The way officials throughout Florida, often at developers' behest, trample local growth plans is maddening. So, it's no wonder Hometown Democracy, a grass-roots movement, got enough public support for a 2010 ballot to alter that landscape. It would require public votes on any changes to local growth plans.
Something's needed to get officials to honor growth-management plans. And Hometown Democracy appears an earnest, provocative and intriguing way of making them do so.
But Floridians would make a big mistake supporting this misguided effort.
Yes, the burden to local officials of placing land-use changes on the ballot might impose some self-discipline. But still thousands would likely come to a public vote. And at a grievous cost.
One casualty would likely be the informed voter. Hometown Democracy's advocates say residents could end up voting on plan amendments just once or twice a year, when other elections are held.
But imagine. Even if the Hometown Democracy cudgel gets officials to put 4,000 instead of 12,000 amendments on the ballot, voters in some counties or cities could still have to weigh the merits of six, 12, 24 or more land-use amendments.
Informed voters wouldn't just have to navigate the ballot's pedantic land-use language; they'd have to suffer months of electioneering by those wanting their vote. And because developers would almost always trump grass-roots organizations in spending, they'd stand a good chance of winning anyway.
There's a better way. While time remains before the 2010 election, state lawmakers should pass a law making it impossible for local commissions to alter their land-use plans without a super-majority vote. Far fewer proposals would clear that higher hurdle — four votes on a five-member commission, five votes on a seven-member council.
That would keep decisions in the hands of those we elect to make decisions, while acknowledging that it ought to be more difficult to change a planning blueprint than to pass a resolution honoring Boy Scouts.
Do that, and lawmakers could eliminate the strongest justification for putting plan amendments in voters' hands. Do nothing, as they've done so often, and lawmakers have only themselves to blame for what might happen when voters go to the polls.
