Florida Property Owners VOTE NO ON Ammendment 4

http://jacksonville.com/opinion/editorials/2010-03-19/story/floridas_growth_a_better_way

Florida's growth: A better way

FRIDAY, MAR. 19, 2010

There has to be a better way.

Advocates for smart growth say that Florida's government is so broken that an election needs to be held every time a change to a comprehensive plan is approved by local government.

An amendment to the Florida Constitution, Amendment 4, will be on the ballot this fall.

In Jacksonville last year, 67 land use amendments were processed. Can you imagine 67 separate land use changes on a ballot?

That is like using a machine gun to kill a flea.

It is an extreme reaction to some clear abuses, the overuse of changes in comprehensive plans that have been dominated by insiders, leaving neighbors and the public too much out of the loop.

Something short of elections is needed every time an amendment comes up.

This is where the Florida Legislature should step in to provide a reasonable way for exceptions to be passed - real exceptions.

The proponents of Amendment 4 are banking that the public is so disgusted with unbridled growth that 60 percent of the voters will approve.

Dissatisfaction is probably greater in South Florida, the poster child of bad growth.

Marketing and apple pie

Proponents of the amendment have done a good job making their case, starting with their name - Florida Hometown Democracy.

Who could be against that? They could have called themselves Florida Motherhood and Apple Pie, too.

They make the point that citizens usually are overpowered and outgunned by developers and their skilled lawyers and lobbyists. They know the rules. They often support the politicians sitting in judgment. And they often have contributed to their campaigns.

Supporters say their amendment would not stop growth, that elections would only apply to changes that do not comply with existing land use plans, that there is plenty of room for growth without exceptions.

Only when a developer seeks to build a project that violates current land use plans and local officials approve of it would a local election take effect.

This does not relate to zoning matters, but to the broader changes in comprehensive plans.

This gives voters the final say, supporters say - direct democracy.

More practical

An irony is that this constitutional amendment is a byproduct of an era of rapid, sometimes uncontrolled growth.

That era is gone now and it looks like it won't be returning any time soon. An overreaction to past excesses is unwise.

Opponents say if local government officials are too tied to development interests, then vote them out at the ballot box. But don't fill up elections with land use changes.

The Florida Legislature needs to provide a practical way to reduce the number of land use changes without direct elections and provide for more enforcement of citizen notice and input rules.

One way is to require a supermajority vote of the governing body, say 75 percent, for land use changes. On Jacksonville's City Council of 19 members, that would mean 14 votes rather than 10. On a five-member county commission, it would require four votes.

That is more reasonable, and still would provide for exceptions.

The system is broken.

But don't make the solution worse than the problem.

For more information go to: http://Florida2010.org