Circuit Judge Upholds CRC Ballot Measure on County Offices
Circuit Judge James Shelfer rejected a challenge from Volusia and Broward counties that sought to have what is known as Amendment 10 removed from the Nov. 6 general-election ballot.
August 13, 2018 at 02:53 PM
3 minute read
Florida voters have the right to decide whether all local constitutional officers, including sheriffs and tax collectors, should be elected, a Leon County judge ruled.
Circuit Judge James Shelfer on Thursday rejected a challenge from Volusia and Broward counties that sought to have what is known as Amendment 10 removed from the Nov. 6 general-election ballot. The challenge argued the ballot language and summary were misleading.
The amendment, which was placed on the ballot by the Constitution Revision Commission, would make the five constitutional offices — sheriff, tax collector, supervisor of elections, clerk of the court and property appraiser — mandatory and require elections for the offices in all 67 counties. It would also prohibit charter counties from abolishing or modifying those offices.
In his ruling, Shelfer said “an average Florida voter should easily understand” the chief purpose of the amendment. He also rejected an argument from the challengers that the constitutional-officer provisions were unfairly sandwiched between “feel good” proposals in the ballot measure related to military veterans and counterterrorism.
He acknowledged the amendment was unclear on whether its impact would be “prospective or retrospective.” But he said “that is a question for another case and another day.”
Shelfer also noted his order was “the first stop in a journey to the Florida Supreme Court whose decision will determine if the amendment makes it onto the ballot.”
Volusia, Broward and other charter counties have opposed the amendment, arguing that local voters through the charter process should have the power to decide how constitutional offices are structured and whether they should be elected positions.
Carolyn Timmann, the Martin County clerk of court who helped craft the amendment while serving on the commission, said the ballot measure “protects the people's right to vote” for constitutional officers. She said she was “happy that the people of Florida will have the opportunity to vote on this, along with other measures important to protecting our veterans, families and tax dollars.”
In addition to the constitutional-officer provisions, Amendment 10 would allow the Legislature to begin its annual session in January in even-numbered years. It would create an Office of Domestic Security and Counterterrorism in the Department of Law Enforcement. And it would revise the constitutional authority for the Department of Veterans' Affairs.
The commission meets every 20 years and has unique power to place proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot. Amendment 10 is one of four ballot measures approved by the commission that are being challenged in court.
Other measures under litigation include ballot proposals to ban greyhound racing (Amendment 13), to expand the use of charter schools and impose school-board term limits (Amendment 8) and to establish victims' rights in the state Constitution (Amendment 6).
In total, 13 constitutional amendments have been slated for the November ballot, including eight measures passed by the commission. To be enacted, each amendment must be approved by at least 60 percent of the voters.
Lloyd Dunkelberger reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCOVID-19 Death Suit Against Nursing Home Sent to State Court, 11th Circuit Affirms
Year-End Tax Planning: How Real Estate Investors Can Leverage Qualified Opportunity Funds
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
- 2Congress and Courts Are Considering Litigation Financing: Is Disclosure Imminent?
- 3Bar Report — Nov. 25, 2024
- 4People in the News—Nov. 25, 2024—Eckert Seamans, Klehr Harrison
- 5How We Made Practice Group Chair: 'One of the Most Important Skills Is Being a Good Listener,' Say Timothy Kincaid and Brad Vaiana of Winston & Strawn
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250