DELAND -- Hometown Democracy's Amendment 4 is either Floridians' "final opportunity" to take control of the state's growth or a Trojan horse that would make matters worse.
Voters will have to make the determination in November, but Tuesday night both views got a thorough airing at a forum sponsored by the DeLand Area Chamber of Commerce and Stetson University's political science department.
While it doesn't generate the number of television commercials that some campaigns do, Amendment 4 could "affect us far more" than who winds up in the U.S. Senate, moderator John E. Evans told about 100 people at the school's Lynn Business Center.
The amendment would give voters the final say on changes to local comprehensive plans, the blueprints that guide development in cities and counties.
Hometown Democracy would effectively give the public veto power over development issues now decided by government officials, representing "our final opportunity to manage our growth," said panelist Michele Moen, a local environmental activist. "Developers are managing our growth by managing our politicians," she said.
Opponents say Hometown Democracy would create an unwieldy development approval process that could hurt efforts to attract businesses to the state.
"Right now, in this recession, it's the last thing we need," said panelist Ryan Houck, who's led a campaign against Amendment 4 since 2007 and compared it to taking a sledgehammer to a fruit fly. "Do we want to send the signal that Florida is closed for business?"
Henry Lee Morgenstern, a Seville attorney specializing in environmental and land-use law, took issue with characterizations that Amendment 4 supporters were simply against growth. Existing growth plans would allow Florida to increase its population five-fold, even without approvals under Amendment 4, he said.
"We're not for 'no growth.' We're for intelligent growth," Morgenstern said. Plans should be changed, he added, but only when it's for the good of the community as a whole, "not just to make a killing for one developer."
Bob Fitzsimmons, a DeLand-area builder, said he was "disgusted" with how Florida's growth has been managed but believes Amendment 4 will create more bureaucracy and increase the cost of government.
"Please get out and vote," Fitzsimmons said, "but vote to change the leadership, not the constitution of the state of Florida."
The final panelist, former DeLand City Manager Mike Abels, an instructor in public policy at the University of Central Florida, called the amendment "very poor public policy."
Florida needs to revamp its growth management and tax policies both are unsustainable, Abels said -- but Amendment 4 will only make that more of a challenge.
In the end, it may be that no one can say what the passage of Amendment 4 would mean. Opponents described scenarios in which voters would be overwhelmed with intricate ballots. Abels said it was wrong to assume local citizens would take the time to study the complicated issues involved in growth issues.
But supporters said it could simplify things, by leading to fewer unnecessary changes. Bottom line, Morgenstern said, is that Amendment 4 may be a better alternative than continuing the current system.
"Look at the evidence," Morgenstern said. "We tried it their way. Did your taxes go down? Did traffic get any better? ... Have Florida's abandoned strip malls attracted any tourists?"
