Backers want the state Constitution to allow local voters to decide on community development.
By JULIE HAUSERMAN
Published August 1, 2003
TALLAHASSEE - Complaining that too many Florida politicians say yes to developers, a new citizen's group wants to let voters decide when to change a community's land use plan.
"Like a lot of people, I've been upset about what's happened to Florida," said Lesley Blackner, a Palm Beach environmental attorney who started the group, Florida Hometown Democracy, to collect signatures for an amendment to Florida's Constitution.
The amendment would require a local election before a city or county commission could change its local comprehensive plan.
The group contends that even though local plans are supposed to stop sprawl, it isn't turning out that way. All over Florida, shopping center developers get approval to build in the countryside, then leave vacant storefronts downtown. Roads and schools are overcrowded and new housing developments sprawl over farm fields.
"The state has so abandoned enforcement of the Growth Management Act, and created such a huge void, that the people are stepping in now to fill it," said Richard Grosso, a Florida land use attorney at Nova Southeastern University who supports the amendment drive.
Florida Hometown Democracy has no major financial backers, and even the state's large environmental groups don't know much about the effort.
The group must collect nearly 500,000 signatures and get approval from the state Supreme Court to get the amendment on the November 2004 ballot. So far, it is relying on volunteers to circulate petitions. Past Constitutional amendment drives have cost millions and used paid signature-collectors.
Blackner said a Constitutional amendment is the only way to bypass politicians who are sometimes beholden to developer dollars.
"I've concluded that the "good ol' boys' go in the back room and cut a deal. That's the history of Florida," she said. "The whole government has accepted the principle of growth-for-the-sake-of-growth mentality, and people think they can't do anything about it."
In the area around Ventura, Calif., citizens have been voting on land use changes for years, said California land use expert William Fulton. He said it has had an impact.
Instead of trying to get a local government to change its plan and allow more sprawl, developers tend to stay inside a community's growth boundaries to avoid a local election, Fulton said.
"The developers choose the path of least resistance," he said.
Florida Homebuilders Association lobbyist Doug Buck said his group opposes the Hometown Democracy initiative. But he predicts the amendment will pass if it gets on the ballot.
"Do we think people are happy with growth and development in Florida? No. Unless you get your paycheck from the industry, no," Buck said. "People see overcrowded roads, overcrowded schools. But at least half of that is not from new construction."
The problem isn't poor planning, Buck said. The problem is that government hasn't funded the roads, schools and other infrastructure to keep pace with growth, he said.
A Constitutional amendment won't help that, he said, adding: "We've got as much public participation as any place in the U.S."'
One question is how many elections a local government would have to hold each year to vote on land use changes. In Pinellas, the plan only gets changed twice a year, said Planning Director Brian Smith. But the state Department of Community Affairs annually reviews hundreds of plan changes around the state.
Some Hometown Democracy supporters say forcing a local election would cut down on plan changes. Tallahassee land use attorney Ross Burnaman, co-chairman of the group, said comprehensive plans already set aside enough land for development over 20 years.
But developers still want changes, he said.
"People go to these meetings and wait for hours, and they might get three to five minutes to speak. It's a very difficult way to participate, and not a lot of citizens are willing to step up to the plate," Burnaman said. "What better way to encourage participation than to put these matters to the ballot?"
