DATE:            February 5, 2001

RE: Information Update - Final Meeting : February 12,  2001

The full Commission will hold its final meeting in the Senate Office Building, Room 32S, on February 12, 2001, beginning at 9:00 a.m. and continuing until as late as 9:00 p.m., if necessary, to conclude the work of the Commission.

Subcommittee Meetings:

Urban Revitalization and Rural Policy Subcommittees will meet on Sunday February 11, 2001, in Tallahassee to finalize their recommendations to the Commission in light of the discussions that have taken place thus far. Urban Revitalization will meet from 4-7 p.m. in Room 32 of the Senate Office Building.

Rural Policy will meet from 4-7 p.m. in Room 42 of the Senate Office Building.

Present were sub-committee members Allison DeFoor, Chair, Barry Rutenberg and Pat Blackshear. Also present were Jim Knotter for Judie Budnick, Vice Chair, Ysela Llort for Tom Barry and Bud Vielhauer, staff member.

Allison DeFoor: The meeting began with an introduction of the sub-committee members and the sub-committee staff. Stated that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss citizen participation in the growth management / land use process. Discussed the agenda.

PRESENTATION: Michael Busha, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Commission. Mr. Busha discussed "visioning" in the land and community development process. Mr. Busha believes that current problems with the growth management process are not "process" problems but rather "planning" problems. All that is required now is the ability to count i.e., number of units, square feet, school children, etc. What the current system does not tell citizens is 25% to 50% more time in cars, poorer water quality and the reduction in agricultural land. Local governments need to get the general public involved early in the planning process. 

Florida Statues §163.3171(11) encourages local governments to articulate a vision for the future appearances and qualities of its community. Local governments need to have citizens involved in the process. Florida Statutes Chapter 120 only requires a public notice in local papers. These are often small print, hard to read, and buried in the paper. Local governments need to go door to door with flyers, and notices. They need help from local community organizations and churches. They need to use charrettes, feed people, schedule for evenings and weekends so it is easier for the public to participate.

In the Treasure Coast visioning planning the had a kick-off presentation, then public workshop that allowed the public to help develop their own plans and ideas. They even get kids involved. The benefits of community based planning and charrettes is that local governments have citizen support and ownership. It makes plans understandable, it shortens the feedback loop, keeps people out of court, provides certainty to citizens and investor and it puts the fun back in citizen involvement.

Mr. Busha recommended that if the Commission were to make one change to increase citizen involvement it would be to revise Florida Statues §163.3171(11) to remove the word "encourage " and replace it with "shall". Require local governments to articulate a vision for the future.

PRESENTATION: Richard Grosso, General Counsel, Environmental & Land Use Law Center. 

Mr. Grosso stated the mechanisms for citizens' involvement must include broader, clearer, more inexpensive, less complex and more structured citizens involvement and standing. His main concern was citizen involvement in the Development Order process. Both citizens groups and developers / homebuilders believe the system is broke. First, the parties in the process are spending too much time and money litigating the issue of standing. He feels the legislature needs to codify case law on standing. There should also be stringent pleading requirements and penalties for "SLAPP" suits

Pat Blackshear: Agreed. SLAPP suits intimidate local citizens and should be eliminated. 

Mr. Grosso also feels that the process for involvement in and challenges to local government development orders is a mess. The point of entry for citizens is unclear. Also, decisions and approvals are made by staff without public notice or approval. They are hidden from public view. The law needs to be amended to ensure that everyone knows what decisions are being made, when, and how the public may challenge those decisions. 

The system also needs to be cheaper and less complex. The cost and complexity of enforcement means there is little enforcement. A more structured decision-making process at the local quasi-judicial level is a must. Also we need a more administrative less judicial forum for challenges, including dispute resolution. Also there should be one process for challenging decisions, that is the same for both applicants and affected persons, and in which all legal issues are raised within the same document and in the same forum. He also feels that the process needs to allow third parties can have meaningful input early in the process and have their question and issues made part of the organized, structured process. This would be better than dozens of identical three-minute speeches in the middle of the day.

Finally, Mr. Grosso expressed his belief that challenges to development order decisions must be handled through specialized land use courts or boards of appeal, not state circuit courts. The courts have crowded dockets and judges who do not understand this complex area of law. Accordingly, the courts do not lend themselves to the appropriate resolution of disputes. 

PRESENTATION: Kim Kobza, President and CEO, Neighborhood America.

Neighborhood America is a Naples, Florida company that employs internet, wed-based applications to improve citizen involvement in land use projects. The company provides neutral, independent communications platforms for public information and interaction. The company designs public information sites to disseminate project information, pictures and documents to stakeholders, constituents or local residents. Neighborhood America also provides stakeholders with a web based platform called Public Comment that allows them to interact and dialogue about a project. The project team can collect, report and archive imputed collected data. Mr. Kobza feels the results capture more input than allowed by traditional means such as public meetings and charrettes. Finally, Neighborhood America provides a project team communications and collaboration platform. This includes a project team directory, task list, centralized document repository, project team calendar, web conferencing and a message board. Web based applications are the future and provide an opportunity to increase citizen involvement in the land development process. 

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD:

Public Comment: Provided written information on the Jacksonville area, Greater Arlington/ Beaches Citizens Planning Advisory Committee and their support for early and meaningful participation in all phases of the growth management process.

Charles Lee: Feels that local governments need to get people involved early in the process. Get them involved in the planning process. Expressed concern about the process and his belief that citizen participation is restricted because the process is too intimidating.

Barry Rutenberg: The plan amendment process is too complicated. That is the reason of the intimidation. 

Allison DeFoor: Proposed recommending the statutory language change to Florida Statues §163.3171(11) suggested by Mr. Busha that would require local governments to articulate a vision for the future appearances and qualities of its community.

Barry Rutenberg: Asked that the sub-committee hold the issue in abeyance. He is concerned about the cost and people getting lost in the process. 

Pat Blackshear: Also expressed some concern about the cost. 

Ysela Llort: Visioning is too important. What does it mean to say it may cost too much? What is the cost? 

Public Comment: A representative from the Homebuilders Association asked the sub-committee not take a position on the issue at this time. 

Allison DeFoor: Agreed to consider it further at a later meeting. He suggested that the sub-committee recommend changes that would allow for the early dismissal of SLAPP suits. 

Pat Blackshear: Agreed with the recommendation.

Allison DeFoor: Proposed a recommendation encouraging the use of the internet and web-based technologies to encourage and increase citizen involvement. 

The Growth Management Study Commission has been broken down into 5 (five) separate sub-committees.  The only sub-committee to establish a meeting time was the State, Regional and Local Roles Sub-committee which was held on Thursday, October 12 in Orlando.  These are my observations and thoughts after attending the meeting.

It would appear that they have a long way to go to get the process rolling.  There were perhaps 30 chairs for citizens, at least half filled by "regional planners" who appeared to be there basically to defend their existence in the chain.  Of the 2 (two) afternoon agenda items, the one on regional planning was the only one actually addressed with a presentation by Brian Teeple.  Paul Bradshaw, chair of the subcommittee, asked the speaker if they (regional planning councils) could be arbitrators or function in that capacity as their "role" in the planning process.  I thought the question was interesting and could redirect role/function, cut the state budget and/or address an oversight function.

During the morning session much of what was discussed about what needed to be covered and at what level - state, regional, local - could have saved time by reviewing many of the items and presentations already made at past GMSC meetings and which one can pull off the GMSC website.  It was indicative that there was a failure to understand or to read that which was already available.  Steve Seibert, Secretary of DCA, was not in attendance although Sergio Rodriquez asked many of the most insightful questions and Paul Bradshaw, chair, did a very effective job of trying to focus the efforts.

The public participation extended beyond the 30 minutes allowed.  The first speaker was Jay Odom from the Panhandle area and he brought up "protection of private property rights" and trying to relate the current state gov. process to private business through management oversight and implementation via management tools and an infrastructure of feedback.  There were about 7 other speakers, all of whom brought up significant growth management considerations.  Something that was thrown out by one of the Committee members was " perhaps the function of GMSC was too aggressive to accomplish effectively in the short time frame allotted to them and maybe two years was more realistic".  That statement sounded like a trial balloon being launched.

Yesterday I took the time to attend a GMSC (Growth Management Study Commission) meeting held in Tampa.  I was there to be an observer with a grass roots political mentality.  Even more than that I was overjoyed to hear during a "Tampa Bay Area Story" panel of five members the commitment separately from Bob Hunter, an advocate of planning for the future, and Denise Layne, a civic and environmental spokesperson that the key to "effective" growth management is public participation.  Both acknowledged the apathy or lack of citizen participation as due in large part to the complexity of the system.

Since I rarely make comments unless I can suggest a potential solution perhaps it would be timely to target markets, such as the senior market at the community college level, with real classes about involvement in local and state government.  Perhaps it is time for the educational system to actively take the bull by the horns and start to educate those who may have some available time, but who are overwhelmed by the initial complexity and negative campaign tactics that appear to be the hallmark of our current political process.  Apathy as represented by low voter turnout, is more a product of lack of time to understand the issues and education about the process, than an abdication of ones right to vote in my opinion.

The stated observation by one of the Commission members, Charles Lee, addressed the issue of public participation when he identified how Disney, prior to building the Wilderness Area (?), actively went out and solicited public involvement.  His intuitive understanding of a positive cause and effect when tied to some of the comments made by the two Tampa area speakers was refreshing to say the least.  For my part I think it is important to suggest to you, Seminole Community College and GMSC, that the right kinds of classes and education can put the enthusiasm back into government involvement and public participation. 
Dianna D. Meyer

Dear Chairman Mel Martinez, 

We've included our original messages to the GMSC (8/23) and to your
office in Orlando dated 31 August, 2000 requesting consideration for a
GMSC meeting in our county. 

We notice; meetings have been held in Orlando, Tallahassee and Tampa
with the next meeting scheduled in Pensacola. In addition; tentative
meetings in Miami, Tallahassee and West Palm Beach. 

Although we're certain our request has been given due consideration we
haven't received a response from your office or in your capacity as
Chair of the Growth Management Study Commission. 

Time is fleeting and we understand there are two open meeting dates,
i.e., January 10/11 and January 31/February 1, 2001. 

Therefore, we're requesting further consideration to schedule a GMSC
meeting, during one of the above open dates, as suggested in our
original request.

Thank you very much for your consideration. 
We look forward to your reply. 
Sincerely, 
Bob, Ocala, FL.

We've noticed; Marion county, one of the most fastest growing counties
in Florida, isn't represented on the commission. Nor is the
Withlacoochee Regional Planning Council located in, Ocala, our county
seat. 

Therefore, while the commission is engaged in setting places to conduct
business we're requesting consideration of the Chair for convening a
future commission meeting(s) in Ocala/Marion county. 

We believe; the most convenient and appropriate facilities available for
the commission and a gathering of the general public can be acquired at
the Central Florida Community College. 

In addition, if the commission decides to conduct it's public meeting(s)
in Ocala, adequate overnight accomodations are available in the near
vicinity of CFCC, along SR200. 
(commonly referred to as "Hospitality Avenue.") 

When the DCA was conducting the Survey of Growth Management, Secretary Steven M. Seibert and members of his staff held an important meeting at the CFCC location. 

Therefore, the Secretary can attest to the appropriate accomodations,
relative ease of access to CFCC facilities and the warm hospitality he
received from residents. 

We look forward to meeting study commission members at CFCC and
participating in the general discussion of growth management vs
uninhibited growth in Florida.
 

During its September 19, 2000 meeting, the Marion County Board of County Commissioners unanimously approved sending this letter to you to be addressed by the Growth Management Study Commission (GMSC). 

As one of the fastest growing areas in the State of Florida, we are very familiar with and are concerned about any amendments and changes to Growth Management legislation. Due to this community's overwhelming interest in the Commission's charge, we are respectfully requesting that
the GMSC schedule one of its meetings in Marion County. 
Our County staff will be available to help facilitate this request. 

Should you have any questions or need any help in accomplishing the arrangements please do not hesitate to contact me or Jim Lowry, County Administrator (352-620-3340) 

We look forward to attending your meeting in Ocala. 
Sincerely 
(signed) 
Steve Henning 
Chairman 
c: Commissioners
   Jim Lowry
   Dwight Ganoe 

Today, we send our sincere thanks to Chairman Steve Henning and his colleagues of the board of Marion County Commissioners for instructing  county administrator Jim Lowry to transmit a request to Growth Management Study Commission Chair Mel Martinez supporting our desire to
schedule a meeting of the GMSC in Marion county. 

Commissioner Henning, et al, thank you for your willingness to listen and respond to our request. We appreciate it very much.

To date; despite our concerted efforts we have not received a response to the three requests we've sent to the GMSC. Hopefully, our County Commissioners request will be considered in the context sent and the GMSC will respond favorably? 

The correspondence to Mr. Martinez is *transcribed (*SEE BELOW) for your edification. 

We look forward to the reply from the GMSC Chairman and/or his executive director and respectfully urge the Ocala City Council to transmit a similar request. 
Sincerely, 

Robert E. Janauskas