A proposed state constitutional amendment will cost taxpayers an unprecedented amount of money in election costs, usurp governments’ legislative powers and have a chilling effect on proposed developments across the state.
Amendment 4, basically, requires referendums on any changes to local governments’ growth plans.
The measure is expected to be on the Nov. 2 ballot. It is sponsored by Hometown Democracy, a group that contends that development is running rampant in Florida because politicians are rubber stamping changes to government growth plans.
Indeed, too much development in Florida has caused serious problems, such as loss of wildlife, wetlands and traffic problems. Sometimes local governments, touting the economic benefits of new developments, are too eager to approve projects. Years of urban sprawl has taken its toll on governments’ ability in Florida to provide services in an orderly manner, such as schools, law enforcement and environmental protection.
Nevertheless, any proposed amendment that gives voters carte blanche authority to reject changes in growth plans goes to the extreme, with consequences such as possibly bringing development to a standstill.
Local governments spend hours studying requests for land-use changes because that’s their job. Planning boards and elected officials act on their staffs’ advice after reviewing detailed information on such issues.
Does the average voter have the technical knowledge to determine whether a proposed growth plan change is in the best interest of the community and meets sound planning criteria? Will he or she take the time to analyze every growth issue slated for referendums?
Also at issue is what effect the amendment would have on the number of requests developers seek for changes in the growth plans. If the amendment is approved, some developers may be less likely to make a considerable investment in designing plans for their projects and going through the governmental review process because of fears that such efforts will be all for naught.
Hard to say how many more elections will be held if the amendment is passed, but costs will be astronomical. The last mid-term election in Largo cost $70,000. Thousands of changes to growth plans were approved across Florida last year.
Business interests, of course, are against Amendment 4. The Florida Chamber of Commerce and the Florida Association of Realtors see the proposal devastating to governments’ efforts to improve their tax bases.
Agreed. The appropriate way to control the negative effects of growth in Florida is through the legislative process, either at the state and local level. For instance Pinellas County commissioners recently adopted an ordinance that includes a ban on the sale and application of nitrogen and phosphorous fertilizers from June 1 to Sept. 30. It also regulates landscape and maintenance practices.
Some local governments have spoken out against Amendment 4, such as adopting resolutions against the measure. Others should do likewise.
Amendments to the state constitution should be based on sound principles that are designed to improve the structure of government, not turn it upside down.
