Legislation sponsored by Rep. Kevin Ambler has come under fire by many concerned citizens, specifically because of the inclusion of the City-County Planning Commission in the bill.

HB 723 is about a power shift of several local boards including the Environmental Protection Commission, the Tampa Sports Authority and The Planning Commission. The EPC board right now consists solely of the Board of County Commissioners. Yes, that same BOCC that tried to kill our wetlands last summer which is reason enough to decrease the BOCC's power on the EPC.

I don't have time to follow the Sports Authority so I can't comment on that board. (But here's an earlier PoHo piece on how that board spends your tax dollars.) The Planning Commission, however, currently has equal representation of city and county. Many concerned citizens, myself included, feel that our Planning Commission serves us well as is and do not want to see a shift in power giving the County the edge with more representation which is what this bill is proposing.

The three local municipal governments â€” the City of Tampa, Temple Terrace and Plant City â€” have voted against a change on the Planning Commission. On Nov. 13, 2007, our own BOCC voted unanimously to support this bill ONLY if the Planning Commission was removed from it. That is why it was strange when on Dec. 7, County Administrator Pat Bean told Hillsborough legislators that the BOCC would still support the bill if Mr. Ambler left the Planning Commission in it.

These transcripts and a letter written by Commissioner Sharpe who clearly opposes any changes to the Planning Commission can be seen on Mariella Smith's blog post on this subject at Sticks of Fire. Mr. Ambler waived the rules at the delegation meeting and voted on this issue without a quorum. It seems like the political agendas of a few politicians have overridden the will of the people as well as local governments.

Why then did Rep. Ambler push this bill without a quorum? Why did Pat Bean say the BOCC would support the inclusion even though they voted against it? That is what many citizens are asking our delegation. We are also asking that they hold another meeting due to the unfinished business of this controversial bill. R-LAND and UCAN members have posted a letter for anyone sharing the same views to use and it goes right to our delegation and committee members. You can access it here.

Why is giving our BOCC the edge on any board a bad idea? Again I cite the EPC example. Why are citizens so concerned about the Planning Commission? Because the Planning Commission is the only objective agency we have free of political bias and hidden agendas. They promote smart growth and discourage sprawl. The knowledge of its staff is unparalleled, and they are charged with being the keepers of our comprehensive plan, the county's blueprint for growth. They make recommendations to our Planning Commissioners (who are appointed by the city and the county) and they in turn vote on issues to make recommendations to the BOCC. The BOCC gets the final word on growth, and that fact alone says they ALREADY have the edge.

Here's how to contact Ambler or any state representative to let them know how you feel about the proposed changes to these three boards.

This article appears in Mar 19-25, 2008.