Land-Use Amendment 4 Rejected

November 3, 2010

A seven-year effort to give voters more control over local growth decisions went down in defeat Tuesday as opponents of Amendment 4 rallied to defeat a proposal they said would have cost thousands of jobs and billions of dollars.

Amendment 4, the so-called “Hometown Democracy” amendment, would have required local voters to approve changes to their communities’ comprehensive plans to prevent the “development gone wild” atmosphere that became synonymous with Florida in the ’60s and ’70s.

But in a down economy, the notion that it might check recovery appeared to sway voters.

With more than 50 percent of votes cast in the statewide race, backers of the measure held only 33 percent of the vote,far from the 60 percent majority they needed to place the requirement into the Florida Constitution.

Business interests and many local governments banded together to defeat the measure, which they said would grind development to a halt and prevent growth, regardless of merit.

“Voters have sent the signal loud and clear that they do not support a no-growth agenda,” said Ryan Houck, executive director of Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, a business-backed group that spent millions to defeat it.

Backers of the proposal saw it differently.

“Voters were subjected to the full financial power of those special interests that are committed to maintaining a death grip on their ability to control the status quo of sprawl and overbuilding in our state,” Florida Hometown Democracy founder Lesley Blackner said Tuesday. “We nonetheless respect the voters’ judgment at the ballot box.”

Amendment 4 backers, a coalition of environmental and slow-growth groups, contend local comp plans have become as malleable as modeling clay in the hands of deep-pocketed developers.

Since first proposing the amendment in 2003, Blackner, a West Palm Beach land use attorney, and co-founder Ross Burnaman were joined by others who said Florida growth laws enacted in the 1980s were being rendered meaningless by developer-backed changes approved by local officials ready to reap the tax revenue that new homes and businesses bring.

Backers of Amendment 4 also contended elected officials too often ignore the public’s wishes and instead side with developers and powerful business interests, who have frequent contact with government planners and elected officials. Such collaboration has resulted in urban sprawl, overcrowded schools, traffic and the loss of environmental lands.

Opponents said the amendment would have forced local governments to hold scores of special elections or bog down voters with a California-style ballot chock full of changes written in ‘techno-speak.’

With Florida still recovering from the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, slowing government’s hand would be catastrophic, they said.

Comments

One Response to “Land-Use Amendment 4 Rejected”

  1. David Huie Green on November 3rd, 2010 2:40 pm

    now extend that thought a little further—-land use plans slow growth. As it it, you can get around them if you pay off—uhhh, excuse me—convince county commissioners to change them. If you had a profitable venture in mind but the land use plans didn’t allow it and you can’t “convince” the powers to allow for a change in use, it doesn’t get done.

    Just a thought..

Written by William Reynolds · Filed Under News