Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, Inc.

 Amendment 4 on the November ballot is a deeply flawed attempt to address a genuine problem.

We recommend a "no" vote.

Many Floridians are justifiably frustrated with how the state mismanaged growth over the last several decades, particularly with the way local planning officials continuously made exceptions in comprehensive plans for developers. The resulting overbuilding created traffic congestion, strained public utilities, gobbled up natural resources and generally caused so many headaches that, in many eyes, were not offset by the increased jobs and tax revenues growth also brought.

Residents believe their elected officials didn’t represent their interests, and in many instances ignored their complaints and pleas for change.

Amendment 4, also called "Hometown Democracy," aims to empower citizens by requiring local governments to gain voter approval of changes in comprehensive land-use plans. Although it is emotionally appealing — the chance to stick it to politicians and special interests — in practice the measure wouldn’t manage growth so much as choke it off. The pendulum would swing too far the other way, and in doing so hamstring communities with costly legal and electoral battles over growth-management minutiae.

For a preview of how the "Hometown Democracy" process would work, look at St. Pete Beach. The town of 10,000 adopted a version of Amendment 4 in 2006, and since then it has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on comp-plan-related lawsuits. Supporters and opponents of Amendment 4 have fought bitterly over whether St. Pete Beach represents a legitimate analogy.

"Hometown Democracy" founder Lesley Blackner, a Palm Beach attorney, has argued that St. Pete Beach residents can propose their own amendments to comp plans, which has increased conflict and confusion in that community. Whereas her statewide measure, she says, would simply be a check on government actions — an up-or-down vote on changes proposed by developers and approved by elected officials.

Nevertheless, Blackner told PolitiFact.com, "I fully expect there will be fights over ballot titles and summaries. Developers are the most litigious people I’ve ever seen. I’m sure there will be lawsuits over this."

Supporters argue that Amendment 4 is needed because special interests have too much influence in local planning decisions. However, if the measure passes imagine how involved they will be when every comp-plan change must be voted on. Developers will pour money into advertising campaigns to sway voters. Think you’re sick of political ads right now? They will multiply if Amendment 4 is approved.

That is, if developers don’t alter their behavior in response to Amendment 4. It’s likely, though, that many will see Florida as a much less fertile area for economic growth. They will take their business elsewhere rather than deal with the increased hassles (and costs) of getting approval for their projects. That means fewer jobs and reduced tax revenues.

For the anti-growth crowd, that’s exactly what they want. In a 2007 profile of Blackner, Florida Trend magazine noted that she and her family lived a block from the ocean in a 1924 home valued at $1.5 million (which actually is modest by Palm Beach standards). When asked whether her home on a barrier island would exist if the land-use controls she advocates had been in place when it was built, she replied, "Maybe there comes a point where you say ‘enough’s enough.’"

Funny how that point often arrives just after you’ve gotten yours, and don’t want anyone else to get theirs.

Amendment 4 isn’t just bad policy that would be enshrined in the state constitution (and thus difficult to reverse). It would undermine our representative democracy. The public elects city and county commissioners to study land-use plans, working with professional staff to understand the pros and cons of proposals and make a decision. The public already has input on these discussions.

If the elected officials ignore the public’s will on these matters, the solution is to vote them out of office and elect candidates who share the majority’s views on growth management. According to the St. Augustine Record, St. Johns County voters have done just that recently, electing candidates who lean toward less development.

The public doesn’t need additional power to effect growth. It just needs to exercise the one it already has. Vote "no" on Amendment 4.