# Florida ballot measure would require voter approval of any change to local land-use plans
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402
**Category:** Politics & Elections
**Created:** [August 25, 2010, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402 "2010-08-25T14:52:58Z")
**Posts on this page:** 15
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [August 25, 2010, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/1 "2010-08-25T14:52:58Z")
Ever since the [Florida Growth Management Act](http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/DCP/compplanning/index.cfm) 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](http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Florida_2010_ballot_measures) this November will be [Amendment 4:](http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Florida_Comprehensive_Land_Use_Plans,_Amendment_4_(2010))
> [@](#):
>
> Establishes that before a local government may adopt a new comprehensive land use plan, or amend a comprehensive land use plan, the proposed plan or amendment shall be subject to vote of the electors of the local government by referendum, following preparation by the local planning agency, consideration by the governing body and notice. Provides definitions.
This was placed on the ballot by petition signatures collected by [Florida Hometown Democracy.](http://floridahometowndemocracy.com/) 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.](http://www.florida2010.org/about-no-on-4)
From the [Ballotpedia page:](http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Florida_Comprehensive_Land_Use_Plans,_Amendment_4_(2010))
> [@](#):
>
> **Support**
>
> The initiative is sponsored and funded by a Political Action Committee (PAC) called Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc. Florida Hometown Democracy is primarily funded by its author and president, Lesley Blackner, a Palm Beach attorney.[12] “Mismanaged growth destroys communities,” said Blackner.[1]
>
> Supporters argue that Amendment 4 will simply add “another layer of protection against unwanted developments.” According to the Hometown Democracy website, “Rising taxes, falling home values, gridlocked roads, dwindling water supplies and Florida’s disappearing beauty are just some of the devastating consequences of Florida politicians’ habit of rubberstamping speculative plan changes. Hometown Democracy Amendment 4 changes all that by giving voters veto power over these changes to your community’s master plan for growth.”[13]
>
> **Arguments**
> \*Political columnist Ron Littlepage wrote in The Florida Times-Union: “In other words, legislators have pretty much given free rein to developers to continue building; quality of life and the state’s natural resources be damned, even though there are currently 300,000 homes in Florida sitting empty.” Littlepage noted that “direct democracy on land use changes may be the only way to promote smart growth in Florida.”[14]
>
> \*Dan Lobeck, a land use attorney and president of Control Growth Now, said,“Business as usual has led us to ruin, and will lead us to greater ruin if it’s not reigned in. Amendment Four is a reasonable, balanced proposal to rein in over-development, but giving the voters a veto over plans that will shape the future of your community, for better or worse.”[15]
>
> \*Andrew Dickman, a land use attorney from Naples who represented Hometown Democracy during a March 2010 debate, said, “Amendment 4 will level the playing field and give citizens the opportunity to vote on plans that affect them.” Additionally, Dickman argues that since the 1985 adoption of the state’s Growth Management Act, “sprawl has not been contained.”[16]
>
> - Manatee County Commissioner Joe McClash said, “It’s all about what is good for the place we call home” and argued that he doesn’t see any harm in the measure.[17]
>
> - In response to the opposition Lesley Blackner, president of Florida Hometown Democracy, wrote in a March 12 editorial that Amendment 4 will not stop Sarasota County’s growth, “but it will help confine growth to where it is now allocated in the county’s comprehensive plan. There is enough future commercial and residential development already approved in the comprehensive land-use plan to keep construction workers building for decades. That’s what the Sarasota 2050 plan is all about.”[18]
>
> - Martin County Commissioner Sarah Heard endorsed Amendment 4 in April 2010 during a Martin County rally.[19]
>
> **Opposition**
> Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy is the main organization leading the effort in opposition to Amendment 4. Over 280 statewide business, labor, and environmental organizations, including the Florida Chamber of Commerce, the Florida AFL-CIO and 1,000 Friends of Florida - an environmental group, have expressed opposition to Amendment 4. These groups say that Amendment 4 will make Florida’s recession permanent by increasing taxes and contributing to unemployment.[20][21] Mark Wilson, President of the Florida Chamber of Commerce said, "If you like the recession, you’ll love Amendment 4.” [22]
>
> Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy executive director, Ryan Houck, called Amendment 4 “a stimulus package for special interest lawyers.” Pointing to the interests behind Amendment 4, he went on to say that “Amendment 4 is not designed to empower voters; it’s designed to empower special interest lawyers, and hand taxpayers the bill.”[23]
>
> **Arguments**
>
> - In response to the initiative, some Floridians have started a campaign, Floridians for Smarter Growth. The group proposed a different take on the currently proposed Smarter Growth Land Use Initiative; to require voter approval of changes to local land-use plans only if 10 percent of local voters sign a petition calling for the referendum.[1] However, the measure failed to collect sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot.
> \*\* Supporters of the alternate measure formed a group called Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy in opposition of Amendment 4. Ryan Houck, former executive director of Floridians for Smarter Growth, serves as the executive director of the new group. Houck argues that the proposed measure may cost the state $4 billion in lost “economic opportunities.”[24]
>
> - The National Federation of Independent Business, Florida opposes Amendment 4, saying that “While November will be a busy election season, no issue on the 2010 ballot will be more important than Amendment 4. In this tough economy, the last thing Florida needs is an irresponsible amendment that will cost jobs, raise taxes and make it more expensive to live in our state.”[25]
>
> - In 2007 1000 Friends of Florida said Amendment 4 “could limit responsible new development in more populated, urbanized areas, forcing development out into rural areas which have fewer people to oppose the proposed plan amendment. It could also limit efforts to pass plan amendments intended to lessen sprawling patterns of development.”[26]
>
> - The Coalition for Property Rights opposes Amendment 4, arguing that Amendment 4 “represents a direct assault on the foundation of freedom our Founding Fathers created when they drafted the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.”[27]
>
> - The Florida Farm Bureau opposes Amendment 4, saying that “Florida’s jobless rate is high; but it could get much, much worse with the passage of Amendment 4. At a time when many families and small businesses are struggling to make ends meet, that’s the last thing we need.”[28]
>
> - The Florida American Institute of Architects opposes Amendment 4, saying that “Amendment 4 would affect our state’s economy and quality of life by requiring every local government comprehensive plan change to be approved by voters. It would result in an average of 200 - 300 plan changes to be approved every year, greatly increasing the cost of local government, place unreasonable and expensive burdens on business and property owners, and limit the ability of our communities to adapt to the challenges of the 21st century.”[29]
>
> - The Florida AFL-CIO joined a business coalition to oppose Amendment 4. Frank Ortis, an executive board member with the Florida AFL-CIO said “Defeating Amendment 4 means protecting jobs. As Floridians attempt to recover from the worst recession in a generation, Amendment 4 threatens to drive the jobless rate higher, prolong the recession, and hurt our state’s working families.”[30]
What are your thoughts? Yea or nay? Why?
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [August 25, 2010, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/2 "2010-08-25T15:37:19Z")
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.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [August 25, 2010, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/3 "2010-08-25T16:46:12Z")
Much ado about nothing. No growth plan can correct for a state population that doubles every thirty years.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [August 25, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/4 "2010-08-25T17:17:38Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#):
>
> 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](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [August 25, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/5 "2010-08-25T17:19:52Z")
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…
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [August 25, 2010, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/6 "2010-08-25T20:01:16Z")
> [@](#):
>
> 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.
I was about to mention the thread on the light rail ballot initiative, but I guess you’re already familiar with that one.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [August 27, 2010, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/7 "2010-08-27T01:35:17Z")
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](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=575295)). 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.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2010, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/8 "2010-08-28T02:07:26Z")
Found a [“No on 4”](http://www.florida2010.org/?gclid=CMLqsuKJ26MCFQ5O2godtAb-TA) website. The [video](http://www.florida2010.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.CurrentVideo) 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.
---
### Author:  [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/9 "2010-08-28T02:32:59Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#):
>
> 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.
**N** ational **A** ssociation of **I** ndustrial and **O** ffice **P** roperties. I did a show for them once, years ago, in Clearwater I believe.
---
### Author:  [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2010, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/10 "2010-08-28T02:44:26Z")
A drag show? Monster truck show? Dog and pony show? Trade show? Magic show?
---
### Author:  [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)
#### Post date: [August 28, 2010, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/11 "2010-08-28T04:22:08Z")
Yep. It was a monster dog and pony magic truck drag trade show; I do lighting for them all the time.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [September 28, 2010, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/12 "2010-09-28T13:20:13Z")
Update: According to [this,](http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/state/amendment-on-comprehensive-land-use-changes-sparks-dueling-940807.html) “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).
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [October 5, 2010, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/13 "2010-10-05T02:48:48Z")
Update: [Polling shows 53% in favor of Amendment 4, 26% opposed, 21% undecided.](http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Florida_Comprehensive_Land_Use_Plans,_Amendment_4_%282010%29#Polls)
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [October 20, 2010, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/14 "2010-10-20T14:10:09Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#):
>
> 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](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=575295)). 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.
As eday draws nearer I’m increasingly curious: What’s the thinking here? Why would Amendment 4 be a killer for mass transit?
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [November 3, 2010, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/florida-ballot-measure-would-require-voter-approval-of-any-change-to-local-land-use-plans/551402/15 "2010-11-03T04:28:48Z")
Measure defeated two to one.