Amendment would empower people on land use issues

This November, voters will go to the polls to vote on Amendment 4, a proposed change to the state constitution that could alter the landscape of local planning projects for years to come.

Simply put, Amendment 4 would allow citizens to approve any proposed changes to a county or city's comprehensive land use plans by voting at special referendum. A comprehensive plan is a blueprint for community growth and sets the foundation for land use in a given area.

The amendment needs at least 60 percent of the total votes for passage.

Proponents believe the amendment would stop uncontrolled growth and that citizens should have the power to decide what is built in areas where they live. They are rallying people to get behind their cause and refer to the amendment as "Hometown Democracy."

Critics say the electorate is not knowledgeable enough to wield that power and it takes power away from the government officials elected to make those decisions.

The Florida Association of Planners is opposing Amendment 4.

"It really oversimplifies the process," Hernando County Planning Director Ron Pianta said. "It's not guaranteed to lead to a better outcome or better decision-making. It could also encourage aggressive public relations and media campaigns by special interests who either support or oppose proposed changes to the comprehensive plan."

The Hernando County Republican Executive Committee (HCREC) passed a resolution opposing the amendment, saying it would "thwart economic growth" statewide.

The HCREC said passage would imperil an already fragile economy, increase the local unemployment rate and infringe on personal property rights.

"Hometown Democracy will prevent and negate responsible planning discussions by county engineers and county planners and turn the process over to a political campaign," the board said.

HCREC Chairman Blaise Ingoglia told Hernando Today the amendment would sap the county's authority.

"It's taking the power away from the people who are making informed decisions," Ingoglia said. "The electorate is not going to have access to all the records that county engineers and planners will have. Plus, we've elected commissioners for a reason."

An increase in 'nimbyism'

The nonprofit 1,000 Friends of Florida opposes the amendment for three reasons:

First, it believes it will lead to an increase in "nimbyism," (not in my backyard) where people would reject controversial amendments such as affordable housing proposals, landfills and water-sewer projects.

Second, the organization said it would cause piecemeal planning. Instead of comprehensive planning, it could morph into a series of disjointed voter-approved amendments.

Finally, the agency is concerned about the legal challenges that would likely be necessary to clarify vague or murky language of the amendment, possibly resulting in years of court proceedings.

County Commission Chairman Dave Russell said he doesn't believe the amendment belongs in the state constitution.

"The public is not going to have the information or the background on a lot of the decisions that will be made in terms of comprehensive plan changes," Russell said. "I'm afraid that the public will be swayed one way or another by advertising campaigns on either side of the issue rather than based on pertinent data relating to the amendment."

In Hernando County, one of the biggest examples of comprehensive plan amendments was in 2007, when county commissioners approved the future development of Hickory Hill, a 1,750-home development planned for the Spring Lake area.

The decision proved controversial, with people on the eastside forming a grass roots alliance opposing the tampering of the comprehensive plan and what they said was the dangerous precedent it set for future growth management.

Others saw it as a victory for progress and economic development by creating jobs.

'A seat at the table'

Supporters of Amendment 4 say they are only asking for a "seat at the table" when it comes to planning their community.

A statewide grass-roots, non-partisan group calling itself Florida Hometown Democracy has formed pushing the perceived benefits.

"Property owners in Florida have the right to use their property in accord with the comprehensive plan designation," according to the group's Hometown Democracy website.

"For example, if a property is designated agricultural, the property owner has the right to use it for any and all agricultural purposes. Agricultural land owners do not have the right to use their land for high-density residential and commercial purposes," the website said.

"Like a lot of Floridians, I've watched for years as one bit of Florida's postcard paradise was bulldozed after another," Lesley Blackner, one of the organizers of Florida Hometown Democracy, said in a prepared statement. "It's depressing. I grew up (in) Jacksonville. When I go back there I can no longer remember what parts of it looked like before they were bulldozed into mirror images of other ugly places."

The organization's co-organizer Ross Burnaman said state planners have done a poor job of considering long-term future uses of land, resources and public facilities such as water supply, schools and transportation systems.

"Plans have been amended too often to increase development density and intensity without regard for future demands upon natural systems and infrastructure," Burnaman said on the Florida Hometown Democracy website.

A failed experiment in St. Pete Beach

The city of St. Pete Beach, which changed its comprehensive plan in 2008 after voters approved a city charter change mimicking Amendment 4, is considering putting a referendum on the November ballot asking voters to repeal it.

The main reason: The city has been named in numerous lawsuits from citizens challenging its two-year-old ordinance.

"The city has expended thousands of dollars in defense of these cases," according to a draft resolution.

The ordinance required referendum approval of all amendments to the city's comprehensive plan.