Amendment 4

[tufsu1]

Stephen...Planners (and APA Florida as an advocacy and professional development organization) are involved in the development and real estate indusry....so yes, we bear some responsibility...but I would argue that every person in Florida is responsible (at some level) for the landscape we have today.

I think what Miss Fix It is trying to say is that ANY development might be stopped as part of Amendment 4....here are some examples

a. A new convention center downtown
b. Expansion of the VA Clinic in Springfield
c. New residential development (infill) in the urban core.

APA Florida is developing a presentation that includes some statewide examples of projects that could be considered "good planning" that required comp. plan land use (LU) amendments...these include:

1. a 16-acre waterfront park in Port St. Joe (LU change from Industrial to Recreation)
2. new downtown arena complex in Orlando (LU change from Office to Urban Activity Center)
3. new schools (often LU is changed to Public or Institutional)
4. other public facilities (fire stations, hospitals, sewer plants, etc. often require LU changes)
5. historic resources (LU for cemetery in Port St. Joe was changed to protect it)

These types of projects could be in jeopardy if Amendment 4 passes.

[lindab]

Chip, you say that all development will come to a halt if Amendment 4 is passed.  Does all this development truly violate the local comprehensive plan?  We would have no growth if we followed our comprehensive plan? Amazing!

Are you saying that voters are so ignorant that they cannot decide what kind of community development they think is worthwhile paying taxes to support? After all those ignorant voters will have to pay for the roads, sewers, schools, police and fire and various government amenities to support most of those comprehensive plan changes, right?

I feel pretty insulted by some of these comments. Pay up and shut up, right?

[tufsu1]

APA's members don't want to have their professional opinions and plans subject to review by an ignorant public.  How demeaning.  What a blow to professional pride.  What a blow to your paychecks when development is slowed.  

That is not the motivating factor for planners...we already have our opinions and plans reviewed and often thrown away by decision makers (elected officials).

[Dog Walker]

APA's members don't want to have their professional opinions and plans subject to review by an ignorant public.  How demeaning.  What a blow to professional pride.  What a blow to your paychecks when development is slowed.  

That is not the motivating factor for planners...we already have our opinions and plans reviewed and often thrown away by decision makers (elected officials).

And I was being a bit sarcastic.  I have known many, many good reports from planners recommending that a change to the comp plan NOT be approved only to be overruled by developer controlled elected officials.  That has to burn the pride a good deal.  It is also the reason that the Directors of the Water Management Districts now have the SOLE authority to approve or deny any applications.  Too often the staffs of the districts were saying things to the Boards of the Districts that the developers didn't want them to hear.  Now they only have to get to the director rather than the whole board and now the staffs are stifled.

[Miss Fixit]

Here is the full text of Amendment 4.  I'll provide my thoughts later, after you all have a chance to digest this.

FULL TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT:
BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF FLORIDA THAT:
Article II, Section 7. Natural resources and scenic beauty of the Florida
Constitution is amended to add the following subsection:
Public participation in local government comprehensive land use planning benefits
the conservation and protection of Florida’s natural resources and scenic beauty,
and the long-term quality of life of Floridians. Therefore, before a local
government may adopt a new comprehensive land use plan, or amend a
comprehensive land use plan, such proposed plan or plan 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 as
provided by general law, and notice thereof in a local newspaper of general
circulation. Notice and referendum will be as provided by general law. This
amendment shall become effective immediately upon approval by the electors of
Florida.
For purposes of this subsection:
1. “Local government” means a county or municipality.
2. “Local government comprehensive land use plan” means a plan to guide and
control future land development in an area under the jurisdiction of a local
government.
3. “Local planning agency” means the agency of a local government that is
responsible for the preparation of a comprehensive land use plan and plan
amendments after public notice and hearings and for making recommendations to
the governing body of the local government regarding the adoption or amendment
of a comprehensive land use plan.
4. “Governing body” means the board of county commissioners of a county, the
commission or council of a municipality, or the chief elected governing body of a
county or municipality, however designated.

[tufsu1]

the oddest part of the language is the term "comprehensive land use plan"....taken literally, these don't exist as comprehensive plans in Florida have a Future Land Use Eleemnt....however, the authors of the amendment take a much broader view and interpet it as referring to any plan affecting land use.

[JeffreyS]

Well we have the internet now lets just vote online and not have a representavie republic. So every time someone watches Glen Beck or Al Franken they will be able to cast their informed vote, brillant.

[CS Foltz]

"Local Government Land Use Plan"? We don't have anything like that other than the master plan used by developers to enhance their profits! I mean get real here.......we are driven by developers whether or not we acknowledge that..........malls, houses, condos, marina's, sprawl! There is no overseeing entity other than the allmighty dollar! FDOT, in their infinite wisdom, just wants to build more roads, more concrete and oh by the way lets make this one a toll road! Get some rail going and build off of it..............not Rat Rail style but something that could be actual mass transit............but I digress........I say "Yes" since this is a opportunity for those with some sense to reign in developers who can not bamboozle me!

[tufsu1]

ok CS...try this one....in order to implement SunRail (not ratrail), several local governments had to amend their comprehensive plan...both transportation/capital improvements elements to include the line and the land use element to create density at stations.

would this have passed if it went to referendum....or would central Florida be stuck with more roads?

[British Shoe Company]

Stephendare, your a straight shooter.

Who works where?

What are the positives of #4, and the negatives of #4

Sea ya

[billy]

Any poll or data on whether or not this will pass?

[north miami]

#4 envisions returning to basics established in the 1970's Local Government Planning Act.

The Citizens have a role,decide on future land use.This reflected in FLUM-Future Land Use Map.
FLUM updated per routine schedule.

We have seen a rash of FLUM amendments,the rising role of ardent developer pressure,often implemented through friendly sounding Planners & Consultants and other elements to the point that the general outline desired by the public has been lost.

(St.Johns County is a dandy example-though lost on most.Citizens operating in such vacuum often grow to become leaders in the #4 concept)
Amendment # 4 simply restores the definitive role of the Citizen.

There is a significant amount of future vested development already commited for.

People take a stand according to where they sit and the source of specific high profile opposition to #4 is telling.

[CS Foltz]

north miami..........I agree! The more I think on this, the more I am leaning in the "Yes" side of the equation! Getting something, that voters have to approve, just circumvents elected official rubber stamping and there is where I do not agree with what is taking place. Concordance is just one tool and often not even used for an effected area but somewhere else........who makes that call, our elected officials. If you can not depend on the elected ones, court of last resort is the electorat....good or bad, the people have the last say!

[tufsu1]

ok folks...here's what is going to happen if Amendment 4 passes....the Legislature will basically wipe out Growth Management and Comp. Planning laws and start all over.....now while that actully seems like an admirable idea (and our laws seriously need a rewrite), do you trust the Legislature to get it right?

[billy]

If approved, when would it actually become law?