Amendment 4

[Dog Walker]

Well if this just governs amending multi-year master landuse plans then it sounds like all the shrieking that everyone is doing on this forum, and everwhere else, about how Amendment 4 is going to make you have a voter referendum to put up a new mailbox is nothing more than made-up hysterics and bullcrap. Typical. I hate politics.

That is exactly what it does, Chris. But the development community is used to being able to change the land use plans easier than we change our socks.  They are using the typical "big lie" tactics on this.

[simms3]

As far as rail, you have a valid point. I doubt the suburbanites in Mandarin would vote to build streetcars in Riverside. And I doubt we'd vote to do anything in Mandarin. I suspect maybe there needs to be more localization, perhaps narrow the focus into local and regional planning boards. Again amendment 4 isn't necessarily the answer, but it's no more FUBAR than what we've got now. The ultimate solution is probably some type of caucus system involving districted planning boards, so that each area has the opportunity to represent its interests. Under the current system, especially in a consolidated city/county government like Duval, the view from above is so large that the total picture gets lost in the shuffle.

Well according to many land planners/MPO guys/state DOT guys/and transportation planners the exact opposite is the problem.  Here in Atlanta we can't get anything done precisely because there are 77 (now 79 I think) governments in a 20 county MPO region.  Also, a major problem with every locality except of a couple (Portland being one) is that the state DOT and the MPO do the long range master plan and TIP whereas the local municipalities and counties do all the zoning/land planning, and there is only coordination on projects in the final stages.

People that came and lectured my Urban Transportation class yesterday have been pushing for a more streamlined board/process so stuff can actually get done.

Personally, I think the problem lays with the people (which is precisely why I don't want the people being the ultimate end all source of land/transportation decisions...a rare instance with me where I think it is government's job and not the people's).  Of course I am for input in the form of public meetings and public hearings, but I think we have gotten so distracted with other issues and social issues even on the local level that city council candidates don't even mention really their positions on zoning, transportation, regulations, etc, and it has become out of site out of mind until you are the individual affected.

I think our system works fine and if people are concerned about elected officials making under the table deals or appointing crooks to other positions, they should do due diligence on the person and find out their background.  We all know voter turnout is poor from national elections all the way especially to local elections where it's dismal, even though local elections usually have the greatest direct impact on people.  Once again, I simply blame the people for not utilizing to the full extent a brilliant system already in place (and then blaming the system).

Plus here is what happens all the time.  Dan and Sally move from Danfield, CT to some place off of Race Track road (a $350,000 5-4-door faux stucco home with half an acre and a community center).  There is only one other similar development that they also looked at.  Dan commutes to Southpoint or Baymeadows or Downtown and Sally takes care of the kids (they are there for the schools right?).  Well fast forward 5-10 years and now there are 12 developments like their's on Race Track and traffic counts at SR-13 went from 10,000/day to 45,000/day.  Now Sally and Dan are mad because they didn't think other developments would come in, at least so quickly.  Now they are spewing thoughts about how sprawl has ruined the "charm" of the area and Dan's commute has doubled in time.  Well, to me it sounds very hypocritical, but I bet tons of people just like this are in favor of Amendment 4 for very hypocritical and selfish reasons.  So other people shouldn't be allowed to have the same 5-4-door sprawl life as Sally and Dan?  Get my point?

[simms3]

That is exactly what it does, Chris. But the development community is used to being able to change the land use plans easier than we change our socks.  They are using the typical "big lie" tactics on this.

Sure the developers lobby elected/appointed officials and MPO to change the land use plans.  Even without developers these plans change all the time out of necessity.  Land use doesn't just change in the suburbs, it changes frequently in the city, as well, to allow for higher density development or a zoning ordinance allowance to make an exception.

[ChriswUfGator]

As far as rail, you have a valid point. I doubt the suburbanites in Mandarin would vote to build streetcars in Riverside. And I doubt we'd vote to do anything in Mandarin. I suspect maybe there needs to be more localization, perhaps narrow the focus into local and regional planning boards. Again amendment 4 isn't necessarily the answer, but it's no more FUBAR than what we've got now. The ultimate solution is probably some type of caucus system involving districted planning boards, so that each area has the opportunity to represent its interests. Under the current system, especially in a consolidated city/county government like Duval, the view from above is so large that the total picture gets lost in the shuffle.

Well according to many land planners/MPO guys/state DOT guys/and transportation planners the exact opposite is the problem.  Here in Atlanta we can't get anything done precisely because there are 77 (now 79 I think) governments in a 20 county MPO region.  Also, a major problem with every locality except of a couple (Portland being one) is that the state DOT and the MPO do the long range master plan and TIP whereas the local municipalities and counties do all the zoning/land planning, and there is only coordination on projects in the final stages.

People that came and lectured my Urban Transportation class yesterday have been pushing for a more streamlined board/process so stuff can actually get done.

Personally, I think the problem lays with the people (which is precisely why I don't want the people being the ultimate end all source of land/transportation decisions...a rare instance with me where I think it is government's job and not the people's).  Of course I am for input in the form of public meetings and public hearings, but I think we have gotten so distracted with other issues and social issues even on the local level that city council candidates don't even mention really their positions on zoning, transportation, regulations, etc, and it has become out of site out of mind until you are the individual affected.

I think our system works fine and if people are concerned about elected officials making under the table deals or appointing crooks to other positions, they should do due diligence on the person and find out their background.  We all know voter turnout is poor from national elections all the way especially to local elections where it's dismal, even though local elections usually have the greatest direct impact on people.  Once again, I simply blame the people for not utilizing to the full extent a brilliant system already in place (and then blaming the system).

Plus here is what happens all the time.  Dan and Sally move from Danfield, CT to some place off of Race Track road (a $350,000 5-4-door faux stucco home with half an acre and a community center).  There is only one other similar development that they also looked at.  Dan commutes to Southpoint or Baymeadows or Downtown and Sally takes care of the kids (they are there for the schools right?).  Well fast forward 5-10 years and now there are 12 developments like their's on Race Track and traffic counts at SR-13 went from 10,000/day to 45,000/day.  Now Sally and Dan are mad because they didn't think other developments would come in, at least so quickly.  Now they are spewing thoughts about how sprawl has ruined the "charm" of the area and Dan's commute has doubled in time.  Well, to me it sounds very hypocritical, but I bet tons of people just like this are in favor of Amendment 4 for very hypocritical and selfish reasons.  So other people shouldn't be allowed to have the same 5-4-door sprawl life as Sally and Dan?  Get my point?

I get your point, certainly. I just question listening to the same crew of planners and engineers who were asleep at the wheel during this last boom cycle and let things get grossly out of hand, both in Florida and in many other states. They jumped on the development bandwagon and contributed to painful sprawl problems, and to the additional costs of building and maintaining the attendant huge infrastructure requirements which were passed along to taxpayers.

Also, many planners and civil engineers make their living off of designing much of the same infrastructure attendant to new development, especially here in the sprawl-friendly south, and accordingly they have a vested interest in focusing attention away from issues that may impact their own revenue stream. I would suspect most of the ones defending sprawl-inducing policies do so because of bias / economic realities. I'm not sure there's a lot of value in letting a fox guard your henhouse.

And Dan and Sally would probably be equally happy in a reasonably-priced urban setting as in a stucco cookie-cutter, the problem is we don't really have that setting around here, and all the marketing you see is geared to suburban sprawl, because that's where profits are highest. Developers are going to chase the easiest buck, if you ever want to reverse this long slide we've been on, it would have to be done via some mechanism like this Amendment.

[billy]

I could see maybe public voting on a DRI.
However, I can only imagine the kind of print, radio and tv ads that this might generate.

[cityimrov]

What ever happened to the idea of the republic?  That is where we elect people to represent us in a particular matter.  Especially in matters that is very complex and time consuming for the normal person to understand.  

Why direct democracy?  Most of us are too busy to worry about this stuff on a daily basis.  

[north miami]

What ever happened to the idea of the republic?  That is where we elect people to represent us in a particular matter.  Especially in matters that is very complex and time consuming for the normal person to understand.  

Why direct democracy?  Most of us are too busy to worry about this stuff on a daily basis.  

The routine tasks are handled by local government planning departments,planning commissions and all centers to County Commissioners.(And also enters hired "Planners & Consultants)

And the process often comes apart,in the face of a public very willing and able to understand and in fact were directly involved-at length-,and then the process often extends to even beyond the republic's local representatives to State over sight for even more effort and understanding,often another train wreck (developer politicians would rather see State oversight/DCA go away)  and that is where the citizen's checks and balances enter-via democratic vote.

Amend # 4 is really all about simple civics.It is after all,Democratic.Hometown if you wish.

A liveable,economically diverse and productive landscape is going to take effort on the part of it's citizens.Citizen involvement has been a key legacy behind many planning and growth positive initiatives and outcomes.There has been more going on than many know or would care to acknowledge.
The current arrangement has seen considerable citizen effort-now we look to a return to basics,citizen participation and design as envisioned in the earliest local government planning acts,without undue manipulation.Anything else is scary.

[cityimrov]

What ever happened to the idea of the republic?  That is where we elect people to represent us in a particular matter.  Especially in matters that is very complex and time consuming for the normal person to understand.  

Why direct democracy?  Most of us are too busy to worry about this stuff on a daily basis.  

The routine tasks are handled by local government planning departments,planning commissions and all centers to County Commissioners.(And also enters hired "Planners & Consultants)

And the process often comes apart,in the face of a public very willing and able to understand and in fact were directly involved-at length-,and then the process often extends to even beyond the republic's local representatives to State over sight for even more effort and understanding,often another train wreck (developer politicians would rather see State oversight/DCA go away)  and that is where the citizen's checks and balances enter-via democratic vote.

Amend # 4 is really all about simple civics.It is after all,Democratic.Hometown if you wish.

A liveable,economically diverse and productive landscape is going to take effort on the part of it's citizens.
The current arrangement has seen considerable citizen effort-now we look to a return to basics,citizen participation and design as envisioned in the earliest local government planning acts,without undue manipulation.Anything else is scary.

But as a general member of the public, I don't have time to read developer documents every week!  I don't have time to spend half my week in meetings that last till 3AM to figure out if this is good or bad idea.  I'm busy.  I just don't have the time to micromanage land development!

What's wrong with just electing somebody to do all that work for me?  The only thing I want to do is make sure my elected representative is one that would listen and make decisions similar to what I would do if I was placed in a similar situation.  My main responsibility would be picking the right person for the right job.  What's wrong with that? 

[CS Foltz]

Well, if our elected officials actually thought about the people who voted them into office, Amendment 4 might not be needed or something similar! Unbridled developement done haphazardly and willy nilly.....voters paying for infrastructure and all the amenities that goes with developing anything and here we go...........#4 is on the ballot, this time out and I guess the voters will decide, whether it is good or bad!

[cityimrov]

So, how does an average person learn about complex land laws, environmental and ecological effects, traffic patterns, and so fort for the weekly land proposals between Little Jimmy's soccer practice and Little Lily's softball game and the boss needing your help right now and first thing in the morning?

[tufsu1]

here's the deal....right now there are minor comp. plan amendments and major ones....both would be subject to referendum if Amendment 4 passes.

minor ones can be adopted at anytime...major ones are limited to 2 cycles a year per local government.

and here's the rub...any text change (even simple scrivner errors) are major text amendmnets...as are land use changes on parcels as small as 10 acres.

How many of you are likely to do reserach and vote on 25+ major amendments every year

[buckethead]

Taking power away from (perhaps corrupt) governments=good

Giving power to the general population over issues of which they have little to no understanding=bad.

I still don't know where I stand on this issue. 

It does seem suspect that the voters can only disapprove projects which have been approved while they cannot approve projects that have been disapproved. Is this the "Amendment of No"?

[ChriswUfGator]

I'd very much prefer taking an hour once a year to go online and learn the issues to vote accordingly than continue to have unbridled and harmful sprawl inducing development roaring away for which I have to foot the bill as a taxpayer.

I have done a lot of reading on this issue since the topic first broached on the forum, and have pretty much made up my mind I will be voting yes. Enough is enough with this crap, it's quite literally ruining the state, and this will level the playing field. Developers have been able to buy off local governments over the wishes of their residents, which has led to the current problems. Buying off the entire electorate will be much harder. Good.  

here's the deal....right now there are minor comp. plan amendments and major ones....both would be subject to referendum if Amendment 4 passes.

minor ones can be adopted at anytime...major ones are limited to 2 cycles a year per local government.

and here's the rub...any text change (even simple scrivner errors) are major text amendmnets...as are land use changes on parcels as small as 10 acres.

How many of you are likely to do reserach and vote on 25+ major amendments every year

[cityimrov]

I'd very much prefer taking an hour once a year to go online and learn the issues to vote accordingly than continue to have unbridled and harmful sprawl inducing development roaring away for which I have to foot the bill as a taxpayer.

I have done a lot of reading on this issue since the topic first broached on the forum, and have pretty much made up my mind I will be voting yes. Enough is enough with this crap, it's quite literally ruining the state, and this will level the playing field. Developers have been able to buy off local governments over the wishes of their residents, which has led to the current problems. Buying off the entire electorate will be much harder. Good.  

here's the deal....right now there are minor comp. plan amendments and major ones....both would be subject to referendum if Amendment 4 passes.

minor ones can be adopted at anytime...major ones are limited to 2 cycles a year per local government.

and here's the rub...any text change (even simple scrivner errors) are major text amendmnets...as are land use changes on parcels as small as 10 acres.

How many of you are likely to do reserach and vote on 25+ major amendments every year

One hour a year?  For 25 amendments, that's spending about 2 minutes 24 seconds per amendment.  How is it possible to read hundreds of documents and listen to all the arguments in 2 minutes 24 seconds?  

For the average person living in Florida, I don't think it's possible to figure out the ramifications in 2 minutes and 24 seconds.  

What is so wrong with representative government?  If this was another layer of elected officials on top of the current system, it might work, but this is asking for direct democracy on a complicated issue.

[tufsu1]

I'd very much prefer taking an hour once a year to go online and learn the issues to vote accordingly than continue to have unbridled and harmful sprawl inducing development roaring away for which I have to foot the bill as a taxpayer.

I have done a lot of reading on this issue since the topic first broached on the forum, and have pretty much made up my mind I will be voting yes. Enough is enough with this crap, it's quite literally ruining the state, and this will level the playing field. Developers have been able to buy off local governments over the wishes of their residents, which has led to the current problems. Buying off the entire electorate will be much harder. Good. 

maybe you've done a lot of reading on the issue, but clearly haven't done much research into comp. plan amendments....while most text and map amendments themselves are fairly simple, they are supported by lots of data and analysis...somtimes hundreds of pages.

Good luck getting up to speed on even one amendment in 1 hour!