In their recent articles on Hometown Democracy, both Ron Rae of the Hernando Today and Dan DeWitt of the Hernando Times endorsed the passage of Amendment 4 in the November election.
Their recommendation was based on a need to slow down (stop?) development because of the amount of property already approved but as yet unbuilt that lies ready for an economic recovery. Planners and commissioners had already decided these were the best land uses for the properties. They were carefully planned, guarded by multiple performance conditions and development agreements that required development to pay for the needed infrastructure improvements that their plans specified.
Featured
Amendment 4: A gamble Florida can't afford to take
Source:
Florida Times-Union
Date:
August 29, 2010
There are ways to get Florida’s economy back on track, but grinding future development to a halt isn’t one of them. Yet, that’s exactly what Amendment 4, the proposed constitutional amendment commonly billed as “hometown democracy,” would do.
Florida’s had some doozies over the years, but this one’s in a league of its own. Fact and fiction have flown fast and furious, but while some outcomes remain unclear, there are some certainties.
Featured
Letter: Amendment 4 would result on costly red tape, obstruct progress
Source:
TC Palm
Date:
August 27, 2010
Ian Pollock’s Aug. 22 letter could not be more misguided. Amendment 4 is not a solution to corruption or growth management challenges. It’s a special-interest boondoggle written and funded by a land-use attorney.
It would require a taxpayer-funded referendum for every single change to our local growth plan. It’s so extreme it doesn’t even provide exceptions for hospitals, police stations, or schools — delaying these necessary public projects by years and burning up taxpayer dollars.
Voters will decide in November whether all changes to comprehensive growth plans for cities and counties should be put to a public vote. Amendment 4 would give everyday people vast new power over developers and property owners.
But how would you vote -- or would you bother? -- if your ballot included an item like this:
"An ordinance of the city of West Melbourne, Brevard County, Florida, adopting comprehensive plan amendment No. 2007-1; Amendment the future land-use map of the comprehensive plan of the city to provide for low density residential, single-family dwellings use for a certain parcel of land newly annexed into the city and lying to the southwest 1/4 of section 13, township 28 south, range 36 east, Brevard County, Florida, being a part of "Addition No. 3 to June Park" according to the plat thereof, as recorded in plat book 4, page 74, of the public records of Brevard County, Florida;
Problems with Amendment 4 surround complexities of land use issues
Source:
TC Palm
Date:
August 22, 2010
After reading Don Millenbruch’s Aug. 18 letter reacting to my column, “Don’t take officials off the hook by passing Amendment 4,” I assume he has no idea what the planning process involves.
I never inferred that the average citizen does not possess the intellectual ability to understand. My opinion was based on the complexity of the planning process, and legal issues are extremely voluminous and require more than deciding if you like it or not.
Don’t take my word for it; go to city hall and review one of the comprehensive land use packets that go to the council for a vote.
Featured
Amendment 4 Would Hurt Many Businesses, Cut Jobs, Raise Taxes
Source:
The Ledger
Date:
August 16, 2010
Andrew B. Quinn's July 13 column "Amendment 4: Give Citizens Vote" about Amendment 4 plainly wrongly simplifies a complex issue. Billed as a "solution" to Florida's growth management challenges, Amendment 4 would require a taxpayer-funded referenda for every change to a local growth plan. The Florida Supreme Court plainly indicates that Amendment 4 would trigger votes not simply on all land use items, but, in fact, on every change to a local government's comprehensive plan. Get the facts.
Featured
Don't take officials off the hook by passing Amendment 4
Source:
TC Palm
Date:
August 13, 2010
Proposed constitutional Amendment 4 (“Florida Hometown Democracy”) is seemingly a most innocuous amendment that appears to re-enforce the people’s involvement in the democratic process. In part it states before a local government can adopt a new comprehensive land-use plan or plan amendment, such amendment shall be subject to referendum of the electors.
But after you scratch the surface and dwell deeper, you find problems. Amendment 4 relies on the unrealistic assumption that voters will study the issue in depth, educate themselves on the entire scope of the plan — including the sociological, financial and legal ramifications — and vote on the overall merits for the entire community.
To really understand the importance of this issue, you must decide how important controlled beneficial growth is compared with growth guided by emotions and a lack of meaningful and diligent research.
Featured
Realtors urge rejection of Amendment 4
Source:
Marco Island Sun Times
Date:
August 12, 2010
Local real estate executives are urging the rejection of Amendment 4 during the Nov. 2 election, describing the amendment a "grave threat to Florida's future."
The amendment, dubbed the "vote-on-everything" amendment, would require referendums for the adoption of any and all local government comprehensive land-use plans.
"It's been threatening for a while," said Shirley English, executive director of the Marco Island Area Association of Realtors, "but now it's on the 2010 ballot."
The summer weather isn’t the only thing heating up in recent weeks.
As the countdown to Election Day in November begins, the bickering over Amendment 4 — click here to see what we’ve written about it — is heating up.
A comment on the pro-con debate over Florida Hometown Democracy
Source:
TC Palm
Date:
August 4, 2010
First, thank you to the Stuart News for printing the opposing arguments Aug. 1, concerning the Hometown Democracy, Amendment 4, controversy. We are all better informed by reading both sides of a public issue. Ed Candela (yes) and Toby Overdorf (no) did a superb job in presenting their positions.
What we learned from these gentlemen is that: 1) Hometown Democracy was (perhaps) successful in the small town of Yankeetown in Levy County; and 2) Hometown Democracy was (described as) a failure in other areas of Florida and could be expected to fail if imposed elsewhere in the state.
Helping to Stop Admendment 4
Join the conversation
