Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, Inc.

If oil were still gushing into the Gulf, the panel discussion I moderated Thursday at the Sarasota International Realty Conference doubtless would have gravitated to that topic. But it's not. So with the elections nearing, we have a new hot-button issue in Florida, and it's Amendment 4. That is the change to the state constitution that would require alterations of local comprehensive land-use plans to be approved by voters, after approval by elected officials. Judging by the reaction of the panelists and the audience of mostly real estate brokers, the title of the discussion, "The State of Real Estate in Florida," should have been changed to "The State of Amendment 4 in Florida." The panelists fell just short of turning red in voicing their opinions of Amendment 4. "It's really silly," said Pat Neal, president of Neal Communities, which develops land and builds houses in Manatee County. This brought a big round of applause from the audience,

Pick your cliche: Tossing the baby out with the bath water, cutting off your nose to spite your face. They both describe the trouble with Amendment 4: It's a serious overreaction to some legitimate concerns about careless growth.

Editor: This amendment goes by the name of “Hometown Democracy” and by the name alone who would not vote yes, it sounds like what our nation was founded upon … but it is far from that. It is an amendment that goes against what our founding fathers put into play. Our founding fathers created a system of democracy, where voters do not make the decisions directly, but elect representatives at all levels of government, to represent the “collective interests” of their community, from the smallest of babies to senior elders. On a local level we have been charged with providing leadership and guidance necessary for efficient provision of municipal services and effective operation of the city government. Our position also has a quasi judicial component where we have taken an oath to take the emotion out of our decision to review the law as it applies and make a decision based on those laws, both fairly and consistently, the fundamental principle of “home rule.”

The question before voters in Citrus County and throughout Florida on Nov. 2 will be whether to let voters decide land-use issues, or to let local governments continue make those decisions. The forum at the Crystal River on Monday night, sponsored by the Women's Political Network of Citrus County, did little to settle the issue, although it did give proponents and opponents a chance to air their arguments before local voters. The forum was populated by views from both sides of the proposed amendment. On the one side were representatives of business, embodied by the Citrus County Chamber of Commerce and Florida Chamber of Commerce. Both groups have members that include builders and developers. The Florida AFL-CIO is also opposed to the amendment. On the other side was the group that sponsored the amendment, and a former local government official.