Amendment 4: Vote yes
The Record's Oct. 17 editorial against Amendment 4 again stresses the potential loss of jobs and unexpected consequences if it passes but cites no specifics or "proof" beyond speculation to back up the claim.
Where are the jobs from all the growth we've already experienced and the "attention" our politicians say they're paying to add jobs? Job growth is promised by virtually all politicians in every election cycle, but where are the jobs? Political lip service doesn't create jobs.
The Record claims the costs and potential delay of votes could be potentially costly to hold elections on comprehensive land use changes but the fact is; not having Amendment 4 is costly for voters/taxpayers who pay for growth with higher taxes while developers rake in enormous profits. Taxpayers always pay for the roads, schools, sewer, water infrastructure etc. Growth never pays for itself.
The media and the special interests always bring up the fact we have a representative form of government, and "if our elected officials don't get the decisions right we can vote them out at the next election." Unfortunately, however, much economic harm and environmental damage can be done in the two years between elections. This is a huge concern for voters of St. Johns County and Florida.
Voting bad politicians out of office sounds good but, in practice, rarely happens because developer/special interest money tends to keep them in office. The dilemma we often have is in choosing between the "lesser of two evils" such as what's occurring in Florida's gubernatorial race.
The development industry and other "special interests" invest in getting politicians elected because they want results ie, approval of the projects they bring before the County Commission or other local government agency.
If it were that easy to get a government that truly represents the will of the people, Amendment 4 wouldn't be necessary and it wouldn't be on the ballot. Our representatives typically have not served the best interests of the people.
Another local newspaper suggests that comprehensive plan land use changes be approved or rejected by super majority vote of the local government. In St. Johns County this means four of five commissioners would be needed to approve or reject a specific development request.
What happens if only four commissioners vote that day? Would this mean all four would be required to approve or reject a proposed land use change, or would only three be the super majority? What happens if one of the five commissioners is forced to recuse himself/herself from the vote? What happens if only three show up on the day of the vote?
In Florida, we have the most corrupt government system of all 50 states (based on a 2008 Justice Department report) with more than 824 government officials convicted and imprisoned (in a 10-year period) for corrupt activities.
This is an indictment of local government processes to which we're subjected in our county and throughout Florida.
The people of Florida have endured this "representative" form of government for too long, and now is the time to do something about it -- vote for Amendment 4.
We deserve a seat at the table. It's our tax money on the table and the future of our state is at stake.
*
Al Abbatiello is a 12-year resident of St. Johns County. In 2008 he was a candidate for St. Johns County Commission. He has been active in this community since moving here from St. Louis. He served on the Julington Creek Plantation Community Development District, is an appointed member of the Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Citizens Advisory Committee, and chairman of the William Bartram Scenic and Historic Highway
No comments:
Post a Comment