Florida Amendments On The Ballot

[Kurt]

On November 2, Florida voters will decide the fate of six proposed amendments to the state Constitution and one referendum question about the federal deficit.

Confused by the amendments on the ballot? Here's a breakdown - Orlando Sentinel

Amendment 1: Should Florida stop offering subsidies for statewide campaigns?
In 1998, Florida voters decided to start giving public money to candidates who agreed to limit their spending. The idea was to keep spending in check and level the playing field for candidates who weren't super-wealthy or backed by tons of special interests.
The motives were noble. But lawmakers and courts made so many changes, we now subsidize politicians who don't need or deserve it ? such as Charlie Crist and his last $20 million campaign for governor.
Vote yes if you don't think any candidates deserve any public money, no matter how much money their opponents have.
Vote no if you can live with the warts and still think candidates who aren't personally wealthy or flush with big-time benefactors deserve a fighting chance, courtesy of public cash, no matter what the courts say.


Amendment 2: Do soldiers serving abroad deserve property-tax breaks?
This proposal first came to light in this very column back in 2007 when I wrote about a local soldier who started calling for the tax breaks while he was fighting in Afghanistan. His contention: That soldiers shouldn't have to pay property taxes on houses they can't even live in while serving in foreign lands.
This amendment would give active-duty soldiers a break, pro-rated for the amount of time they are away, even if family members stay in the home.
Vote yes if you think a property-tax break is an appropriate benefit for service members and their families.
Vote no if you think this an unnecessary perk for members who voluntarily joined the service.


Amendment 4: Should voters have a more direct say on growth?
"Hometown Democracy" is the most controversial of this year's amendments. It would basically give voters ? rather than politicians ? the final say on many growth proposals.
Backers say local politicians have proven that they're in developers' pockets, approving sprawl and causing everything from crowded schools and the housing glut to mega-stores where neighbors don't want them.
Opponents describe this amendment as a "job killer" that would send new businesses away from Florida and prompt countless, confusing votes for residents. They also say it would undermine the principles of our representative Democracy.
Vote yes if you think growth has run amok in this state and that voters have a right to the final say about major growth decisions.
Vote no if you think that either the status quo is working well or that this "cure" would be worse than the disease.


Amendments 5 and 6: Should Florida have compact, geographically sensible congressional and legislative districts?
These are the "Fair Districts" measures, designed to stop gerrymandering.
Right now, instead of drawing geographically logical districts ? along county and city lines, for example ? legislators search for the kind of partisan voters who will keep them and their friends in office. The result is a maze of serpentine districts that snake through seven, eight, even nine counties, splitting communities and neighborhoods in two. Winter Park, for instance, has four representatives in the U.S. House.
These amendments (No. 5 for state elections and No. 6 for federal ones) would require legislators to draw more compact, geographically sensible districts.
Vote yes if you think voters should choose politicians, rather than the other way around.
Vote no if you think it's OK for legislators to use creative mapping techniques to keep "like-minded" people together ? and you don't mind "your representative" living in another part of the state.


Amendment 8: Should we make the class-size cap more flexible?
Nobody wants 40 students in their kid's class, right? That's why Floridians voted in 2002 to enact class-size caps, so that no more than 25 high school students, for instance, could be crammed into a single classroom.
Well, the Legislature thinks that's too strict and that the cap should be a classroom average for each school, meaning one class could have 27 students, as long as another had 23.
Vote yes if you think flexibility is needed.
Vote no if you think voters meant what they said in 2002 ? that a cap is a cap is a cap. No exceptions.

 

[Kurt]

EDITORIAL: Here's our amendment roundup | election, general, nov - Opinion - Northwest Florida Daily News

Amendments 3, 7 and 9, in case you?re wondering, were removed from the ballot.
 AMENDMENT 1 would repeal a provision in the state constitution that requires public financing of the campaigns of statewide candidates.
Using taxpayers? money to pay for political campaigns is always a bad idea. Vote yes on Amendment 1.
 AMENDMENT 2 would require a new homestead property tax exemption for military personnel who were deployed during the previous year.
Despite questions about how the tax break will be applied and how it might affect local government budgets, we recommend a yes vote on Amendment 2.
 AMENDMENT 4 would require voter approval before local governments can adopt comprehensive land-use plans or change the plans they already have.
This is a real stinker. It?s backed by no-growth interests, it?s likely to cost jobs, and it?s a direct contradiction of America?s republican form of government. Vote no on Amendment 4.
 AMENDMENT 5 would establish fairness standards to use in redrawing Florida?s legislative districts; the new lines couldn?t favor any incumbent or political party.
This is common sense. Vote yes on Amendment 5.
 AMENDMENT 6 would do the same as Amendment 5, but for congressional districts. Vote yes.
 AMENDMENT 8 would ease the class-size limits for public schools that voters favored in 2002 by changing the calculation from per-class maximums to schoolwide averages.
Florida?s strict class-size limits were an expensive mistake. Vote yes on Amendment 8.

 

[Kurt]

Editorial: Election 2010 | Florida Ballot Amendments 1, 2 & 4 ? Naples Daily News

Amendment 1
Repeal of public campaign financing
This amendment would do away with the 1998 amendment that sought to level the playing field for political campaign contributions.
That amendment awards money to challengers of wealthier candidates once they surpass a certain threshold.
a.inline_topic:hover { background-color: #EAEAEA; } Bill McCollum tried to invoke it against his Republican primary gubernatorial opponent, a.inline_topic:hover { background-color: #EAEAEA; } Rick Scott. So far, all the money awarded ? it amounts to about $10 million every election cycle ? has gone to Republicans or Democrats. Small-party candidates need not apply. The last time we checked, the major parties were having no trouble raising millions on their own.
Enough is enough. This amendment should not have been approved in 1998 and ought to be repealed now.
Campaign donations are a form of free speech. Bring on the donors ? and let public records show voters who they are and how much they give. Also, let voters know which candidates are willing to accept gifts from which donors.

Vote yes.



Amendment 2
Homestead tax credit for deployed military personnel
This would provide an additional homestead property tax break to armed service personnel deployed overseas. The Legislature is to decide the amount of money involved.
With so much turmoil around the globe, and with Florida being home for so many of our troops and their families, this ought to be a small token of our appreciation that everyone can endorse.
Now, what else can we do for them?

Vote yes.


Amendment 4
Comprehensive land use plans referendums
Opponents from the business community refuse to call this amendment by its popular name ? Hometown Democracy.
They have a point. A better name would be hometown trouble.
This amendment would subject major projects, and even some modest projects, calling for comprehensive plan changes to referendums in cities and counties rather than votes of city councils and county commissions.
The timing is awkward. There is little development to police these days.
Still, when there will be such development again, we have problems with the thought of endless referendums taking the hard decisions away from elected officials we pay to make them.
Plus, it would open up decisions on neighborhood projects to disinterested, ill-informed voters countywide. For example, a proposed shopping center in Golden Gate Estates would be voted on by people in Immokalee while changes to Immokalee?s master plan would be put before voters in coastal Naples.

Vote no.

 

[Kurt]

2010 Florida Amendments Home Page - Collins Center for Public Policy Inc.

This site will serve as your one-stop-shop for the latest news, information and analysis of the proposed amendments. You are invited to view the broad content that makes up this special section.

 

[30ashopper]

Amendment 2 - Homestead Ad Valorem Tax Credit For Deployed Military

I plan to vote no on this. Military personel enjoy number of tax breaks and free services already. This would hit areas like Walton and Okaloosa where it most hurts, property tax revenue.

 

[Andy A]

Amendment 2 - Homestead Ad Valorem Tax Credit For Deployed Military

I plan to vote no on this. Military personel enjoy number of tax breaks and free services already. This would hit areas like Walton and Okaloosa where it most hurts, property tax revenue.

May I suggest you note the word, "deployed". It is not a continuing perk. I don't know if you have ever been "deployed" without your family but let me assure you it is not a fun thing. It is a small effort on our part to help them and recognize their sacrifice.

 

[Matt J]

May I suggest you note the word, "deployed". It is not a continuing perk. I don't know if you have ever been "deployed" without your family but let me assure you it is not a fun thing. It is a small effort on our part to help them and recognize their sacrifice.

Read it again Andy. It applies to any military personnel not serving in the US. In other words someone who is "deployed" to Germany would qualify. This amendment would take more abuse than Lindsey Lohan's liver.

 

[SHELLY]

Amendment 2 - Homestead Ad Valorem Tax Credit For Deployed Military

I plan to vote no on this. Military personel enjoy number of tax breaks and free services already. This would hit areas like Walton and Okaloosa where it most hurts, property tax revenue.

I'm voting NO as well (but not because the military already has too many "breaks")--quite simply, this amendment is a total piece of crap as written.

Until they put some numbers/percentages and spell out when and to whom it will be applied, it should be removed from the ballot.

I don't feel unpatriotic about voting "No" -- and yes, I do know first hand about the hardships of military deployments on both the troops and their families.

.

 

[scooterbug44]

I am torn on the military tax break one.

Unless the house is sitting empty because of a deployment, I don't think it is justified and I am concerned about the cumulative tax effect it would have.

I know I voted for adding a property tax break for disabled veterans a couple years ago, and I assume the house would be homesteaded if it is a primary residence, so I think this seems excessive.

 

[Matt J]

I am torn on the military tax break one.

Unless the house is sitting empty because of a deployment, I don't think it is justified and I am concerned about the cumulative tax effect it would have.

I know I voted for adding a property tax break for disabled veterans a couple years ago, and I assume the house would be homesteaded if it is a primary residence, so I think this seems excessive.

Yeah, nobody ever claims homestead exemption illegally in Florida. :roll: