Hot Issues
Last week Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy stepped up the campaign against Amendment 4 by launching a web video on the first community in Florida to adopt a local version of the proposed constitutional amendment. To view the video, please click on the below web link: St. Cloud Division of Purchasing and Materials Management Open House The City of St. Cloud’s Division of Purchasing and Materials Management is hosting its 4th Annual Open House Thursday, March 25, from 9-11 a.m., at City Hall, Building B, third floor. The open house offers the opportunity for the community to meet the purchasing division staff and discuss purchasing procedures, tour the purchasing facility, and participate in drawings for door prizes. Refreshments will be served. The purchasing division staff will meet and greet visitors, have display boards showing some of the various products and services they provide, and brochures will be available. I. Promises Made Should Be Promises Kept The legislature should remove the cap and fully fund the Sadowski Affordable Housing Trust Fund. In 1992, the Florida Legislature, supported by the Home Builders Association and others, increased the doc stamp paid on real estate transactions with the agreement that these funds would be applied toward affordable housing programs. Recent years have seen the trust fund arbitrarily capped at $243 million, and hundreds of millions of dollars swept into General Revenue to balance the budget. At a time when our real estate and construction markets are still reeling from excess inventory, there is no better use for these trust fund dollars than to be spent on their intended purpose – helping low income families and seniors with down payment assistance so they may have their chance at the American Dream of homeownership and reducing the state’s housing inventory at the same time. For every $1 million the state spends on affordable housing programs, it receives $7.66 million of economic impact and realizes 77 jobs created. Appropriating the $174.7 million currently available would generate 13,452 jobs and $1.338 billion in economic activity. II. Reduce Uncertainty The legislature should pass bridge legislation which validates the permit extension and DRI exemption portion of the 2009 law. This will clarify to individuals and businesses that took action to extend a permit or claim a DRI exemption, that their reliance on the law is guaranteed and legally valid. Understanding that construction on already-approved projects has been delayed by economic conditions, the growth management reform measure allowed businesses to seek permit extensions until such time as the economy improves. This same reform measure also allowed DRI exemptions. But due to the lawsuit, these businesses and their projects are in legal limbo. III. Remove Unnecessary Barriers to Recovery The legislature should pass condo bulk-buyer legislation which allows investors to purchase more than seven units in a building without the investor having to accept the legal and financial liabilities of the original developer. Now, with bargain prices and low interest rates, investors have returned to Florida’s condo market. However, due to an unnecessary barrier in Florida law, many investors are choosing to remain on the sidelines at a time when Florida desperately needs them to help reduce inventory and return stability to the market. IV. Prevent Ill-Conceived, Costly Mandates The legislature should send a clear signal opposing the ICC mandate and supporting consumer choice by passing legislation to prevent the fire sprinkler mandate from being adopted into the Florida Building Code. Unless the Florida Legislature takes action this session to prohibit this mandate, the Florida Building Commission will be forced to include the mandate in the 2010 Florida Building Code. This very expensive mandate will be passed along to home buyers. Conservative estimates indicate the mandate will cost over $4,000 in an average size home, or about $2 per square foot. Smoke alarms perform as well, or better, at a fraction of the cost. It should be noted that, at present, no other state has allowed this mandate into their building code, and over 20 states have filed or are considering legislation to block this mandate. V. Prevent Job Killing Regulations The legislature should pass legislation requiring state agencies to conduct an independent analysis on any proposed rule to determine the effect it will have on private sector job growth. Additionally, the legislature should impose a temporary moratorium on any agency rulemaking effort that may thwart job growth or increase the net costs and regulatory burdens on small businesses. Despite Florida’s 11.8 percent unemployment rate, some state agency bureaucrats are moving forward with rulemaking efforts that will thwart job growth and eliminate even more jobs. It’s simply unexplainable. These agency rulemaking efforts will add to the cost and amount of red tape it takes to do business in Florida. Companies that might otherwise choose to expand or relocate in Florida are investing elsewhere…in states where taxes, fees and the time to get permits are not as difficult. VI. Reduce Cost Burdens on Taxpayers The legislature should appropriate the $2 million necessary to complete Phase II of the Department of Health research project. This project is testing and developing prototype lower cost, passive alternatives to reduce nitrogen from septic tanks before nitrogen standards are established in law. Our citizens deserve the completion and results of this project, which will identify cost-effective solutions, rather than having scientifically unproven, expensive systems effectively forced on them in this economy. In recent years, several state agencies and some local governments have attempted to mandate expensive and scientifically unproven performance-based septic treatment systems on homeowners living in or near certain springsheds. Florida’s springs are vitally important to our state’s natural beauty and wildlife, our recreation and our overall quality of life. Reducing nitrogen releases into our springs and aquifers is a noble goal. But adopting standards and outcomes before technologically feasible, or before cost-effective solutions are identified or even available, is essentially putting the cart before the horse. Adopting laws or rules which could prematurely require the use of scientifically unproven and expensive septic systems thereby forcing this cost burden onto existing and future homeowners is not the solution. VIDEO ON AMENDMENT 4
All interested in doing business with the City of Saint Cloud are encouraged to attend. For more information, call (407) 957-7212 or e-mail purchasing@stcloud.org.2010 Legislative Session Plan / Priority Issues
Message
Background
Message
Background
The growth management reform law that resulted from the 2009 Legislative Session is now tied up in a lawsuit – creating great uncertainty in the development industry. This uncertainty is stifling the very kind of investment in Florida’s urban areas that it was designed to create. Message
Background
Florida’s real estate market, including the condominium market, has been in turmoil for over three years. Supply far outpaced demand, and for condominiums where too few owners remained in a building to keep it afloat, many financially collapsed.Message
Background
In 2009, the International Code Congress (ICC) adopted a mandate that automatic fire sprinklers must be installed in all new one- and two-family dwellings effective January, 2011. Message
Background
Message
Background
Osceola County Purchasing Cooperative Hosts Vendor Appreciation Workshop
The Osceola County Purchasing Cooperative will hold a Vendor Appreciation Fair on Friday, March 12, 2010, from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. at the Extension Services Building at Osceola Heritage Park, located at 1921 Kissimmee Valley Lane in Kissimmee. This will be an opportunity for individuals to learn how to do business with various Osceola County agencies, including the Osceola County School District; Osceola County and its Constitutional Officers; the City of Kissimmee; the City of St. Cloud; Kissimmee Utility Authority; and Toho Water Authority.
A training session entitled “How To Do Business With Government” will be held from 10:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m. This business training session will be an informative overview of the registration and solicitation process. Special guest speakers will be on hand from local government leadership. Staff members will also be available after the presentation for assistance with the registration process and to answer questions about specific commodities and services that these government entities procure.
For additional information, please call 407-870-4630 or visit www.osceola.k12.fl.us.
Department of Community Affairs Workshop Scheduled on Rule 9J-5.006
9J-5.006: Future Land Use Element
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: The purpose and effect are to amend the rule to provide greater detail and explanation relating to the statutory requirements that the future land use element be based upon the amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth and the projected population of the area.
SUBJECT AREA TO BE ADDRESSED: The statutory requirements that the future land use element be based upon, inter alia, the amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth and the projected population of the area.
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY: 163.3177(9), (10) FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 163.3177(6)(a) FS.
DATE AND TIME: February 22, 2010, 1:00 p.m.
PLACE: Wyndham Orlando Resort – Jasmine Room, 8001 International Drive, Orlando, Florida 32819
THE PRELIMINARY TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT YET AVAILABLE
Amendment 4 Will Lead to Heavy Job Losses
Florida business, civic and labor leaders gathered in Tallahassee on January 26, 2010 to hear the report of a top Florida economist showing that Amendment 4 - a proposed change to the state constitution - would lead to heavy job loss and higher costs for Floridians.
"The losses of Florida jobs under the 'Most Likely Scenario' are very high," reported Tony Villamil, economist for Washington Economics Group, the organization that conducted the study. "Amendment 4's passage will have potentially devastating consequences to Florida's economy at a time when the economic situation at both the state and national levels is uncertain and at a time when attracting new businesses to Florida is essential for the future recovery and prosperity of the state and its residents."
The study considers a "Modest" and a "Most Likely" economic impact scenario. The study does not predict a "Worst Case" scenario. According to the study:
Under both scenarios, Florida's economic dynamism is lost. This would permanently impact the economic growth potential for Florida, causing a steady decline in the standard of living of all Florida residents. Further, permanently impacting employment and growth within major industries and job-generating activities.
"If you like the recession, you'll love Amendment 4," said Mark Wilson, President of the Florida Chamber of Commerce. "This amendment will cost jobs, hurt taxpayers and make it more expensive to live in Florida."
In an unprecedented show of unity, labor and business leaders agreed to jointly oppose Amendment 4.
"It's not too often that a union leader and a business leader agree on something," said Frank Ortis, President of the Florida State Council of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. "But we can all see how much Amendment 4 would hurt Florida's working families. And we are working together to defeat it."
Ortis and Wilson serve together on the board of Citizens for Lower Taxes and a Stronger Economy, Inc., the group formed to defeat Amendment 4. That organization is chaired by former South Bay Mayor and National League of Cities President Clarence Anthony.
"No single item on the 2010 ballot has the potential to weaken Florida's economy and hurt Florida's taxpayers more than Amendment 4," said Anthony. "If passed, this amendment will trap Florida's communities in gridlock."
The economic study indicates that Amendment 4 will also have a major impact on Florida taxpayers. According to the study:
Additionally, Florida's tax revenues would sharply slow as a result of Amendment 4's passage as fewer commercial and residential properties will be developed due to the increased costs and uncertainty associated with each comprehensive land-use plan referendum. This would force local and state governments to either raise taxes or cut services. Public schools, public safety and local health care services would suffer from both the direct impact of Amendment 4 (delay construction until the next election) and the indirect impact of fewer tax revenues from which to fund needed operations and capital investments.
If Amendment 4 is adopted, Florida would become the guinea pig for a measure that has never been adopted in any other state in the country. However, the small Florida town of St. Pete Beach adopted a local version of Amendment 4 in 2006. Since then, the town has seen fewer jobs, higher tax rates and endless litigation at taxpayer expense.
"Our experiment in Amendment 4 has turned St. Pete Beach into a battleground for special interests," said Ward Friszolowski, the former Mayor of St. Pete Beach. "And at a time of economic hardship, it has caused extraordinary damage to our economy."
"I ask the voters of Florida to learn more about St. Pete Beach-- and to learn from our mistakes," said Friszolowski. "Amendment 4 supporters promise that they'll give you a 'say on growth.' Don't believe it. Don't let them do to Florida what they already did to my hometown."
For more information, visit www.florida2010.org
…is your group missing from this list?
Another Major Newspaper Criticizes Amendment 4
On January 4th, the St Petersburg Times published the below editorial critical of Amendment 4 saying, “It… invites lawsuits and retards economic development.”
A Lesson in How Not to Manage Growth
A Times Editorial
In Print: Monday, January 4, 2010
Florida voters will decide this year whether to move local land use decisions to the ballot box, and St. Pete Beach's three-year experiment along a similar path offers a good lesson on the downside of letting voters manage planning by election.
There are indeed some important differences between what has happened in St. Pete Beach and Hometown Democracy, the constitutional amendment expected to appear on the statewide November ballot. But the concept of giving residents a "yes" or "no" vote over land use decisions that were previously decided by elected officials is being thoroughly tested in St. Pete Beach. And its version of "hometown democracy" has proven to be divisive, expensive and an impediment to much-needed redevelopment.
St. Pete Beach became ground zero for the hometown democracy movement in 2006 after city officials amended the comprehensive plan to increase height and density allowances. Residents who feared the changes would lead to rows of 15-story hotels along the barrier island organized a citizens petition to undo the changes. Voters approved the measure, repealing the changes in height and density allowances and amending the city charter to require all comprehensive plan amendments to pass voter approval -- the first city in Florida where the public had such sweeping authority.
It didn't take long for the growth advocates to get in the game. In June 2008, a different citizens group proposed a comprehensive plan more friendly to developers that won voter approval. Critics filed lawsuits against the city and the citizens group. Settlement negotiations have collapsed, the city's legal bills have exceeded $300,000, there are serious questions about whether the city violated the Sunshine law and development has ground to a halt.
In the November city election, St. Pete Beach voters decided they didn't need to vote on all comprehensive plan changes but just those affecting height, density, intensity of use, or land use categories. They also voted to retain control over any height-related changes to another city document, a set of laws known as the Land Development Code, unless those height changes had been approved in a previous referendum.
Defenders of the statewide efforts are technically correct when they say their measure isn't as sweeping as what happened in St. Pete Beach. Yet the potential for dysfunctional government is the same. Comprehensive plans are thick, technical documents usually written by professional planners. Elected officials are best situated to shape those plans to match a community's long-term vision for its future. Putting that control under direct democracy, as happened in St. Pete Beach, invites short-term thinking and frequent referendums that are even more susceptible to well-financed campaigns by powerful interests. It also invites lawsuits and retards economic development. Florida has serious growth management issues, but Hometown Democracy is not the solution.
[Last modified: Jan 03, 2010 09:15 PM]
Amendment 4 Would Be a Job Killer
Published in: The South Florida Sun Sentinel
December 22, 2009
By Mike Jones
Political spin doctors cleverly label ballot initiatives so that they sound "too good to be true." So it is with "Hometown Democracy" -- a proposed change to Florida's constitution that will appear on the ballot in November 2010 as Amendment 4.
At a time of serious economic hardship, the last thing Florida needs is a California-style system of ballot-box legislation, which hurts the economy and has contributed to unprecedented financial chaos in that state.
Under Amendment 4, the people of Florida would be forced to decide thousands of technical land-use items at the ballot box. As we have seen too often in the past, these planning decisions would quickly turn into highly politicized campaign battles. The "spin" provided by special interests, not facts, would become the basis for public decision-making.
With Amendment 4, changes to the comprehensive plan would be delayed for years -- until the next regularly scheduled election -- while jobs went elsewhere. Once they finally made their way to the ballot, job-creating projects would be forced to wage an expensive and uncertain political campaign.
Voting on everything, regardless of how trivial, as Amendment 4 requires, would invite gridlock, litigation and higher taxes. The lack of predictability created by such a process will cast a pall on our economy for the foreseeable future, should this ill-advised amendment pass.
Worse still, this amendment would stop job-creation at a time when it is most needed. This is no time for costly experimentation when foreclosures and unemployment are at historic levels. In an emerging knowledge-based economy, we need to encourage economic diversification and make it easier for projects that offer more high-skill, better-paying jobs to come to our state.
Amendment 4 is an example of a bad idea with even worse unintended consequences. Crippling job creation by requiring regular political "campaigning" on local growth-management issues is not what our forefathers envisioned. Turning every growth decision into a high-priced media campaign will surely turn public policy into a popularity contest. The pubic deserves better. Our community deserves better. Voters should vote no on Amendment 4.
Mike Jones is president and CEO of the Economic Council of Palm Beach County and an active member of Floridians for Smarter Growth, which is opposing Amendment 4.
For more information, visit www.florida2010.org
Osceola County - Notice to Contractors
Major Florida Newspaper Criticizes Amendment 4
The Palm Beach Post recently published an editorial critical of Amendment 4. In the November 20th opinion piece, the Post says:
“It’s easy to understand the appeal of Hometown Democracy. A favorite expression among Hometown Democracy supporters is that even though the proposed constitutional amendment has flaws, the system couldn’t be any worse than it is now. That’s not true. Ballots statewide would be full of jargon-laden, irrelevant junk. Developers who get legitimate plan changes would be penalized. Because St. Pete Beach suffered for three years, Florida can avoid having to suffer for much longer.”
Read the complete editorial here: http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/editorials/75965.html.
BACKGROUND
Floridians for Smarter Growth leads the opposition to Amendment 4.
Click here for additional articles regarding Amendment 4
Osceola County - Notice to Contractors
Just Take a Deep Breath
By Jim Cooper
It has been quite interesting these past few years and especially the past two to three years reading the various blogs, editorial comments and opinions bashing the "greedy developers" that are finally getting what we deserve because "they crashed the economy." One quote said "Home Builders don't like fees, even when they go to build homes."
All of these comments taken out of context certainly paint our industry as probably ranking just above the Taliban as contributing citizens and neighbors. I would like everyone to step back and examine the full spectrum of possibilities before forming an opinion based on some of these outrageous quotes.
Every business I know is trying to make a profit. What is wrong with this? The Orlando Sentinel is smaller and arguably the quality less yet the price has increased. I don't see it published every week that you are "greedy"?
Some have blurred vision about what caused this recession and glut of houses and lots. Is there no responsibility from the buyers who were purchasing homes they couldn't afford, the bankers that were lending them money knowing they couldn't afford the payments, the government putting pressure on lenders to provide a mortgage to anyone breathing because in their idealistic world every person should own a home, the wall street experts packaging worthless mortgages and selling them overseas?
Developers or builders will not build unless they think there is a demand for the product. Yes, what we found out was the demand was artificial and we are paying for those mistakes. This was not fraud; this was an honest mistake.
Yes, we don't like to pay fees because you the buyer actually pay the fees!
$25,000 in impact fees are typically rolled into a mortgage at 6% over a 30 year period. This equates to $54,000 that you the buyer pay over the life of the mortgage.. By the way, we have the highest school and transportation impact fees in the State, are our schools and roads the best in the state? Have the fees solved the problem? No, they have increased the cost of housing without solving the problem.
If someone moves to the area with six children and four cars and buys an existing home, they don't pay all of these fees, they have a huge impact on our schools and roads. Is this equitable?
I am proud of the industry that provides shelter, contributes generously to local charities and the community. We didn't cause this problem! Quit playing the blame game and start working together as a team to solve these problems.
This article was originally published as a “My Word Column” in the Orlando Sentinel on November 15, 2009.
Resources Available on Tax Credit Extension
The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has produced a comprehensive set of resources to help members spread the word about the extended $8,000 first-time home buyer tax credit, and the $6,500 tax credit for qualified repeat home buyers. There is no time to waste in promoting tax credit information, as sales contracts must be signed or homes purchased within the next 5 ½ months.
Resources available include NAHB’s consumer Web site: www.federalhousingtaxcredit.com which has been updated and provides eligibility requirements and answers frequently asked questions. Additional promotional materials can be accessed at: www.nahb.org/taxcreditmaterials.
St. Pete Beach Abandons Local Version of Amendment 4
Since beginning a 3-year experiment in Amendment 4-style rule, St. Pete Beach residents have seen endless lawsuits, higher taxes and widespread economic turmoil. Last week, the citizens of St. Pete Beach scaled back their local version of Amendment 4 so that only certain land use changes require a referendum.
While Florida voters are set to soon decide the fate of Amendment 4 - a statewide Vote on Everything initiative - St. Pete Beach voters have chosen to rein in their own local experiment by a decisive 60-40 margin.
"St. Pete Beach residents are tired of voting on everything, especially issues that don't even relate to development," said Ward Friszolowski, former Mayor of St. Pete Beach. "This amendment doesn't work. It has resulted in chaotic, confusing and expensive elections driven by sound bites rather than sound planning."
Workers’ Comp Rate Decrease Approved
Florida Insurance Commissioner Kevin McCarty recently approved a 6.8% average rate decrease for workers’ comp rates. It is estimated the decrease will save employers about $166 million. McCarty said since lawmakers reformed workers’ comp laws in 2003, rates have dropped 63% cumulatively. The filing by the National Council on Compensation Insurance will go into effect Jan. 1, 2010 for new and renewal policies.
Osceola County / St. Cloud Hosting Stakeholder Meeting for Homebuilders
Individuals in the home building industry have been invited to attend a stakeholders meeting to learn more (& comment) on the Greater St. Cloud Region Special Area Planning Study currently in progress at the City of St. Cloud and Osceola County. The meeting details are:
Stakeholders Meeting for Homebuilders
Wednesday, November 4th from 3:30 to 5:00 p.m.
Lakefront Park – Marina Building Banquet Hall
1104 Lakeshore Blvd.
St. Cloud, FL 34769
For additional information, please contact Tina Demostene with the Osceola County Planning & Zoning Office at 407.742.0200 or via email at tina.demostene@osceola.org
City Commission Repeals $2,000 Housing Demolition Fee
Last Monday, the Winter Park City Commission voted to abolish the City’s new $2,000 Residential Housing Demolition Fee. Echoing concerns HBA leaders had voiced at the September 28th City Commission meeting, Commissioners expressed unease about implementing such a large fee during a sever economic recession, and unanimously voted to repeal the $2,000 fee.
Next time you run into Charlie Clayton, HBA President Jim Cooper, or Phil Kean, please give them a well deserved “pat-on-the-back” for their successful action on this important issue.
Update on Winter Park’s New Demolition Fee
On September 28th, HBA leaders spoke before the Winter Park City Commission asking that they reconsider the recently adopted $2,000 residential housing demolition fee. As a result, the City Commission voted to reconsider the new $2,000 fee at their October 12th Board meeting.
BACKGROUND
On September 14th, the Winter Park City Commission voted to approve a revised fee schedule, which contained a new $2,000 residential housing demolition fee. Although the revenue collected will be earmarked for affordable housing, a longstanding HBA priority, this new fee will tend to make housing more expensive and less affordable.
Furthermore, as the City’s affordable housing program is already funded by the Affordable Housing Linkage Fee, an additional $2,000 fee on top of the linkage fee may be ill timed considering the economic crisis we are facing today.
Amendment 4 is Shortsighted & Bad for the Economy
By Steve O’Dowd
Hometown Democracy, contrary to Orlando Sentinel columnist Mike Thomas' beliefs ("Blocking build-build-builders," Sunday), is as good for Florida as Thomas is for Orlando.
As a Florida resident for 40 years — 25 of them in Central Florida — I have watched Orlando become the "City Beautiful" as a result of the combined efforts of private and public enterprise. We open our arms to diversity, immigration and tourism as cornerstones of the area's existence, yet when it comes to providing employment, we continue to fight capitalistic ignorance by people who fail to realize that their ideological world fails to provide jobs and other means of achieving individual support.
These beliefs are contrary to those who advocate the advancement of free enterprise capitalism. Hometown Democracy is short-sighted, disregarding long-term economic effects.
Consider a few issues that Thomas stands behind.
The basis of Hometown Democracy is to move control of the regulation of land use from those trained to handle it to a consensus of the general public. To the average person or business, this means a desired change in property use would become a decision to be made by the popular vote.
Imagine a family taking in their senior parents or returning children, needing a land-use change to accommodate a second kitchen to be built. Presently, local and state officials handle this process. According to Hometown Democracy, the general population would make the decision whether to approve it.
Similarly, consider the small business desiring to expand into an adjoining property needing a land-use change. Presently, systems, laws and public hearings are in place to handle requests like these. Thomas must think our local government, its staff and its elected officials are not qualified to do their jobs.
St. Petersburg Beach adopted a plan similar to Hometown Democracy, which restricted land-use changes. Thomas should revisit his previous column ("Hometown Democracy gone wild," Orlando Sentinel, June 25) and report on the blight that has since occurred there as a result of the paralysis of this approval process.
Thomas needs to look beyond his disdain for builders and developers and consider the damage that his biased stance would have on the overall economy.
Maybe he should let the tens of thousands of unemployed Central Floridians review and vote on whether his articles should be published. Maybe Thomas would realize that business people need a voice and have needs also, if for no other reason than to give people like him opportunities for employment.
Steve O'Dowd of Longwood is president of O'Dowd Consulting and Vice President of the HBA of Metro Orlando.
This article was originally published as a “My Word Column” in the Orlando Sentinel on October 1, 2009.
Amendment 4 Information
To learn more about Amendment 4, please click-on one of the three web links below:
3. FAQs
Gopher Tortoise Update
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) recently announced its finding that a petition filed by Save Our Big Scrub, Inc., and Wild South to designate the gopher tortoise (GT) as threatened, including the population in Florida, Georgia and portions of Alabama and South Carolina, presented sufficient information to determine that such listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) may be warranted. This finding initiates a process that could result in the formal listing of the GT under the ESA and the designation of critical habitat.
This species is abundant in many parts of Florida and is now subject to a statewide management plan which prohibits entombment. Listing of the GT under the ESA would have catastrophic impacts on land development, agriculture, resource extraction and infrastructure construction in Florida since upon formal listing, take, including compliance with the state guidelines, would be prohibited unless authorized by FWS.
Based upon experience, such approvals by FWS could take years to obtain. “The Florida Home Builders Association will be monitoring this situation closely as it develops and interjecting itself as appropriate to discourage the formal listing of this species at the federal level, including, but not limited to, advocating that Florida seek a carve-out based upon the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission’s extensive involvement with this species,” said FHBA General Counsel Keith Hetrick.
AMENDMENT 4: DEFINING THE DEBATE
By Ryan Houck
The wealthy backers of Amendment 4 (formerly known as “Hometown Democracy”) have invested six years and nearly $2 million in their attempt to re-write Florida’s constitution. With their amendment now slated to appear on the 2010 ballot, the debate over this anti-jobs proposal is rapidly heating up.
Not surprisingly, Amendment 4 supporters spend most of their time debating last year’s legislation, local policymaking and absolutely anything other than their own radical idea. Their objective is simple: Make this campaign about everything except the costs and workability of Amendment 4. In public debates with Amendment 4 founder and co-author Lesley Blackner, a few recent examples have emerged:
Sprawl. Amendment 4 supporters often talk about sprawl. However, respected planners, environmentalists and growth management experts note that Amendment 4 may encourage sprawling patterns of development by making well-coordinated planning impossible. This amendment would discourage local policymaking that might otherwise prevent one-unit-per-five-acre sprawl. That is why leading growth management groups like 1000 Friends of Florida and the Florida American Planning Association are opposed to Amendment 4.
Special Interests. Amendment 4 supporters often pretend that their idea will just “give the voters a say on growth.” That’s not true. Amendment 4 advocates do not want to empower voters; they want to stop growth at any cost. Under their proposal, special interests on both sides of the development debate will gain influence at the expense of ordinary citizens. Rather than being compelled to compromise, interest groups will be encouraged to draft the most extreme proposals and hire political consultants to sell them. Under Amendment 4, sound bites will have more influence than sound planning.
Amendment 4 supporters do not want this debate to be about their idea. They want it to be about a variety of issues, policy changes and proposals that will not appear on the ballot. Their goal is to change the subject of this campaign and distract voters with issues that their amendment will neither address nor solve.
We must not allow Amendment 4 supporters to cloud the debate or make it about anything other than their extreme proposal. For more information on Amendment 4 or Floridians for Smarter Growth, please visit www.florida2010.org.
Ryan Houck is the executive director of Floridians for Smarter Growth.
St. Pete Beach urges residents to vote against Amendment 4
ST. PETE BEACH -- There was no doubt Tuesday that the City Commission dislikes a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution that would require voter approval to change land use regulations.
The city has operated under a local voter-approved version of that restriction since 2006 and has incurred about $300,000 in legal bills defending itself against a series of related lawsuits.
In a formal resolution, the commission called the proposed Amendment 4 "a grave threat to Florida's unique quality of life, the stability of its communities and the prosperity of its economy."
If passed, the constitutional amendment, sometimes called Hometown Democracy, would "further disenfranchise millions of Florida's already fatigued electorate, paralyze local governments and cripple local businesses."
And even though two commissioners -- Mayor Mike Finnerty and Christopher Leonard -- objected to making that view official, the commission voted 3-2 on a resolution calling for the defeat of Amendment 4 in November.
The resolution urges city residents to vote "no" on a ballot question that "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."
The resolution was suggested by the Mayor's Council, a group representing the 24 municipalities in Pinellas County.
St. Pete Beach had its own version of the proposed constitutional amendment added to its charter in 2006 when voters approved a referendum put forward by Citizens for Responsible Growth requiring voters to approve any changes to the city comprehensive plan.
Three months ago, voters relaxed that requirement, allowing minor changes, particularly when such changes are mandated by state law, to be approved solely by the City Commission. Left unchanged, however, is the requirement that any changes affecting density or intensity of land uses, building heights or additions to or changes to land use categories must still be submitted to voters.
In fact, voters here will be asked in March to approve an updated redevelopment plan.
But before the commission began debate on the amendment, attorney Ken Weiss, who continues to represent former CRG activists in legal actions against the city, urged the commission to reject the resolution.
"It seems some of the developers and the development community in the state have tried to make St. Pete Beach the hallmark, the bad boy of Hometown Democracy," Weiss said. "Hometown Democracy gives every single citizen the right to vote on the future of his or her community."
Several commissioners later challenged Weiss, arguing the city is the "poster child" for what is wrong with Amendment 4.
"This takes us back to before the November election and puts everything back on the ballot. It actually is far more comprehensive than what we had before," said Commissioner Bev Garnett. "That's not what our voters said they want."
Commissioner Al Halpern said passage of the constitutional amendment would trigger unemployment because of its negative impact on development and construction.
"We have a representative form of government," said Commissioner Jim Parent. "People realize how much time it takes to review issues. Amendment 4 will frustrate voters. If this passes statewide, there may be less planning that gets done. Net-net it is going to cost the counties and the cities investment dollars that might otherwise come their way. People aren't going to want to move to Florida."
Leonard said although he understood the impact on the commercial real estate industry, he was "not comfortable" with the resolution because it told people how to vote.
"I would much rather stay neutral on this and leave it up to the intelligence of the people of St. Pete Beach as to how they are going to vote on this," agreed Finnerty.
This article was originally published in the St. Petersburg Times on February 1, 2010.
