The Hometown Democracy Amendment is a big straw man. It is probably the most useful example of how an inattentive, mostly politically ignorant, society will swallow the hook, the line, the pole and the person(s) holding the pole--w/out seasonings. Given that each city has the authority to make, and place on referendum, the tenets that govern a municipality, it makes little sense to hamstring municipal/city initiative. In other words,
if a municipality should decide that over/under development needs addressing, what is (currently) stopping them from placing the issue on the ballot as an amendment to its charter in the form of a referendum item that citizens of that particular municipality can vote on it in an a straight "up or down" election.
That said, constitutional amendment or not, the decision to do or not do something at the local levels of governance is seriously dependent on the electorate and their willingness to get engaged in the politics and the political process as well as become knowledgeable enough to make a coherent decision on their own and stop waiting for some smooth talking person to sell them the best of a number of bags of horse manure. The amendment is a total waste of tax payer $, not to mention the time taken to get this nonsense on the ballot. Wake up Flori--duh, please do not provide America an additional example of why this country's Founding Fathers right on target in their assessment of "duh people" and the notion of democratic governance. Remember the Bullet Train? How about "cleaning up the Everglades?
Flori--duh, you should ask yourselves two simple questions. What is the source of this amendment? Who initiated it? Whichever side of this issue you come down on presently, the answer to these two questions should assist you in determining whether or not this should a part of the State Constitution.
