Attorney Anthony Galluccio Warns of Hidden Costs from Poor Community Engagement in Development Projects

Anthony Galluccio, a land use and permitting attorney, is issuing a public alert about the common and avoidable risk of moving forward with projects without understanding community processes. After decades in public service, law, youth coaching, and charity leadership, Galluccio observes that people often rush and decide internally that their project is good for the community, leading to mistrust and setbacks. He emphasizes that the first public meeting should follow months of listening and getting to know neighbors, as starting with mistrust can be irrecoverable. Galluccio notes that some clients resist public process but either learn to listen or face hard lessons, advising developers to treat people as they would want to be treated if a project were in their neighborhood. He cautions against focusing solely on anti-everything activists, pointing out that loud critical voices are part of the process and should not be dismissed as impossible to satisfy, as opposition can be cooled and opponents can become supporters with good intentions and compromise.

This risk is common due to a bunker mentality across industries and communities, where lack of preparation leads to delays, stress, and broken trust. Studies show nearly 60% of project delays stem from poor planning or unclear processes, while more than half of people report avoidable stress linked to last-minute decisions. Research suggests 40% of daily actions are habit-driven, meaning unplanned habits often guide outcomes. Communities that lack public engagement in planning processes experience higher conflict and longer approval timelines, and teams that skip preparation meetings are significantly more likely to miss deadlines. Galluccio remarks that speed feels productive, but getting real buy-in is what actually moves things forward. The common trap to avoid is drinking your own kool-aid, where projects evolve without public interaction or groundwork, leading to months or years to recover good faith in the community. Galluccio asserts that permitting is not fast work but trust-based work, and skipping steps often creates more work later, with community process saving time upfront or costing it later.

A quick self-check can help identify if one is at risk, with questions such as whether community process was skipped before introducing a project, if deadlines control the process rather than benchmarks, or if criticism is seen as a setback rather than an opportunity. Answering yes to three or more indicates likely risk. To address this, Galluccio recommends a simple decision tree: if feeling rushed, refine success as getting feasible entitlements approved on a reasonable timeline; if unclear about outcomes, be fluid in allowing the project to change with community input; if facing resistance, encourage processes that create specific requests and embrace change so the project becomes theirs not yours; and if overwhelmed, remind oneself that permits must be earned, not entitled. He compares the process to a game where winning or losing offers opportunities for improvement, accepting it as a journey that requires endurance. Galluccio calls for comforting the community before they are unnerved, noting that trust is built by showing up consistently and responding to concerns, and enduring challenges to prove worthiness of partnership. For more information on community engagement strategies, visit https://www.galluccioandwatson.com.