Dinner Panel: Yes or No on Amendment 4

The UEL dinner on October 20th tackled the question: Is Florida Hometown Democracy (Amendment #4) The Best Answer for Growth Management? Here is the evening in pictures:


Former City of Miami Mayor Maurice Ferre makes a point in favor of Amendment 4.


Co-Presidents of UEL, Sonia Succar Ferre and Fran Bohnsack take a moment for a photo op.


County Commission Katy Sorenson spoke against Amendment 4 and Former City of Miami City Manager spoke for it.


Above: Helen Ferre moderated the Panel. Below: Former Miami Beach Mayor, Neisen Kasdin at the podium speaking against Amendment 4.


UEL Board Member Enid Pinkney and Charlayne Thompkins listen to an audience member asking a question. UEL Board Member Erika Brigman center.


UEL member Beatrix Baldan questions the speakers about the Amendment.


The audience listening to the discussion.

Frank Rollason at the UEL Dinner last night: Talking about Amendment 4

Why I Am Voting YES on Amendment 4. By Albert Harum-Avarez

We know in our gut that land use in Florida is out of the control of citizens, and so Amendment 4—Hometown Democracy—has a strong attraction for anyone who cares about Florida. Turns out this is one of those cases where you can trust your gut. Here are the main arguments against Hometown Democracy, de-constructed one by one:

1. AMENDMENT 4 (HOMETOWN DEMOCRACY) IS TOO FAR-REACHING.

Here's how the Miami Herald summarized the opponents' argument the other day: "...the amendment amounts to an indiscriminate blast that, by leaving often technically complex decisions to the unpredictability of the ballot box, could make matters worse by inhibiting smart planning while stifling development in a state heavily dependent on it for jobs."

It's a classic scare tactic, evoking lost jobs and recession. But the truth is, overdevelopment is what has made the Great Recession even GREATER in Florida. And that happened under the current rules, not under Amendment 4. What we see today is mostly bad planning, and overbuilding has left us with an economy very vulnerable to downturns. None of that can be blamed on Amendment 4—which hasn't passed yet.

2. THESE DECISIONS SHOULD BE LEFT TO ELECTED OFFICIALS, WHOM WE CAN VOTE OUT OF OFFICE IF THEY DO A POOR JOB.

Some people have swallowed the argument that elected officials should be entrusted with these Comp Plan decisions. Of course, we all know that local democracy is in a coma, induced by truckloads of developer money. County Commission incumbents have turned away challengers 56 times in a row--despite the commission's craven record on land use decisions.

If you count Katy Sorenson's win over sexual abuser Larry Hawkins 16 years ago, and if Jean Monestime is finally able to turn out bought-and-paid-for Commissioner Dorrin Rolle, the score will improve to 56 to 2. That's not exactly a ringing endorsement of our democratic process. Elections have not given Florida's voters a shred of confidence in their ability to steer development in this state. That's why the Amendment 4 petition effort was supported so strongly.

3. THE RESULTING BALLOT MEASURES WILL BE NUMEROUS AND COMPLICATED.

This is a complete exaggeration. Complex administrative decisions will never get to the voters. If there is a ruling that minor technical matters have to go to a vote, The Developer Lobby will pull the strings on their legislative marionettes, and the statewide Comp Plan rules will be adjusted. Bank on it!

Please pass the word: YES on 4.

The Time to RSVP is Now for UEL Dinner October 20th!

hit on image to enlarge it...all info is on the invitation.. .reserve today! Uelinfo@bellsouth.net

UEL October 20th Dinner: Panel on Florida's Amendment 4

To enlarge graphic hit on it.

Amendment 4 Debate, September 28th

The Downtown Bay Forum (www.downtownbaforum.com) is having a luncheon September 28th at 11:30. The subject will be:

Amendment 4: Tonic for over development or barrier to growth?

The speakers will be Tom Connick 'for' and Neisen Kasdin 'against' the amendment. Helen Ferre will be the moderator. To reserve for the luncheon at the Marriott Hotel, 1633 N. Bayshore Drive, call Annette Eisenberg at 305 757-3633.

A UEL member asked us to post this Video about Amendment 4.

The Urban Environment League has no official position on Florida Amendment 4 but we do have a strong position on the right of the public to be heard. The public put this Amendment on the ballot and we believe they are entitled to have the voters vote on it. The UEL recommends that you get informed on both sides so you can make an informed decision.

Andrew Dickman Speaks out in Naples News.

Long time friend of the Urban Environment League has written an opinon piece in the Naples News:

Guest commentary: Amendment 4 empowers citizens to vote on their community’s future
Andrew Dickman / Naples -Monday, March 29, 2010

Florida’s 1985 Growth Management Act was a promise to all Floridians that they would have a fair say in decisions about the future of their communities. That promise has been broken. Big development and politicians control our destiny, while citizens get three minutes to voice their opposition at public hearings in front of their elected officials.

The act promised to manage population growth and direct new development away from sensitive environmental areas and stop urban sprawl. The law promised to stop incompatible developments from damaging the quality of life in your neighborhoods and diminishing your property values. The statute promised that your future comprehensive plan would only be amended under very limited circumstances. All are broken promises.

After 25 years, not one planning study calls Florida’s growth-management system a success. Yet, year after year, despite persistent lobbying, Tallahassee watchdog groups and professional planning associations settle for concessions to important planning laws. Meanwhile, citizen activism and disenchantment grows.

Florida Hometown Democracy was established by citizens who said enough is enough. After more than six years of fighting against the lobbyists and politicians connected to big development who would rather keep the status quo, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that Florida Hometown Democracy’s referendum to amend the state constitution will be on the Nov. 2 ballot. “Amendment 4” will require that all city- or county-approved changes to the future land-use plan will not become effective unless a majority of voters in that city or county approve it. In my opinion, this will guarantee that citizens have an equal voice and seat at the table with big development and the government.

The opposition relies on fear and disinformation. They claim that land-use plans are too complicated for the average citizen. They say that too many amendments are approved by local governments every year and that voters will be overwhelmed. They argue annual construction jobs and related industries that rely on uninhibited growth will be destroyed. They falsely claim that Florida Hometown Democracy wants to stop all development, which is completely false.

The truth is, Florida Hometown Democracy was founded on the notion that citizens should not bear the cost of hit-and-run developers and that elected officials must be held accountable when they change future land-use plans. Amendment 4 seeks to inspire disenfranchised citizens who, under the current system, can only watch as the state’s natural resources and infrastructure fall apart.

Those who benefit from keeping growth management complex do not want you to understand it and they fear making the planning process transparent.

I have taught law students, hundreds of trade organizations, homeowner associations and civic groups about the Growth Management Act. What I have learned is that if your intent is to empower rather than confuse, then growth management isn’t that complicated. I believe that all citizens should know more about what their government’s future plans are for their community, and I strongly believe that the public should be allowed to fully participate. Amendment 4 is an opportunity for that to happen.

A fundamental strategy of Amendment 4 is to slow the number of amendments to future land-use plans in order to guide new development into areas already designated for that growth. Future land-use plans around the state already have enough land set aside to accommodate development for decades to come.

Six years ago, the University of Florida concluded that if the current trend of amending future land-use plans continues, the state will become 45 percent urbanized by the year 2060, three times more than it is today. The UF study also concluded that Southwest Florida will become a continuous band of urban development, and that “natural systems and wildlife habitat corridors in the region will be fragmented, if not replaced, by urban development.”

Based on the this study, the University of Central Florida determined that if we don’t select an alternative path, the total cost of urbanizing land would amount to at least $695 billion by 2060 and an additional $85 billion will be needed for additional highways and major roads to serve dispersed, newly urbanized areas. All studies on the topic conclude that we simply cannot afford the current trend.

Population growth and development isn’t necessarily the problem. The real challenge is managing that growth and development. Unfortunately, innovative development patterns realistically will not happen until big development and the government are held accountable by Amendment 4.

To learn more about this, visit www.floridahometowndemocracy.com.

Dickman is a land-use attorney based in Naples. He earned his master’s degree in urban and regional planning from the University of Florida and he is a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. He previously was policy director for the Conservancy of Southwest Florida. Dickman currently serves on the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council and he is an adjunct professor at Ave Maria School of Law teaching land-use and environmental law.

The Amendment 4 Debate

Last night almost 100 people showed up for the debate on Amendment 4. Florida Hometown Democracy President, Lesley Blackner, faced off against Clifford Schulman, an attorney who belongs to Floridians for Smarter Growth. Helen Ferre moderated.

Blackner believes giving people a say in Comprehensive Land changes --by giving them what amounts to a veto-- will lead to smarter growth. Schulman opposed her, saying the public couldn't be trusted with such decisions, He pulled out volumes and said, how can the public learn this. I was thinking, how can my commissioner either? He said there would be no growth or an economic recovery. Blackner believes the people will do the right thing and blamed the sluggish economy on the outfall from over development.

Senatorial Candidate Maurice Ferre was in the audience at the Rusty Pelican, getting educated for his Sentatorial campaign.

There was a section on St. Pete Beach that Schulman described as having a law similar to FHTD's Amendment 4 and he states everything has gone wrong. He said FHTD funded St. Pete's law. But Leslie countered that she didn't know anything about it until recently. She gave a pictorial presentation about St. Pete's Policies and where they went wrong. This seemed to stop the attack by Schulman.

The Amendment is expected to be on the November 2010 ballot. We are interested to hear your opinions, especially if you were there last night.

Lesley Blackner will be at the January 20th UEL Dinner.

Lesley Blackner is President of Florida Hometown Democracy. Here is a reprint of a letter that Blackner wrote to Palm Beach Post on Amendment 4 which will be debated at our dinner tomorrow, you have till noon today to RSVP at uelinfo@bellsouth.net:

The Palm Beach Post
Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor:
The November 2010 election is still a year away and yet The Post is already editorializing against Florida Hometown Democracy, on the ballot as Amendment 4. Given The Post recognized that Amendment 4 is “the biggest thing on the 2010 ballot,” it is very important to set the record straight.

The Post editorialized that under Amendment 4, voters will be forced to vote on every single change to a local comprehensive plan, whether important or meaningless.

In fact, the plain language of Amendment 4 establishes voter referendum only over comprehensive plan changes that concern “future land development.” Nothing else. These “future land development” changes often determine the future of a community for decades to come. The Post thus erred when it stated that Amendment 4 will require a vote on each and every comprehensive plan change.

For the past 25 years, the Florida Growth Management Act has mandated that each local government have a “comprehensive plan.” According to the law, each plan’s purpose is to “establish standards for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and fiscal development of the area.” The Growth Management Act acknowledges that Americans rightly expect a certain level of infrastructure and municipal services which will be paid for by a dedicated funding source. The American standard of living requires government to provide certain things like drinkable water, adequate police, drivable roads, decent schools, open space, etc. It’s what separates us from the Third World.

To that end, the law directs that each comprehensive plan must contain a map designating future land use categories. The plan must also contain other elements supporting the land use designation with levels of service for traffic; sewer and water; conservation, recreation and open space; and capital improvements. Commissioners vote on changes to these plan elements. Amendment 4 will not cover those changes. Commissioners also vote on changes to the future land use element, which controls the location, amount and type of development permitted. Amendment 4 will cover these changes.

The frustrating experience of years watching arrogant commissioners ignore the public interest and rubberstamp endless speculative overdevelopment produced Amendment 4. Too many local commissions forget who they represent when they just can’t say no to yet another piece of reckless sprawl that further raises our taxes and depresses our home values. Operating under the influence of developer contributions to their political campaigns, our political class drove Florida’s economy over the cliff. Yet most are loathe to take any “personal responsibility” for the calamity.

Unrepentant, too many elected local officials continue to mindlessly rubberstamp growth plan changes to allow even more speculative “future land development.” Anyone paying attention sees that our political class is incapable of self reform. Voters must take back control. Amendment 4 is the only way to bring accountability back to a broken growth planning system.

Amendment 4? Yes or No? By Fran Bohnsack

Although the 2010 election is still a year away, there’s no doubt that Amendment 4 is the biggest thing on next November’s ballot. Proposed as an antidote to reckless and speculative over-development, Amendment 4 has mobilized Growth Management proponents and catalyzed opposition from Chambers of Commerce and elected officials across the state of Florida.

The question on which the amendment centers is this: Should the public be allowed to ratify a vote on comprehensive plan changes that concern "future land development" since these changes often determine the future of a community for decades to come —in communities where voters reside.

Hometown Democracy argues “Yes,” pointing out that Amendment 4 requires a public vote only after a Commission approves sweeping changes to the location, amount, and type of development currently permitted for a given area. Opponents say “No” to Hometown Democracy, arguing that the citizen vote will be cumbersome and that elected officials already give the voters representation on the changes. Which side has it right? More important, how will you vote on Amendment 4? We hope after this discussion you will form an opinion.

The Uel is hosting a debate, on January 20th, at the Rusty Pelican, between Lesley Blackner Amendment 4 supporter and founder of the group Florida Hometown Democracy and Clifford Schulman, member of Floridians for Smarter Growth.

Please RSVP today at uelinfo@bellsouth.net.

UEL Dinner on Amendment 4 on January 20th

Excellent dinner for an incredible price and a great program to boot!
(Hit on image to enlarge it.)

Is Amendment 4 the Right Answer?

There is an article in the Miami Herald today about Amendment 4. The author says:

In the complex world of comprehensive land-use plans, the public cannot vote.

However, this uneven balance of power could change in the 2010 elections. A proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution would give the public the final say on changes to a comprehensive land-use plan that have been approved by commissioners.

Given that changes to a development plan determine the fate of a community for future generations, it is vital that those changes reflect voters' interests, maintains Florida Hometown Democracy, which is promoting Amendment 4.

Contrary to the arguments of the amendment's foes, the objective would not be to ask voters to approve all changes, no matter how minor, like putting an addition onto a house. Instead, it would be limited to significant changes in development policies.

What is your opinion readers? Do you want to leave the last word with voters or politicians?