The group is pushing a proposed constitutional amendment that would give voters the final say about whether local governments change comprehensive plans that serve as blueprints for growth.

Ross Burnaman, the group's attorney, said he hopes the proposal will reduce the number of comprehensive-plan changes that often lead to large developments. Also, he said it will let voters be more involved in their communities.

But to critics, the proposal is an example of a constitutional amendment process that has gone amok. While the proposal sounds appealing, they say, it could have dramatic effects on such things as economic development.

"You're going to get the people who don't want anything to change ever, saying 'no' (to comprehensive plan changes)," said Sen. Jim King, a Jacksonville Republican whose district includes parts of Volusia and Flagler counties.

The Florida Supreme Court on Monday heard arguments about whether the Hometown Democracy proposal should be allowed to go before voters, likely in the 2008 election. But the issue also comes amid a renewed debate in the state Legislature about whether it should be harder to amend the state constitution.

Some Republican lawmakers, backed by business groups such as the Florida Chamber of Commerce, are pushing bills that would restrict a petition-gathering process that is crucial to getting amendments -- including the Hometown Democracy proposal -- on the ballot. At the same time, they want to make it far more difficult to pass amendments that would force the state to spend large amounts of money.

Lawmakers have proposed the changes after voters approved a series of major amendments in recent years, such as requiring smaller school class sizes, starting a statewide prekindergarten program and imposing a higher state minimum wage. Critics of the amendment process say it has been hijacked by special interests that can pour millions of dollars into passing ballot measures.

One of the legislative proposals would require that two-thirds of voters approve any amendments that would be costly for the state -- up from the current majority. Such a requirement could help prevent future efforts to pass amendments similar to the class-size requirements, which are costing the state billions of dollars.

"This is excellent legislation," said Rep. David Simmons, a Longwood Republican who is sponsoring the proposal. "It makes good common sense."

Opponents say the legislative proposals would effectively shut out voters from being able to change the constitution. They say groups are forced to turn to the constitutional-amendment process because lawmakers refuse to carry out voters' wishes on issues such as reducing class sizes.

"They (lawmakers) don't like people telling them how to do their job," said Brad Ashwell, democracy and consumer advocate for the Florida Public Interest Research Group, which is fighting efforts to restrict the amendment process.

Lawmakers last year passed a proposal that would require 60 percent of voters to approve future constitutional amendments. That proposal will go to voters during the November election. The proposal requires voter approval because it involves changing the constitution.

Similarly, voters ultimately would have to approve the proposal requiring a two-thirds margin on any costly future amendments. The House and Senate have different versions of the proposal, but one would apply the two-thirds requirement to amendments that would cost $52 million or more.

Lawmakers, however, could place restrictions on the petition process without needing voter approval. That idea, which some lawmakers say is needed because of fraud in petition gathering, would affect all citizen-driven ballot initiatives.

Backers of the Hometown Democracy proposal have gathered 69,000 signatures, which was enough to trigger a Supreme Court review of the ballot language. If the court approves the language, the group still will need to collect more than 600,000 signatures to get on the ballot.

Jim Cameron, a vice president of The Chamber, Daytona Beach/Halifax Area, said his group "steadfastly" opposes the Hometown Democracy amendment.

"It's going to be difficult for them (voters) to make an informed decision on every amendment to their local government's comprehensive land-use plan," said Cameron, who lobbies the Legislature. "That's what we have planning boards for."

jim.saunders@news-jrnl.com