Ballot language for Sarasota's anti-term limits referendum

Time is running out for the desperate Sarasota County Commissioners trying to undermine their county's voter-approved 8-year term limits law. At the request of commissioners, county attorney Stephen DeMarsh has offered sample ballot language and warns a public hearing is required on this issue on Nov. 8 or Nov. 15 in order to place the question on the Jan. 31 ballot.

Ed Scott tells the story in a Englewood Sun article here. Scott reports that in an Oct. 18 memo to commissioners DeMarsh advised that the language has to confirm with a 1982 Supreme Court decision that the public be “advised of the true meaning and ramifications of the amendment in clear and unambiguous language” and the ballot summary must “give the voter fair notice of the decision to be made and explain the effect of the amendment."

DeMarsh's sample language for the most part passes the test. Here it is:

TITLE: Extend Commissioner term limits to three terms
commencing upon referendum approval if term limits constitutional

TEXT: Shall Section 2.1A of the Sarasota County Charter be
amended to allow County Commissioners to serve three, rather than two, consecutive terms, and to provide that term limits shall be applicable only to terms commencing after January 31, 2012, rather than to terms commencing after September 1, 1998 (effective date of current term limit provision)? These term limits would be enforceable if a court’s ruling results in Sarasota County’s Commissioner term limits being found constitutional.

Note that the text makes it clear, if one reads it, that this ballot measure weakens the existing term limits and adds a 12-year delay on implementation.

The title alludes to this too, but is not 100% clear and many voters only read the title. So defenders of the current law need to inform voters that this measure does not simply impose 12-year term limits (something voters may support as they don't know Sarasota already has 8-year term limits in the charter) but instead is an self-interested attack on term limits. We should refer to it as the "anti-term limits amendment" from here on out.

If citizens are successful in educating their neighbors on this point, the people will win and the politicians will lose.

Dr. Rich: Sarasota should take positive action on behalf of voters

In this blog I have been calling for the Sarasota County Commission to give up its desperate 6-year crusade against enforcing Sarasota County's voter-approved 8-year term limits law, accept the imminent state Supreme Court affirmation of county term limits laws, and then act in accordance with the law. In other words, the county commission should resign itself to the law and the clearly expressed will of the people.

But the local businessman, blogger and radio host known as Dr. Rich suggests that is not enough. In his view, the county commission is elected to serve the people and therefore should be taking positive action to implement the people's will.

He points out that the highest court to look at the issue of county commission term limits -- the 4th District Court of appeals -- has unanimously decided such term limits are constitutional and enforceable. Hence, Dr. Rich says in a new blog post, "What the County Commission should have done is direct County Attorney DeMarsh to support the ruling of the 4th DCA and request the Florida Supreme Court to issue a quick judgement in favor of the people of Sarasota County."

He's right, of course.

Unfortunately, the commission is going the opposite direction: floating a new referendum to replace the voter-approved 8-year term limits with 12-year term limits and -- the real reason for the change -- a new 12-year grandfather period for current commissioners.

The commission is taking action all right, but it is not to serve the voters, but only themselves.

KEEP 8-YEAR TERM LIMITS bumper sticker available!

The people spoke, approving 8-year term limits for the Sarasota County commission with 68 percent of the vote.

Local politicians blocked their implementation for years, but it looks like the Florida Supreme Court is coming to voters' rescue in a few months. In response, the commission is cobbling together a new scheme to abolish the voter-approved 8-year term limits and replace them with new 12-year limits with -- can you believe it? -- a new 12-year grandfather period for current commissioners.

So, it is time for the people to speak again. One way to do it is with this tasteful, high-quality vinyl bumper sticker: KEEP 8-YEAR TERM LIMITS. This sticker is easily removable without any damage to your vehicle. And, they're free.

To get one, go here and include your contact info including mailing address and you'll find one in your mailbox promptly. Thanks.

Commissioner Jon Thaxton bucks Sarasota voters on term limits -- again!

Is it something in the water?

Arrogance of professional politicians is, of course, hardly uncommon, but Sarasota County brings it to a new level when it comes to the way county politicians have dealt with their county’s voter-approved term limits law.

In 1998, 68 percent of Sarasota voters approved a citizen initiative to limit the terms of county commissioners to eight years in office. As has occurred elsewhere, politicians brought the charter amendment to court and found a friendly local judge to shoot it down as unconstitutional. One would expect that the county would feel obligated to defend 68 percent of their voters by appealing the decision. But Commisisoner Jon Thaxton and the rest of the commission – the very body the term limits amendment applied to – voted not to appeal, citing the cost.

The cost! In a decade with surging property value and surging budgets, the big spending commissioners of Sarasota County suddenly became fiscal conservatives when faced with the prospect of having their terms limited by pesky citizens. The estimated cost of the appeal was $15,000.

Today, the charter amendment stands, but there is a footnote in the charter noting that the term limits language is not enforceable due to the court decision.

Meanwhile, in Broward County a similar story unfolded but with a far different ending. When local politicians tried to overturn the Broward County term limits law, the county went to bat for the 80 percent of voters that approved their term limits law. And guess what? The 4th District Court of Appeals in August confirmed unanimously that, yep, county term limits are indeed constitutional.

Politicians are appealing to the Supreme Court, where the term limits law is expected to be affirmed. When it is, Sarasota term limits will go into effect, finally.

So the Sarasota County commission has been busted by the 4th District Court of Appeals for their self-serving upending of all the hard work and the clear will of their citizens. But Commissioner Jon Thaxton is not done yet. He has announced he plans to run for his fourth term in spite of the voter-approved term limits amendment.

Thaxton is a poster child for term limits. There are several good reasons for term limits, but the primary one is that it mandates regular, competitive elections. As is typical, Thaxton has not faced a challenger since he first ran in 2000.

That's right, Jon Thaxton’s name has not appeared on a general election ballot for over a decade! Remember that the next time some politician pulls out the hoary old cliche "we already have term limits, they are called elections."

It is no wonder Thaxton voted against defending the people’s term limits law. He knows what all county commissioners know, that because of the advantages incumbents have, sitting commissioners rarely face serious challengers -- if they face any challengers at all. The county commissioner gig is a cozy one and he is all but guaranteed of keeping it, as long as there are no term limits.

His announcement means that other potential challengers are not entering the race or, if they are, they will not be able to raise the money they need for a competitive race. On his way out, Thaxton is throwing one more wrench into Sarasota democracy.

Isn’t it this kind of behavior that led 68 percent of Sarasota voters to approve term limits in the first place?

Term limits emerge as issue in Florida U.S. Senate race

As noted below, polls show Floridians love term limits. And why not? We have term limits on our governor, state legislators, county commissioners in nine counties and countless mayors and city councils. Term limits work and Floridians know it.

Adam Hasner, as a term limited former House majority leader, knows it too. Hasner has signed the U.S. Term Limits pledge that, if elected, he -- like Sen. Marco Rubio -- will cosponsor and support Sen. Jim DeMint's term limits amendment bill to limit terms to three in the U.S. House and two in the U.S. Senate. He reiterated his pledge in his new campaign brochure, at left, going further to say that he would only serve two terms in the Senate. The U.S. Term Limits pledge is not a self limit, but only a pledge to support 3/2 term limits legislation.

While all the Senate candidates have made pleasant noises about term limits when asked, only Hasner has signed his name so far.

But rival George LeMieux is challenging Hasner's ownership of the issue. In his attack site, PhonyConservative.com, LeMieux points out that as a Florida House member Hasner voted for an amendment to weaken Florida's voter-approved term limits on the state legislature from eight to 12 years. (Hasner also voted to remove the amendment from the ballot following a public outcry in support of the 8-year term limit law.)

Brian Seitchik, campaign manager for LeMieux, puts it this way: "The fact is, Adam Hasner voted to severely weaken Florida’s voter approved term limits law in order to give career legislators like himself more time in Tallahassee. He even defended that position, saying longer terms would bring better government. Now he wants voters to believe he’s a term limits champion?"

Ouch.

I'm looking forward to the next round. May the best man win. But dare I suggest that other candidates sign the pledge to support the term limits amendment as Hasner did before they attack him for being weak on term limits.

Politicians ask Florida Supreme Court to kill voter-approved county term limits

It's official. Broward County politicians, hiding behind their attorneys, are appealing the recent appellate court decision that deemed county commission term limits constitutional. Yes, county term limits are going to the state Supreme Court.

Bill Scherer, acting for sitting Broward commissioner John Rodstrom among others, launched the appeal after losing his case at the appellate court level on Aug. 10. The appellate court had decided -- unanimously -- that home rule charter counties do indeed have the right to customize their county commissions as they have long done.

It is for this reason that some counties have seven commissioners and some have five, or even 13. Some have single member districts and some are elected from the county at-large -- and some have a blend of the two. Some have a strong mayor system and some have a commission-manager structure. Some counties offer nominal compensation to cover expenses and others offer high salaries with benefits. Some counties have term limits and some don't.

In home rule counties, all charter changes such as these are approved by the voters in a referendum, sometimes by a citizen's initiative after collecting thousands of signatures from their neighbors. Florida's county term limits were adopted by lopsided votes of the people, including 80% voter approval in Broward.

The August decision by the 4th District Court of Appeals upheld Broward County term limits, argued that this traditional understanding of home rule is correct. The people won; the politicians lost. It should have ended there.

But politicians grasp for power like a drowning man gasps for air. Scherer and his cronies argue in their appeal to the Supreme Court that the people cannot be trusted to alter their charter in this way. Instead, county commissioners should be treated just like constitutional officers -- such as the tax collector and property appraisers -- which are state creations over which the Supreme Court has said people have less say.

This is seen as a weak argument, as constitutional officers are distinct from county commissioners are treated in a different section of the state constitution. The quite readable 4th district decision makes this distinction as clear as day.

Meanwhile, the desperate Broward political clan is tossing 2012 county elections across the state into confusion in their last bid to hold on to the thrones that have enriched and, sadly but evidently, corrupted them.

Voters in half of charter counties have approved county term limits

This Supreme Court case isn't just about the antisocial ambition of Broward County politicians. The case will reaffirm -- or revoke -- the will of voters in 10 of Florida's charter counties.

Right now, half of Florida's charter counties have voter-approved term limits on their county commissioners. There are 67 counties in Florida.

But only charter counties -- sometimes called 'home rule' counties -- are permitted to customize their local government to meet local needs and concerns. There are 20 such counties in Florida, and they include the biggest ones. Orange, Hillsborough, Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade are all charter counties.

As explained on the Palm Beach County govenrment website, "True Home Rule gives the Board of County Commissioners the ability to create, through a local public hearing ordinance procedure, local laws that are not in conflict with or specifically prohibited by state general law or the Florida Constitution. This process is done without having to go to the Florida Legislature to request special legislation to create these laws."

Home rule has resulted in many different formats for county government, chosen by the people. For example, some counties have partisan elections and some don't.

For a simple and excellent primer on charter counties, see this presentation by the Palm Beach County Charter Review Commission. This was the source for the county comparison above.