Florida ballot measure would require voter approval of any change to local land-use plans

Ever since the Florida Growth Management Act was passed in 1985, all Florida counties and municipalities have been required to enact comprehensive growth management plans.

This situation sometimes gets in the way of development, development, development.

Then again, sometimes it doesn’t. The same county or city commission that enacted each plan can also, within state-mandated limits, change it. They often do.

Among the Florida ballot measures this November will be Amendment 4:

This was placed on the ballot by petition signatures collected by Florida Hometown Democracy. The concern, apparently, is that elected officials are too easily bought and too easily rubberstamp plan changes to facilitate proposed new developments.

Leading a “No on 4” campaign is Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, Inc.

From the Ballotpedia page:

What are your thoughts? Yea or nay? Why?

When the best the opposition can muster is “it’s not for the people, it’s for the special interests”, that alone is enough to push me to the “yes” column. Special interests are the people.

Much ado about nothing. No growth plan can correct for a state population that doubles every thirty years.

The point of these plans seems to be not to stop development but to channel it, e.g., into urban-infill rather than suburban sprawl.

In my experience, be it noted, there are some people on-the-ground in Florida who like suburban sprawl and want even more of it. There used to be a big red-lettered sign visible from I-4 that said, “ABOLISH IMPACT FEES!” Impact fees are assessments on a developer to pay for the additional burden a new development is expected to put on local public utilities, etc., and we have them in Florida, and presumably there would be even more suburban development without them, growth plans or no.

Actually, that dovetails pretty well into my own plan: quintuple impact fees. Solve the housing market crisis and sprawl at a stroke. Of course, it will put some builders out of business…

I was about to mention the thread on the light rail ballot initiative, but I guess you’re already familiar with that one.

Well, this is interesting . . . This evening I went to a local presentation on mass transit in the Tampa Bay Area, in connection with the upcoming Hillsborough County referendum on a one-cent transit-improvement sales tax (see this thead). And at the end of the presenter’s engaging talk, as an oh-by-the-way, he offered everyone a “No On 4” leaflet, saying that the proposed Amendment 4 “would be a killer for mass transit.” I don’t see the connection . . . except that he had been touting mass transit as a boost to local property development – i.e., developers will locate their projects near a light-rail line or BRT (bus rapid transit) route if they have a choice. Thing is, though, he made it sound like Amendment 4 would mean requiring a public vote on every single building permit, which I’m pretty sure is not the case.

The leaflet says at the bottom: “NAIOP” – the acronym is not explained – “COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION - TAMPA BAY CHAPTER”; and below that, “Paid political advertisement. Paid for by the Tampa Bay Regional Coalition.” Whatever that is; googling turns up nothing.

Found a “No on 4” website. The video says St. Pete Beach tried something like it and it led to endless litigation (the video is full of lawyer-bashing) and depressed the local economy. Don’t know if that’s true.

National Association of Industrial and Office Properties. I did a show for them once, years ago, in Clearwater I believe.

A drag show? Monster truck show? Dog and pony show? Trade show? Magic show?

Yep. It was a monster dog and pony magic truck drag trade show; I do lighting for them all the time.

Update: According to this, “Amendment 4’s opposition has raised $7.3 million this year, while Florida Hometown Democracy has raised about $356,870.” There are “dueling ads” in SE Florida (I have yet to see a single pro- or anti-Amendment 4 ad in Tampa).

Update: Polling shows 53% in favor of Amendment 4, 26% opposed, 21% undecided.

As eday draws nearer I’m increasingly curious: What’s the thinking here? Why would Amendment 4 be a killer for mass transit?

Measure defeated two to one.