|
Proposed initiative would threaten affordable housing, state economy, property rights
By Leonard C. Gilroy, AICP
A group called "Florida Hometown Democracy" is gathering signatures for a constitutional amendment requiring a referendum on any proposed change in comprehensive land-use plans. Those are the "comp plans" that guide the type and location of development in a city or county.
In most Florida communities, this decision-making responsibility is shared by elected officials and urban planners at the local and state levels. As part of the process, citizens serving on planning boards conduct thorough reviews of development proposals in an effort to balance a host of interrelated concerns, including economic development and environmental quality.
Hometown Democracy would place decisions about growth and development in the hands of the voters, many of whom are more interested in getting their kids to soccer practice or trying to keep their businesses afloat than in the nuances of real-estate markets or the economic viability of different types of land development.
Granted, Hometown Democracy's plan has a surface-level appeal. The name itself conveys an alluring image of empowered citizens in neighborhoods of white picket fences. But this populist mask conceals an anti-growth, "close the gates" agenda that could threaten housing affordability, economic opportunity and private property rights. Hometown Democracy would turn Florida into a laboratory for a statewide experiment in the radical sort of "ballot-box zoning" that has fueled sky-high housing costs in places such as San Francisco.
A 2001 study in the Journal of the American Planning Association examined ballot-box zoning in 63 Ohio cities and concluded that subjecting rezoning decisions to public referenda had a consistent negative impact on housing construction. Fewer homes being built translates into higher housing costs for everyone.
Florida already faces a severe shortage of affordable housing, and the need will grow, because the state is projected to add 12.7 million more residents by 2030. Making it harder to develop new housing will drive up prices and push low- and middle-income families ever further from the American Dream.
Likewise, the amendment would threaten the state's economic health. Giving voters a de facto veto power over commercial development will make it far more difficult for mom-and-pop shops and large corporations alike to start up, expand or relocate. That would imperil Florida's status as the national leader in job creation. It also could slow the growth of the tax revenues that commerce provides.
More fundamentally, Hometown Democracy represents a frontal assault on private property rights. Under the current planning system, property owners have recourse to appeals and formal procedures for regulating development in the community interest.
Throwing landowners' ability to develop their property to the whims of public opinion shaped by public-relations campaigns embraces the ultimate tyranny of the majority over individual property rights.
Last November, almost 70 percent of Florida's voters supported a constitutional amendment to protect private property rights from local governments' abuse of the power of eminent domain. So it's clear that Floridians care very deeply about private property rights. Hometown Democracy would be a significant step backward.
Statewide, thousands of local comprehensive plan amendments are adopted each year, as local communities adjust to new economic conditions. The decisions are made after extensive hearings and reports from consultants and experts on land development.
Most voters can't possibly do the research necessary to cast an informed ballot on every single development proposal in their community. To expect them to do so is both unrealistic and unreasonable.
But, of course, the Hometown Democracy Amendment is not about better planning. Rather, it's a goal of anti-growth zealots who have become known as BANANAs: "build absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone."
Reasonable citizens already have a strong voice in community planning. The law requires urban planners, planning boards and elected officials to provide numerous opportunities for citizens to voice their opinions on comprehensive land-use plans and, subsequently, on individual development proposals.
These professionals weigh public input seriously in their analyses and decisions. Hometown Democracy would subvert this well-established process, reducing opportunities for families and businesses and threatening Florida's economic future.
Leonard Gilroy is an adjunct scholar at The James Madison Institute, a nonpartisan policy center based in Tallahassee, as well as a certified urban planner and senior policy analyst at the Reason Foundation. An archive of his work is here, and Reason's urban growth and land use research and commentary is here.
Statewide Growth Management and Housing Affordability in Florida
» Full Text (.pdf)
Statewide Regulatory Takings Reform: Exporting Oregon's Measure 37 to Other States
» Full Study (.pdf)
» Press Release
New Approaches to Affordable Housing
» Full Text (.pdf)
Eminent Domain, Private Property, and Redevelopment: An Economic Analysis
» Full Study (.pdf)
» Policy Summary
» Press Release
More Studies
California to Restrict Driving With Latest Global Warming Plan
» Full Text
Dayton, Ohio: The Rise and Fall of a Former Industrial Juggernaut
» Full Text
Politicians Must Ignore Urge to "Do Something" About Housing Woes
» Full Text
Cities Can Sell Abandoned Homes in Blocks
» Full Text
Is Housing "Crisis" Causing a Recession?
» Full Text
The Chilling Effect of the Schwarzenegger-Bush Freeze
» Full Text
Stadium Doesn't Guarantee Economic Gains
» Full Text
More Commentaries
|
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.