Social Returns, Future-cost Offsets, Maximize Returns on Investments, Makes Good Business Sense, Accelerate the Return on/Transformation of _, Human/People-Centered, People-first, Community-first, Long-termism, Long-term perspective, Social Value, Solutions to “Pressing Problems,”


Equity/equitable, Access for all (vs. lacking access, vs. barriers to )/Accessibility, Inclusive/Inclusionary, for all, “No one left behind,” Serves all, Diversity, Affordability (Housing, Transportation, etc.), Vibrant, Livable/livability, Thriving, Strong, Resilient, Striving, Innovative/Innovation, Transformational, Reimagined, Imagine/Imagination, Engaged/engagement, Connectivity/connected, Integrated approaches, Alignment, Collaborative, Cooperative, Consensus-based, Community-driven/led, Quality of Life for all, Human Rights, Trust/Trusted, Verified/verifiable, Accountability/Accountable, Transparent/Transparency, Person-centered/Human-centered (i.e. based on surveillance data of human behavior), Whole-Person Approach, Whole-of-Government Approach, Industry Transformation, Zero-Waste, Protected/Verified, Data-driven, Evidence-based, Results-oriented, Outcomes-based, What Works, Based on Studies/Data, Smart design, Solutions-oriented, Shared Objectives, Bipartisan/non-partisan/pragmatic, Responsive, Adaptability/adaptable, Flexibility/flexible, Personalized, Corporate Purpose, Purpose-driven, Power of Purpose, Leverage Corporate Purpose, Shared Prosperity, Urban Wealth Funds, Culture of Safety/Caring/Engagement, etc. Empathetic leaders, Servant-leaders, Service-oriented, Mission-driven, Mission-oriented, Forward-thinking, Future-oriented, Future-proofed, Risk-reduction (vs. “a nation at risk,” etc.), Preventative approach, Wellness, Safety/security, a New Social Contract, America’s Promise, Hope, Joy, Love, Grit, Empathy, Kindness, Human Capital, 21st Century Global Citizens

Welcoming/Vibrant/Attractive destinations (vs. “flyover zones”), Local Character, Place-based development/investing, Eco-Tourism, Neighborhood identity, Signage, Gateways, and Wayfinding, World-class _ (city, talent, amenities, etc.), Globally-competitive, Comprehensive/systemic/ecosystem approach, Well-planned communities,

Measuring, Monitoring, Reporting, Digitalization, Data-collection, Real-time data, Data Sharing Agreements, Seamless/Frictionless/Integrated Systems, Automate Cognitive Processes, Mesh Networks, Cognitive Networks, “Scale the Network,” Intelligent Management Systems, Intelligent Cities, Wider Systems Change, Networked Solutions, Internet of Things (IoT), Predictive Analytics, Broadband Access, Responsive Systems, Agile Networks, Cloud Computing,

Hazard Mitigation and Early-warning systems, Code enforcement, Public safety, Public health, __ Indicators (Equality, Resiliency, etc.), Historical preservation, Landmark designations, Culturally-significant places,

Urban Design Principles, Green/Eco-certifications, Environmental Impact Statements, Reduce Pollution, Upzoning, Downzoning, Flexible Use, Mixed-Use, High-Density Development, Affordable Housing, Pop-up Businesses, Start-ups, Co-working hubs, Accelerators, Innovation/Tech Labs, Fab Labs. One-Stop Shops, Special Districts (Tax Increment Finance Zones, Education Districts, Opportunity/Choice/Promise Zones, etc.), Special Economic Zones, Digital Economic Zones, Civic Spaces, Public Commons, 15-minute cities, Efficiency credits, Cap and Trade, Green Bonds, Muni Bonds, Land-Value Capture,

Infrastructure upgrades, Infrastructure Based on Technology, Deployment of (Technology, Capital, etc), Coherent Deployment, “Send a clear signal to…,” Holistic Approach, End-to-End Analysis, Vulnerability Risk Assessments, Dashboards, Leader Boards, Gamification, Tokenization, Key Performance Indicators, Optimize, Performance/Efficiency/Productivity, Setting Clear Targets, Shared Objectives, Meet the needs of present and future generations,

Last-mile solutions, On-demand service delivery, “People able to live, work, play within the city, using its resources,” Age-/Gender-Responsive policy, Decade of Action, “Improve the lives of …,” Federal Grants, Challenge Grants, Hackathons,

Light rail, Mobility solutions, Scooters, Electric Vehicles, Multi-modal Transport Systems, Micro-mobility, Pedestrian/Bicycle-Friendly, Clustered Development around Transport Hubs, Traffic calming, Reduce Congestion, Reduce Commute Time, Reduce Travel Distances, “all needs met within a short walk or bike ride,” Elimination of parking minimums, Back-in parking, Car-free/car-optional neighborhoods, Pay-per-mile road user charges, Transit-Oriented Development, Zoning changes (especially to prioritize mixed-use), Complete Neighborhoods,

Public-Private Partnerships (P3s), Stakeholder Councils, Task Forces, _ Authorities (Port, Industrial, Economic Development, etc.), Innovative Finance, Community Foundations, Reinventing/Reimagining Government/Democracy, Arrangements to support a population-based/productivity-focused approach, Engagement with KEY Stakeholders

Comprehensive plans for geographic areas, sectoral innovation (e.g. mobility or economic development, etc.), Frameworks, Playbooks, Roadmaps, Toolkits, Pathways, Pipelines, Regional approaches, Revitalization, Redevelopment, Sustainable Communities Strategies, HUD Regional Planning Grants, Community Development Block Grants, Asset Based Community Development, New Market Tax Credits, Partnership for Sustainable Communities (HUD, EPA, DOT), Strong Neighborhoods, Co-Housing, Workforce Innovation and Development, People Management/Development Strategies, Office of Community Experiences, School-to-Work, Cradle-to-Career, P20 Pipelines, Talent Pipelines, Project-based design, Wraparound Services

Sanctuary Cities, Migration, Immersion Programs, Social Justice, Criminal Justice Reform, Financial Literacy Programs, Digital Citizenship, Civic Education, Common Core, STEM, STEAM, Direct Instruction, Personalized Learning, Life-Long Learning, School Vouchers, School Choice, Education Savings Accounts, Talent Pipelines, Mentoring Programs, Seed Funds, New Frugality, Universal Basic Income (UBI), Income-Sharing Agreements, Transitional services, Next-Generation _ (service delivery, design, etc.), Ambassador programs, Environmental justice, Circular/Sharing/Gig Economy,

Combatting Intergenerational Poverty/Drivers of inequality, Addressing Trauma/Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACES), Racial Justice, Structural Racism, Promoting Mental Health, Addressing Health Disparities/ Social Determinants of Health, Population Health

Beware of dark ‘inclusive’ spirituality masquerading as light. Transformative change-making is an arm of the 4IR NWO, based on Communitarian social theory (not Sacred Scripture). Period. The appeal to people of faith to create ‘positive impact’ in their communities is a perversion of the virtue of Christian charity (and its analogues in other faith-traditions). Charity is grounded in love and is a free gift given to another. This New Narrative is based on impact, outcomes, and practical consequentialist behavioral science – in addition to military psychological research and eugenicist theory. The goal with this NWO spirituality is to create total, submissive conformity and to prepare us for singularity.

I found the Fetzer Institute through its affiliation with the Bloomberg-funded Aspen Institute. Here is a link to its very disturbing whitepaper on the social entreprenuership model of spiritual narrative creation.

Fetzer’s Board is notable for its many ties to social impact investing and education programming organizations. Dan Cardinali is also on the Board of Independent Sector with representatives from Bridgespan Group and other titans of the Great Reset.


There is A LOT to learn from these organizations’ websites, especially in regard to the transfer of govermental responsibilities to private corporations. See, e.g., this post about a Biden executive order to promote public-private partnerships.

“The attached document, prepared in deep consultation with legal expertise from Holland & Knight, suggests a “first year” agenda that the Biden Administration might pursue to build an unprecedented partnership and strengthen the nonprofit sector so that, together, the federal government and the nonprofit sector might best strengthen civil society and ensure that all people living in the U.S. can thrive. It also builds on the collective wisdom and learnings from multiple administrations about how best to build this relationship.”

When billionnaire philanthropists are partnering with government and social entrepreneuers, the goal is social engineering for financial gain – at the expense of freedom, individuality, and the Truth that is the substance of genuine faith.