Although planning theory is regarded as an analysis of the relationship of knowledge to action by many theories, a view from the poor and minority strata of this society suggests a different alternative--that planning theory is an analysis of the relationship of "knowledge" to inaction, particularly with regard to the continuation of deteriorating conditions in inner cities. This is because the body of thought referred to as "Planning Theory" has not provided planners or politicians with any illuminating tools with which to serve the interest of urban poor and minority groups. The proposed models of societal guidance and change may describe existing conditions, but they describe them inadequately to allow required changes to be made in the system. It is the thesis of this article that this inadequate description stems from three basic conceptual problems that are not addressed in the literature. These problems are: (1) the failure to provide theories which are both rigorous and relevant to the urban experience and the means for their implementation; (2) an incomplete analysis of the urban political and economic milieux; and (3) the confused role of the planner in this setting. This article attempts to explain them as a first step in the future development of a more workable "Urban Planning Theory". (Author/JM)