Until the early 1980s, the authority to make, approve and implement plans in Turkey was in the hands of central institutions.However, parallel to the increase in the effectiveness of neoliberal policies after 1980, the planning system was reorganized, andlocal governments were given the authority to plan, approve and implement plans by Law No. 3194. The arguments thatdecentralization of powers in planning will lead to democratization by increasing the efficiency of the local created a greatexpectation in the public and professional circles at the beginning. However, the real estate-oriented urban growth model ofneoliberal policies, clientalism and political populism, which are among the most important phenomena of the Turkey’surbanization, and the lack of financial and technical powers of municipalities to use planning powers have revealed a differentimage away from these expectations. Practices contrary to the principles of urbanism and public interest have become widespreadin municipalities. This study focuses on the roles of the planner in the planning processes experienced in the municipalities ofTurkey, the relations the planner established with other actors and the problem areas he encountered. It aims to analyze theplanning experiences of city planners working in municipalities, one of the most important institutions of urban planning.This article is set as a part of a large research project funded by the MSGSÜ Scientific Research Project, which aims toanalyze the plan experiences of public sector planners. The project focuses on the working conditions of planners working inmunicipalities, the techniques they use in the planning process and the problems they encounter. The field study started withthe examination of the Professional Audit Practice data for all the works carried out in Turkey between 2003 and 2018. In thesecond stage, quantitative data on the total city planners working in municipalities in Turkey were collected, and the reports ofthe Chamber of Urban Planners for planners working in the public sector were examined. In the third stage, an online surveywas conducted for planners working in municipalities in Turkey. According to the study of the Ministry of Environment andUrbanization in 2016, there are a total of 1528 city planners working in municipalities. 15% of city planners (233 cityplanners) working in municipalities have been reached. In the following stage, 8 in-depth interviews were conducted withexperienced planners working in the municipality.Urban planners in Turkey graduate with a professional formation that includes the preparation of holistic and fragmentedplans for different spatial scales, scientific analyzes in these processes, basic values and qualifications related to urbanismprinciples and decision-making according to the public interest. However, when planners start working in municipalities, theyface dilemmas between their professional values and the democratic legitimacy of political decision makers. According to theresearch, the relations between politics and capital, politics and citizens, and even between politics and public institutions aredeterminative in the planning process in municipalities. With the neoliberal urbanization policies implemented for the last fortyyears, urban rents have become the most important area of accumulation, and all social segments, especially large capitalgroups, have sought to get a share from the rent created on the land. Especially after 2000, with the construction sector beingseen as the engine of the economy, the pressure on the cities increased more. As a result of all these pressures, the spatialplanning system has become scattered with fragmented planning approaches. Throughout the period, the most common workdone by planners in municipalities was fragmented plans such as plan changes and additional development plans.Planners working in the municipality are expected to evaluate or prepare proposals for plan changes and other fragmentaryplans, most of which are rent-oriented, and holistic plans for cities are carried out by self-employed planning offices. Theinfluence of the planner is very limited at the point of making decisions regarding planning according to the planners working inthe municipalities. Decisions on plans are made with rent-focused rather than technical and scientific analysis, and the rentrelations are determined by patronage or political favoritism developed between politics and capital, or between politics andcitizens. The fact that the municipalities are open to the pressure of the capital and local people, the increase of decisiveness ofpolitics and rent on planning, the rent-oriented approach is dominant instead of the public benefit, the continuity of the plans dueto the changing administrations, the increase of chaos in terms of scale and authority in planning creates great pressure