If you don't live in an area, you're less fit to make decisions for it. And who said anything about farms? All you need is 1/5 of an acre.
I say no, but I agree with Phillip's logic - local control is good. We knew back in 1776 that a King and Parliament all the way across the ocean, with no representation at all from ourselves, did NOT know what was best for us, we did. Since they decided to butt into our business, we booted them out.
The reason I say no though, is because many residents in an area do not own property - they can rent apartments though and live there on a permanent basis. In modern times, very smart, knowledgeable, and intelligent people do not own land - especially in cities. I think proof of residence should be the criterium. However, for voting on things like property taxes and zoning laws (things that affect land), it may be good to have to own land to vote on it. So I voted yes, but it is situational.