(return to media page)


Palm Beach Post Editorial, December 4, 2007

Hometown Democracy Lite

BY JOEL ENGELHARDT

"This proposed amendment will add/revise definitions and references in the I&A; and FLUE Elements, ... clarify the definition of intersections to address urban interchanges; revise references to the amendment process in the FLUE for consistency with the I&A; ... "

The preceding is just one of 35 changes to Palm Beach County's comprehensive plan that county commissioners considered last week. The changes were among 12,000 submitted statewide last year. If you had to vote on it - and you would, under a proposed constitutional change called Florida Hometown Democracy - it would help to know that an I&A; is an Introduction & Administration element and a FLUE is a Future Land Use Element. But it wouldn't help all that much, would it?

Tom Pelham is secretary of the Florida Department of Community Affairs, the state's planning agency. He wants to head off Hometown Democracy by improving the state's Growth Management Act. Last week, he released the first of his changes for review by planners - clearly noting that the proposals are for discussion purposes only - and they show promise.

For instance, Mr. Pelham would require every local government within the 16 counties of the South Florida Water Management District to produce goals and policies that "ensure protection of the land, water, and biological resources necessary for the long-term viability of the Florida Everglades." Also spurred by Hometown Democracy, Palm Beach County Planning Director Lorenzo Aghemo is suggesting that commissioners review changes less frequently and require a supermajority vote - for major changes.

But voters are angry. Years of experience tell them that politicians won't stand up to developers. They understand that goals to "ensure protection" often do not ensure protection. Mr. Pelham acknowledged in a Fort Lauderdale speech last month that he must respond to the fury that fuels Hometown Democracy by offering something better than Hometown Democracy.

He needs to be bold. The biggest drawback to Hometown Democracy is that it would require voters to consider every comprehensive plan change, no matter how dull or incomprehensible. Mr. Pelham can demand referendums on the most dramatic changes, leaving the minutiae to elected officials.

What's going on in Martin County provides a perfect example. The residents of Martin County aren't up in arms because their county commission changed the Introduction & Administration element. They're upset because a plan to allow homes to be clustered is likely to encourage much more development in rural areas west of Interstate 95.

Mr. Pelham's agency supported the change. One could argue that voters already voted on the change when they elected the commissioners who approved it. But voters also were tricked by Commissioner Susan Valliere's post-election shift from conservationist to booster of growth. She proposed the amendment, which passed 3-2. Would the slow-growthers who helped put her in office vote for the amendment? No. Do they have a chance to vote for the amendment? No.

But they should. They just shouldn't have to vote on all that other stuff. The public has a hard enough time turning out for candidates. Voting on growth minutiae will detract from the big issues, inducing voter apathy by planning overkill.

Even if there isn't another change to any plan in Florida, growth won't stop. A 1995 University of South Florida study found that the comprehensive plans allow 86 million residents - five times the existing population - mainly by building in the state's vast, rural interior.

The proposal for a new town of 10,000 homes in western Palm Beach County couldn't muster four votes on the county commission; if it had, though, the plan would have been ideal for voters to consider. But the decision to "modify current nonresidential policies to increase opportunities for infill nonresidential development for larger exceptionally designed projects" is better left to public servants.

If the problem with Hometown Democracy is that it would leave too many incomprehensible growth decisions to voters, Mr. Pelham can propose something bold - referendums on the most important issues. The public will be satisfied with nothing less.