The debate over Amendment 4 — a controversial proposal to alter Florida’s constitution — rages on. With an unprecedented coalition of business, environmental, labor and civic groups working to defeat it, the proponents of Amendment 4 are struggling to convince voters that their measure is anything but extreme, costly and unworkable. Floridians recently heard their latest claim.
In 2007, Yankeetown adopted a local version of Amendment 4. This small coastal fishing village has about 700 residents, fewer than many neighborhoods in the Treasure Coast. Amendment 4 supporters are calling its experiment a “success.” Here we go again. Yankeetown is not the first community to be heralded as a success by the special-interest lawyers behind Amendment 4; it also is not the first time the Amendment 4 campaign has failed to tell Floridians the whole truth.
In fact, after St. Pete Beach adopted its local version of Amendment 4 in 2006, Amendment 4 backers quickly adopted it as a symbol of their campaign. Now, St. Pete Beach — a small town of 10,000 residents — has been saddled with endless lawsuits, out-of-control legal bills (almost $750,000 so far), higher taxes and fewer jobs. As a result, St. Pete Beach residents voted to scale back their Amendment 4 experiment in 2009. They now are contemplating a full repeal of the measure later this year.
Once the disaster in St. Pete Beach became apparent, Amendment 4 backers tried desperately to distance themselves from this inconvenient case study. They view St. Pete Beach as a political liability as they try to peddle their snake oil to Florida voters.
Like St. Pete Beach, the Yankeetown residents voted to scale back their local version of Amendment 4, exempting the entire capital improvements element from the referendum requirement. The CIE contains the location, cost and source of revenue for water and sewer lines, traffic signals, parks, etc. Extremely technical in nature, decisions regarding the CIE require careful balancing of community needs with available funding.
Amendment 4, as written, is a proposed change to our state’s constitution that would require taxpayers to fund elections for every revision to local comprehensive plans. As the people of Yankeetown discovered, that means every revision. Not just major issues. Not just important projects.
Amendment 4 is so extreme that it does not even provide exceptions for schools, hospitals or police stations. The result: Hundreds of minor, technical plan amendments would litter ballots while vital community needs could be neglected for years — or ignored altogether.
How would this work? It wouldn’t. Amendment 4 is poorly written, badly designed and full of unintended consequences. That’s why both Yankeetown and St. Pete Beach decided to scale it down shortly after adopting it. And that’s why St. Pete Beach is now considering repealing the measure entirely.
If Amendment 4 is too extreme for a tiny village of 700 and failed miserably in a small town of 10,000, how can it possibly work in a state of 18 million? It will not. This November, please vote no to Amendment 4.
Overdorf is the Treasure Coast chair of the “VOTE NO on 4” campaign. He is president and founder of Crossroads Environmental Consultants Inc., Palm City.
