The folks who are fighting Amendment 4 — which would require that major changes to a city or county comprehensive plan be submitted to a public referendum — are launching a”Rapid Response Team” to knock down what they insist are “half-truths and misinformation” coming from the other side.
“We’ll give you more than just the sound bite – we’ll give you the facts to back it up,” promises No on 4 executive director Ryan Houck.
Featured
Zephyrhills City Council opposes Hometown Democracy amendment
Source:
St. Petersburg Times
Date:
July 14, 2010
ZEPHYRHILLS — The City Council has given Florida Hometown Democracy a big thumbs-down.
The council passed a resolution Monday opposing Amendment 4, a measure on the November ballot that would require voter approval of changes to the local land use plan.
"The term Hometown Democracy sounds exciting, sounds like a good thing," said Todd Vande Berg, the city's director of development. But he said the amendment is a complicated and expensive proposition that could require the city to hold elections on every important decision.
On November 2nd, you will be asked to vote yes or no on a plan to alter Florida’s Constitution called Amendment 4. Special interest lawyers, adult entertainment interests and population control groups have designed, funded and proposed this amendment to our Constitution. Take a moment to learn more about who’s backing Amendment 4 and why.
Featured
St. Pete Beach Did Not Circumvent the Growth Management Act
Source:
St. Pete Beach & Hometown Democracy/Amendment 4
Date:
July 12, 2010
When Amendment 4 supporters dispute that St. Pete Beach is a good example of the flaws in Amendment 4, they often try to distinguish SPB by claiming that the city "circumvented the Growth Management Act".
Direct democracy? Why not let people we elected do jobs?
Source:
Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Date:
July 12, 2010
SOUTHWEST FLORIDIANS SOON will vote on two important economic development-related issues.
The first is Amendment 4, the Florida Hometown Democracy-sponsored constitutional change, which would require voters' approval for comprehensive land-use plan amendments.
The second is a local initiative that would allow counties to provide ad valorem tax breaks to companies creating local, high-paying jobs.
In politics, creative marketing may be the difference between success and failure. That's why convincing Florida voters to oppose Amendment 4, the so-called ``Florida Hometown Democracy'' constitutional amendment, is no easy task. After all, how could ``Hometown Democracy'' be anything but good for our state?
Those in favor of Amendment 4 say this is in response to the wild unchecked growth we have experienced.
Let's look back. When I arrived in Volusia County in January 1986: Granada was a two-lane road and there was nothing between where Clyde Morris Boulevard is now and I-95. I moved into the county, now part of Ormond Beach, and had two wells for water and a septic tank.
Clyde Morris was extended to Granada, and opened up a corridor for senior housing, doctors' offices and homes.
On State Road A1A, from the Ormond Beach line to Silver Beach, we had a rundown McDonalds, a strip club and a line of mom-and-pop motels (we can thank hurricanes for getting rid of the worst of the motels and hotels).
Amendment 4 is bad for you, your business and your kids' future.
[Boca Raton, Fla. - July 2010] Palm Beach County Executive Committee met at Palm Beach College, Lake Worth, Fla. to discuss the priorities and action items pertaining to Florida State Amendment 4 (A4) a.k.a. "Hometown Democracy,"which will be on the November 2010 ballot.
Opponents of A4 are reminding others not to be fooled by the "Hometown Democracy" label. They say A4 - a statewide "Vote on Everything" initiative - is a grave threat to Florida's future. This proposed re-write of the Florida Constitution will imperil Florida's economy and unique quality-of-life by subverting a well-established and democratic planning process while threatening Florida's prospects for economic recovery. With the "Vote on Everything" amendment, citizens - not the representatives they elected - are forced to regularly decide hundreds of technical land-use planning issues at the b
People are angry and resentful about uncontrolled growth, and Amendment 4 will supposedly fix that. Amendment 4 argues that our elected officials and developers cause these feelings, so if we vote “yes,” they will no longer be in control; we will. Amendment 4, then, is not about land use decisions. It’s about control.
Pamela Winchester's recent guest editorial asking voters to approve Amendment 4 made several baseless claims. The first claim was the existing taxpayer subsidizes new development by up to 40 percent. Let's face it, folks, anyone can make numbers say anything. For example, I have a study that shows the building industry pumped more than $1 billion into the local economy at its peak, eclipsing the costs created by new development (schools, roads, police/fire) by more than $500 million. However, I urge you to forget about studies for a moment and consider what you know.
Helping to Stop Admendment 4
Join the conversation
