Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, Inc.

The battle is heating up between the Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc Political Action Committee and Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, Inc. The issue is Amendment 4. You've probably seen the bumperstickers on cars touting the "Vote No on 4" logo. In case you're new to the drama, Florida Hometown Democracy is behind the effort, after some hiccups along the way to get the initiative on the ballot and the Citizens for Lower Taxes are against the initiative which will be up to Florida voters to decide this November 2nd. Supporters feel the Amendment will support the state economy and those against feel it will devastate the state's economy, real estate prices and negatively affect the rights of property owners. One thing should be made clear; both efforts, for and against, are spear-headed by very well-heeled Floridians. If anyone is under the delusion, Florida Hometown Democracy is fighting a David vs. Goliath scenario, they would be sorely mistaken.

Amendment 4, which will appear on the 2010 General Election ballot, proposes to amend Florida’s constitution to require a voter referendum on every city and county comprehensive plan amendment. The St. Petersburg area has tried this and found it to be a miserable failure. Despite the time and expense of numerous elections, lawsuits have resulted costing the cities and delaying desirable growth. Businesses impacted by this law are unable to grow, or expand and are now avoiding the area by relocating elsewhere. Ask yourself, why would a law that has been such a miserable failure be proposed as a constitutional amendment for the rest of Florida? The answer is simple. Special interests are those that would benefit and want this measure. Most cities throughout Florida already require some kind of citizen participation process in their land development codes.

On Nov. 2, Floridians will decide on a constitutional amendment that has potentially devastating implications for our communities. If passed, Amendment 4 would subject all comprehensive land-use plans and plan amendments to an exhaustive, costly referendum process. Supporters of Amendment 4 want you to believe that these referenda would lead to stronger communities by putting decision-making power in the hands of the public. While a more informed and engaged public results in better planning, Amendment 4 would achieve none of that.

There’s an interesting argument circulating in Martin County to explain the passage of the tax abatement referendum. “I think that no one understood what they were voting on,” said County Commissioner Sarah Heard. “It was extremely confusing, and there’s still a legal challenge to that.” Voters didn’t understand the referendum? And this is the reason, according to Heard, why it was approved? I grant the possibility. But I also find this argument to be highly disingenuous coming from Heard and others who opposed the referendum. After all, these are the same folks championing Amendment 4, the proposed constitutional amendment that would give voters the right to reject or accept comprehensive plan amendments approved by local governments. If voters didn’t — or couldn’t — understand the tax abatement referendum, what hope is there they will be able to understand equally esoteric ballot measures on comprehensive plan amendments? Do you see the inconsistency?