Florida's Newspaper Editorial Boards on Growth: Blinded by confusion ... by gimleteye

Last week I criticized The Miami Herald editorial board for its Everglades "progress" piece. Most offensive: that the board cast blame for pollution to Orlando, failing to mention pollution coming straight off Miami Dade farmland and suburbs. Something about casting the beam out of your own eye; and then shall you see clearly to cast out the mote out of your brother's eye.

In a separate post, we credited Orlando Sentinel editorial writer Mike Thomas for an editorial that argued, almost as hard as we do at Eyeonmiami, for support of Florida Hometown Democracy. Now the Sentinel editorial board has responded-- perhaps to an avalanche of criticism from the Chamber of Commerce and Associated Industries-- with an opinion against Florida Hometown Democracy. In this case it is not casting the beam out of one's own eye, it is simply not lifting one's head up to see what the neighbor is doing.

Wrong RX for Growth Woes; there's a better way than Florida Hometown Democracy. proposed that the answer to Florida Hometown Democracy is-- eureka!--a supermajority vote of local government to change local growth plans. Well, fancy that.

The supermajority vote, requiring approval of 2/3rds and not a simple majority, to change comprehensive growth plans is already in place in Miami-Dade and doesn't work very well at all. Where there is a lot of developer and land speculator money, as there often is in changes to the Urban Development Boundary for instance, those final votes to achieve a supermajority always go the wrong way. Strange, isn't it? It is why we call the majority of the Miami Dade County Commission, "unreformable".

We have noted the influence of big campaign contributions to commission members from outside their single member districts: it is de facto payola for 'yes' votes, to get a supermajority, on comprehensive land use map changes. (Check out blog archive; corruption, Rolle, UDB.) You would think that inner city commissioners, especially, would be loathe to vote for changes that impose tax burdens on poor constituents for new suburban infrastructure costs, and, you would be wrong.

A year ago, the development lobby in Miami-Dade floated an idea that if community activists would drop opposition to development outside the UDB all the way to Krome Avenue; the western fringe, that it would tolerate a "unanimous" decision to move the UDB further. You see: they know that supermajorities are relatively easy to move with money, and, they own land purchased at highly speculative values (cf. Parkland, Krome Gold Partners). Enough. It's Sunday. Maybe by next Sunday, the Orlando Sentinel editorial board will research Miami-Dade's experience with political pollution and come up with a better idea to oppose Florida Hometown Democracy. Maybe The Miami Herald editorial board will reconsider its own omissions before casting blame in other directions on Everglades restoration. In both cases, the reasoning is just plain wrong.



orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orl-edped-hometown-democracy-100309100409oct04,0,6285576.story
OrlandoSentinel.com

Wrong Rx for growth woes

The gist: There's a better way than Hometown Democracy (check Campaign Contributions)
October 4, 2009


We're as angry and exasperated as anyone when it comes to how readily officials throughout Florida trample local growth plans. The plans are supposed to reflect a community's vision of how — or even whether — it wishes to grow. But at the behest of developers, and frequently against residents' wishes, they're stomped on by city and county commissioners as many as 12,000 times a year.

No wonder Hometown Democracy, a grass roots movement cultivated by land-use attorneys Lesley Blackner and Ross Burnaman, got enough public support for a 2010 ballot to alter that landscape. It would require public votes on any changes to local growth plans.

If it passes, local officials couldn't grease corpulent developments past land-use restrictions that don't allow them. They couldn't plop 23,000 homes somewhere in Volusia and Brevard counties — the so-called Farmton Plan — when those counties' growth plans don't include them. They couldn't — unless voters say they could.

Something's needed to get officials to honor growth-management plans. And Hometown Democracy appears an earnest, provocative and intriguing way of making them do so.

But we can't support it. Hometown Democracy is far from the panacea it's cracked up to be. And it's not even the best balm on the market.

Yes, the burden to local officials of placing land-use changes on the ballot might impose some self-discipline. But still thousands would likely come to a public vote. And at a grievous cost.

One casualty would likely be the informed voter. Hometown Democracy's advocates say residents could end up voting on plan amendments just once or twice a year, when other elections are held.

But imagine. Even if the Hometown Democracy cudgel gets officials to put 4,000 instead of 12,000 amendments on the ballot, voters in some counties or cities could still have to weigh the merits of six, 12, 24 or more land-use amendments.Informed voters wouldn't just have to navigate the ballot's pedantic land-use language; they'd have to suffer months of electioneering by those wanting their vote. And because developers would almost always trump grass roots organizations in spending, they'd stand a good chance of winning anyway.

The cost to local governments of including the land-use amendments on ballots would soar into the millions. And it would pain Floridians who vote absentee. A ballot that now costs about 90 cents in postage could triple when weighted down by more amendments.

There's a better way.

While time remains before the 2010 election, state lawmakers should pass a law making it impossible for local commissions to alter their land-use plans without a super-majority vote. Far fewer proposals would clear that higher hurdle — four votes on a five-member commission, five votes on a seven-member council. That would keep decisions in the hands of those we elect to make decisions, while acknowledging that it ought to be more difficult to change a planning blueprint than to pass a resolution honoring Boy Scouts.

Do that, and lawmakers could eliminate the strongest justification for putting plan amendments in voters' hands.

Do nothing, as they've done so often, and lawmakers have only themselves to blame for what might happen when voters go to the polls.

Saturday's results

Our editorial: Panel should consider if the county needs to switch to a strong mayor.

Thumbs up: XX%

Thumbs down: XX%

Copyright © 2009, Orlando Sentinel