Originally Published on Tuesday, July 24, 2007
If the leaders of Florida Hometown Democracy announced today they were canceling their statewide ballot initiative campaign, would that mean Hometown Democracy was dead? The answer is no. The ballot initiative is part of a broader political movement that has forever changed the politics of development in Florida.
Hometown Democracy owes its popularity to those public officials and developers who have trivialized citizen participation. This sentiment has ignited a populist rebellion enabling Hometown advocates to spread their ballot box campaigns across the state.
Instead of citizens screaming "not in my backyard" at city hall, we are now seeing more direct democracy campaigns by-passing city hall with "let the people vote" ballot-box referendums.
For example, St. Pete Beach became the first municipality in the history of Florida to not only repeal a comp plan amendment at the ballot box, but also the first to require comp plan amendments to be voted on. St. Pete Beach was a wake-up call revealing a political shift in Florida. What we do in the next 16 months, before November 2008, will determine where this shift will lead us.
Surveys have shown that more than 75 percent of voters feel the relationship between elected officials and developers has made growth decisions unfair. That same 75 percent said they were opposed to new development, which means they are opposed to all development.
The numbers are saying Floridians are frustrated over runaway sprawl causing congested traffic, overcrowded schools, concrete canyons, and diminished environment. Moreover, Floridians have lost confidence in the system, opting for the ballot box to have a greater voice in growth decisions.
This public frustration and waning confidence has created an X-factor that not only has sparked this populist rebellion, but is now the political fuel that gives Hometown Democracy its influence.
Floridians collectively support economic development, but they individually resist development that threatens to change the character of their neighborhoods. Traditionally, citizens have directed their concerns at city hall, but our notice-and-hearings protocols have become outdated and constrain third-party input. This produces Jerry Springer-type public hearings and theatrical 3-minute "audience to be heard" segments. Egg timers and expensive consultants create the impression that the system favors the developer at the expense of the citizenship.
Business groups fighting the statewide ballot initiative are essentially defending the very system that's producing this X-factor. Even if the business groups defeat the statewide ballot initiative, they offer no solutions to the very problem that has created the Hometown movement.
Without an alternative to address the public's frustration and restore confidence in majority rule, we will be chasing our tails all the way to the November 2008 ballot.
It's time for Gov. Charlie Crist and Department of Community Affairs Secretary Tom Pelham to change this potentially disastrous course.
A first step is to change our current notice-and-hearings procedures. Government should enact better practices focused on establishing citizen partnerships, building community consensus, and mitigating opposing views, before the application is considered.
We can look to the successes of citizen participation plans and "Neighborhood Bill of Rights" as bold models that will help remediate the X-factor. If we can restore public confidence in a reformed system, then we have a chance of diffusing the populist backlash that has become Hometown Democracy.
We have 16 months before the 2008 election, so let's not waste any more time and begin a constructive path towards bringing our state together, before it's too late.
Slevin is a former mayor of Safety Harbor and a communications consultant based in Tallahassee.
Comments
Posted by LDouglas on July 25, 2007 at 12:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Surveys have shown that more than 75 percent of voters feel the relationship between elected officials and developers has made growth decisions unfair. That same 75 percent said they were opposed to new development, which means they are opposed to all development."
First statement sounds true enough. But the second statement sounds like the respondants were asked one of those trick questions.
Every person that I know who supports Hometown Democracy, isn't opposed to all development at all. Some of them make their living selling real estate. Some are sitting on large tracts of land themselves. Increasing the overall densities seems to be the main issue but even that can't be summed up or answered as a black or white question.
As the news constantly reminds us if we would only listen- too much growth can and will lead to reduced quality of life while at the same time increase our costs of living.
We do need to heal trust in local government but in this case it's too late. The Hometown Democracy is the only way to assure that (to steal someone's elses line) "the people's voices will be heard over the roar of the money".
|
