CopyCited 77 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2000 WL 1260014
...lity. [15] This accuracy requirement, which applies to all proposed constitutional amendments, has been codified by the Legislature in chapter 101, Florida Statutes (1997). Because the text of a proposed amendment oftentimes is detailed and lengthy, section 101.161 provides that only a title and brief summary of the amendment's "chief purpose" may be listed on the ballot. The actual text of the amendment does not appear: 101.161 Referenda; ballots. (1) Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ba...
...The substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1), Fla....
...sponsor. [16] Because voters will not have the actual text of the amendment before them in the *13 voting booth when they enter their votes, the accuracy requirement is of paramount importance for the ballot title and summary: As previously stated, section 101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure....
...[21] Recognizing the deference due legislative acts in general, the Court evaluated the amendment under an implicit "germaneness" theory and approved it, concluding that the proposed amendment was minimally germane to the provision it amended. The Court further ruled that the amendment comported with the requirements of section 101.161 and was not misleading....
...Again, the Court stressed the need for accuracy: What the law requires is that the ballot be fair and advise the voter sufficiently to enable him intelligently to cast his ballot. Grose,
422 So.2d at 305 (quoting Hill v. Milander,
72 So.2d 796, 798 (Fla.1954)) (emphasis omitted). The Court then conducted an analysis under section
101.161 and approved the amendment, concluding that "[t]he wording of the ballot summary of proposed Amendment 2 is unambiguous and clearly states the amendment's chief purpose." [23] And finally, the Court in Askew v....
...16 one's former colleagues is wrong, it is appropriate for that body to pass a joint resolution and to ask the citizens to modify that prohibition. But such a change must stand on its own merits and not be disguised as something else. The purpose of section 101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment....
...In the present case, a citizen could well have voted in favor of the proposed amendment thinking that he or she was protecting state constitutional rights when in fact the citizen was doing the exact opposite -i.e., he or she was voting to nullify those rights. [27] B. " Hiding The Ball " To conform to section 101.161(1), a ballot summary must state "the chief purpose" of the proposed amendment....
...[33] The Court also rejected the Commissioners' argument that the voters' approval of the amendment cleansed it of any defect: We also reject the [Commissioners'] argument that the favorable vote cured any defects in the form of the submission. This defect was more than form; it went to the very heart of what section 101.161(1) seeks to preclude....
...aches would preclude an attack on the ordinance, such is not the situation in the present case where the suit was filed only a few weeks after the election. Deception of the voting public is intolerable and should not be countenanced. The purpose of section 101.161(1) is to assure that the electorate is advised of the meaning and ramifications of the proposed amendment. Because the ballot at issue failed to comply with ... section 101.161(1), the proposed amendments must be stricken....
...electors for approval contains an implicit requirement that the proposed amendment be accurately represented on the ballot; otherwise voter approval would be a nullity. I reach this conclusion for two reasons: (1) the legislative intent expressed in section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1999), that the language of constitutional amendments and other public measures submitted to the vote of the people be clear and unambiguous; and (2) the long history of judicial review of ballots for clarity and lack of ambiguity. In 1980, the Legislature amended section 101.161 to require that the substance of a constitutional amendment or other public measure submitted to the vote of the people be printed on the ballot in "clear and unambiguous language." See ch. 80-305, § 2, at 1342, Laws of Fla. Section 101.161 relates to "Referenda; ballots" and is contained in chapter 101, which governs "Voting Methods and Procedures." As amended by the legislature, section 101.161(1) provides that " [w]henever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language....
...ndment proposed by initiative." Id. Thus, I conclude that the standards of accuracy and clarity apply with equal force to all constitutional amendments and other public ballot measures, whatever the method by which they are initiated. I believe that section 101.161 was simply a codification of the implicit authority of Florida courts to review ballot measures for accuracy and clarity and a legislative statement that such clarity and accuracy is especially important when the voters are being asked to change the basic legal framework of the state....
...I would agree that a constitutional amendment would supersede a prior statute dealing with the same subject matter. For example, if the instant proposed amendment related to the accuracy requirements of ballot summary and titles, then it would supersede section 101.161(1). In the instant case, however, the proposed amendment does not deal with the same subject matter as section 101.161. Therefore, the proposed amendment would not supersede section 101.161....
...this amendment contains; that the amendment would violate the "one person one vote" guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; that the notice of the contents of the amendment which would appear on the ballot violates Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1975); and that the amendment is inadequate to inform the public of the substantial shift in governmental power which it would effect....
...Although the majority here first refers to article I, section 5, as having an "implicit accuracy requirement," the majority basically justifies its power to strike the constitutional amendment on the basis that the Legislature's ballot title and summary are misleading, in violation of section 101.161, Florida Statutes....
...amental law requires that the form of a proposed amendment to the Constitution as it appears on the ballot be fair and advise the voters of sufficient information to permit intelligent voting. This is further codified through the intent expressed in section 101.161, Florida Statutes, which requires that public measures submitted to popular vote be clear and unambiguous....
...Implications of Smathers v. Smith, 5 Fla. St. U.L.Rev. 747(1977) (decrying the lack of adequate judicial control over legislatively proposed amendments and calling for adoption of an explicit accuracy requirement in article XI, section 1). [16] See § 101.161(2), Fla....
...[21] See also Smathers,
338 So.2d at 828 (referring to "the even more compelling notice-giving needs which legislators should have for constitutional amendments"). [22] See Smathers,
338 So.2d at 827 n. 2 ("We have considered all of the points raised by Smith [including his accuracy claim under section
101.161] and find that ......
...g by the parties. In the years following Grose, the issue has been widely debated and has been the focus of intensive and spirited discourse. See, e.g., Perez v. State,
620 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 1993); Bernie v. State,
524 So.2d 988 (Fla. 1988). [28] See §
101.161(1), Fla....
...se of the measure.") (emphasis added). [29] See, e.g., Evans v. Firestone,
457 So.2d 1351, 1355 (Fla.1984) ("The ballot summary should tell the voter the legal effect of the amendment ....") (emphasis added); Askew,
421 So.2d at 156 ("The purpose of section
101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment.") (emphasis added)....
CopyCited 76 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...(Material to be added underlined, material to be deleted struck through.) The proposed amendment, therefore, would remove the absolute two-year ban on lobbying by former legislators and elected officers, retaining that ban only if an affected person failed to make financial disclosure. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981), provides for submission to popular vote of constitutional amendments and other public measures. The wording of the substance of the amendment and the ballot title must be included in the joint resolution and must be prepared by the amendment's sponsor and approved by the secretary of state. § 101.161, Fla....
...The substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. Id. (emphasis supplied). Section 101.161 also requires that the substance of a proposed amendment be in "clear and unambiguous language." In response to these requirements SJR 1035 includes the following proposed title and substance: FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REQUIRED BEFORE LOBB...
...into line with the true intent of the Sunshine Amendment. After receiving the complaint and the parties' joint stipulation, Judge Willis, in an extensive and thoughtful order, found that the proposed ballot title and summary meet the requirements of section 101.161....
...ow that the proposal is clearly and conclusively defective. Weber v. Smathers,
338 So.2d 819 (Fla. 1976), disapproved on other grounds sub nom Floridians Against Casino Takeover v. Let's Help Florida,
363 So.2d 337 (Fla. 1978). As previously stated, section
101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional *155 amendment state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure....
...If the legislature feels that the present prohibition against appearing before one's former colleagues is wrong, it is appropriate for that body to pass a joint resolution and to ask the citizens to modify that prohibition. But such a change must stand on its own merits and not be disguised as something else. The purpose of section 101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment....
...f purpose. The chief purpose of SJR 1035 is to remove the two-year ban on lobbying by former legislators and elected officers. The ballot summary, however, does not adequately reflect that purpose and, therefore, does not satisfy the requirements of section 101.161....
...ing up the total ban to lobby before the former agency for two years. The chief purpose of the amendment is the "trade-off" and the failure of the ballot summary to state the full "trade-off" is a failure to comply with the mandatory requirements of section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981), and hence the ballot summary is fatally defective....
...e not misleading. If the ballot summary had contained the words "and deletes from the Constitution the absolute ban against such representation during such two-year period," or words to that effect, the ballot summary would have fairly complied with section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981), and would not have been misleading....
...I do not intend to imply that the framers of the joint resolution and those members of the legislature who voted for it intentionally set out to mislead or deceive the voters. That is undoubtedly not the case. All I say is that the end result of their well-intentioned efforts was not in compliance with section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981)....
...Justice Adkins ends his dissent with a rousing clarion call that the people should be allowed to vote on the proposal. I join with him in the belief that the people ought to be able to vote on amendments to their constitution. I differ with him in that I believe that the mandate of the legislature expressed in section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981), was not complied with here for the reasons expressed above and in the Court's opinion, and hence the proposed amendment should not be on the ballot....
...tance comply with the statutory requirements. ALDERMAN, C.J., and McDONALD, J., concur. ADKINS, Justice, dissenting. The only issue in this case is whether the language of the caption and substance of the proposed amendment meets the requirements of section 101.161, Florida Statutes....
...The majority seems to ignore article II, section 3, Florida Constitution, which prohibits one branch of government from exercising any powers appertaining to another, unless expressly provided in the Constitution. The legislature has full power to enact measures such as section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981), to regulate the form of the ballot; including the contents of summaries of proposals for constitutional change....
CopyCited 65 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1996 WL 673822
...by citizen initiative accurately apprises the voter of the chief purposes and effects of the proposed amendment and is not misleading so that the voter may make an informed decision whether to support a proposed change to our state constitution. See § 101.161, Fla.Stat....
CopyCited 56 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1991 WL 268455
...ion of this initiative is held invalid. The Attorney General has concluded that the proposed amendment meets the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and the ballot title and summary requirements of section *227 101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
...General law provides that the attorney general shall seek an advisory opinion "regarding the compliance of the text of the proposed amendment or revision with s. 3, Art. XI of the State Constitution and the compliance of the proposed ballot title and substance with s.
101.161." §
16.061(1), Fla. Stat. (1989). Thus, we are limited in this proceeding to addressing whether the proposed amendment and ballot title and summary comply with article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution and section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
...-year terms and state representatives for two-year terms as provided in article III, section 15. Cabinet members and the lieutenant governor will still serve four-year terms as provided in article IV, section 5. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY REQUIREMENTS Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1989), provides in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment ......
...or re-election to that office. Offices covered are: Florida Representative and Senator, Lieutenant Governor, Florida Cabinet, and U.S. Senator and Representative. Terms of office beginning before amendment approval are not counted. We have construed section 101.161 to require that "the ballot be fair and advise the voter sufficiently to enable him intelligently to cast his ballot." Askew v....
...1991); In re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General, Limitation of Non-Economic Damages in Civil Actions,
520 So.2d 284 (Fla. 1988). Accordingly, we hold that the initiative petition and proposed ballot summary meet the requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
...r "the validity of any initiative petition circulated pursuant to Section 3 of Article XI." Granted, we must consider whether the proposed amendment and the ballot title and summary comply with article XI, section 3, of the Florida Constitution, and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
CopyCited 48 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 18871, 1996 WL 400009
..."explanatory statement" or "substance" of the amendment, not to
exceed 75 words, describing the chief purpose of the measure and
(2) a title, not to exceed 15 words. The substance and title alone
appear on the ballot. Fla.Stat.Ann. § 101.161 (West Supp.1996).
B....
...The
secretary of state, through the Division of Elections, evaluates
the petition format but does not review the text of the proposed
amendment or its ballot summary and title to determine whether they
comply with the constitution's single subject requirement and §
101.161....
...§
15.21
(West 1988), who in turn must petition the Florida Supreme Court
for an advisory opinion regarding the compliance of the text of the
proposed amendment with the single subject requirement of Art. XI,
§ 3 of the state constitution and the compliance of the proposed
ballot title and substance with §
101.161....
...Over two months later, and only a month before the 1994
election, the supreme court issued an opinion concluding that
Biddulph's proposed amendment was legally insufficient for two
reasons: it violated the constitutional single-subject
requirement, and it violated § 101.161 because its title was
misleading....
...(Fla.1994). In contrast, the court excluded Biddulph's "Voter
Approval of New Taxes" proposal not only because it violated the
constitutional single subject requirement but also because it
violated the clear ballot title requirement of Fla.Stat.Ann. §
101.161....
CopyCited 39 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1999 WL 685710
...ve in the event any provision of this initiative is held invalid. Id. The constitution and laws of this state require that every citizens' initiative petition be submitted to this Court for an opinion on its compliance with article XI, section 3 and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1997)....
...IV, § 10, Fla. Const.; [3] §
16.061(1), Fla. Stat. *1279 (1997). [4] Article XI, section 3, dictates that any amendment placed on the ballot via citizen's initiative petition "shall embrace but one subject and matter directly connected therewith." Section
101.161(1) requires that when an amendment is submitted to the voters, the substance of the amendment must appear on the ballot in "clear and unambiguous language," not exceeding 75 words, explaining the "chief purpose" of the measure....
...Limited Political Terms,
592 So.2d at 228 (quoting ballot title and summary). The Court found that this ballot title and summary satisfied the requirement that it be "fair and advise[d] the voter sufficiently to enable him [or her] intelligently to cast his [or her] ballot," as we have interpreted section
101.161 to require....
...le and summary issues in Florida League of Cities v. Smith,
607 So.2d 397 (Fla.1992). In Smith, the Attorney General had previously requested this Court's opinion regarding the proposed initiative petition's compliance with article XI, section 3 and section
101.161....
...te, petition the Supreme Court, requesting an advisory opinion regarding the compliance of the text of the proposed amendment or revision with s. 3, Art. XI of the State Constitution and the compliance of the proposed ballot title and substance with s. 101.161....
CopyCited 33 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...ring, mental anguish, loss of consortium, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life shall not be awarded in excess of $100,000 against any party. which would actually appear on the ballot in guise of the following title and summary, pursuant to section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1983): CITIZEN'S RIGHTS IN CIVIL ACTIONS Amendment establishes citizen's rights in civil actions: provides a party in a lawsuit shall not be required to pay more damages than the jury found him/her responsible for p...
...,000. Appellants' challenge alleged that the amendment violates the one subject limitation imposed in article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution and that the title and summary are deceptive and ambiguous, thus failing to give the notice required by section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1983)....
...This opinion follows to explain our earlier decision. We find the amendment clearly and conclusively defective on both grounds considered by the circuit court: it embraces more than one subject, and the ballot summary fails to satisfy the notice requirements of Florida Statute 101.161 as construed in Askew v....
...a single subject such that all three provisions are directly connected therewith. Within the broad generality of the amendment title we find provisions which effect both legislative and judicial functions. II. Legal Sufficiency of the Ballot Summary Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1983) provides, in pertinent part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot......
...his liability for "noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of consortium, and loss of capacity for enjoyment of life" capped at $100,000. This limitation is clearly the chief purpose of provision c within the meaning of section 101.161, Florida Statutes....
...of Florida have reposed in this Court since the founding of this state. A proposed constitutional amendment, whether proposed by the legislature or by the citizens' initiative, does not appear on the ballot. Instead, the legislature has provided in section 101.161, Florida Statutes, that the substance of the proposed amendment "shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot" and that such substance shall be "an explanatory statement, not exceeding seventy-five words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure....
...The ballot summary now before us is nothing more than a blatant attempt to violate the unequivocal legislative mandate of the people of Florida that the explanatory statement set forth the chief purpose of the proposal in clear and unambiguous language. How easy it is to comply with the terms of section 101.161, Florida Statutes! For example, taking the proposal in question, compliance with the statute could be achieved as follows: Provides that a party in a law suit shall not be required to pay more damages than a jury found him/her respons...
...However, the Court's ability to draft a constitutionally adequate summary does not itself confer the authority to place that summary on the ballot. The legislature, in spite of the strong recommendation of Justice Overton in a special concurrence to Askew (in which Justice McDonald and I joined), has not revisited section 101.161 to permit judicial correction of a defective summary....
CopyCited 29 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 505, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 1893, 1998 WL 682524
..., requires that the Attorney General seek an advisory opinion "regarding the compliance of the text of the proposed amendment or revision with s. 3, Art. XI of the State Constitution and the compliance of the proposed ballot title and substance with s. 101.161." Accordingly, the scope of our advisory opinions on proposed amendments based on citizen initiative petitions has traditionally been limited to two legal issues: (1) whether the proposed amendment violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and (2) whether the ballot title and summary of the proposed amendment are misleading, in violation of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1997)....
...BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY Although we do not find that this proposed amendment violates the single-subject requirement of the state constitution, we find a distinct problem with the ballot summary. In order for the public to fully comprehend the contemplated changes of a proposed amendment, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1997), provides in pertinent part that [w]henever a constitutional amendment......
...r "the validity of any initiative petition circulated pursuant to Section 3 of Article XI." Granted, we must consider whether the proposed amendment and the ballot title and summary comply with article XI, section 3, of the Florida Constitution, and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
...I concur with the majority that the proposed citizen initiative amendment does not violate the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. However, I dissent because I believe the proposed amendment complies with the ballot title and summary requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1997)....
CopyCited 27 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1994 WL 202534
...uld be compelled to choose all or nothing. The danger is that our organic law might be amended to compel the sugar industry to pay for the cleanup singlehandedly even though a majority of voters do not think this wise or fair. III. TITLE AND SUMMARY Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993), lists the requirements for the ballot title and summary of a proposed constitutional amendment: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substanc...
...The substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). "[S]ection 101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." Askew v....
...The political motivation behind a given change must be propounded outside the voting booth. Evans,
457 So.2d at 1355. IV. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the title, summary, and text of the proposed amendment violate the legal requirements of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1993), and must be stricken from the ballot....
CopyCited 26 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2002 WL 31051569
...process of petition validation to ensure expeditious and proper verification of petition signatures). Krivanek,
625 So.2d at 843 (emphasis added). Indeed, the Legislature has regulated the process by the requirements of sections
99.097,
100.371, and
101.161, Florida *966 Statutes. This Court has on various occasions stricken initiatives from the ballot for failure to adhere to the requirements of section
101.161....
...I do not agree with the majority's attempt in footnote 4 to minimize the fact that this substantial number of other states have this statutory requirement. What the Nevada Constitution, to which the majority's footnote refers, provides is the same power this Court has recognized the Florida Legislature has in section 101.161, Florida Statutes. As noted earlier in this opinion, if the Florida Legislature does not have the power to enact section 101.161 without the Nevada provision being expressed in the Constitution, then this Court has repeatedly erred in prohibiting initiatives from being on the ballot on the basis of noncompliance with that section....
CopyCited 24 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2002 WL 992066
...When determining the validity of an amendment arising via citizen initiative petition, our inquiry is limited to two issues: (1) whether the petition violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate the clarity requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2000)....
...is only after charging or conviction takes place that the amendment's diversion option is implicated. Florida law currently allows diversion for drug offenders on the motion of either party or the trial court itself. [9] IV. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2000), sets forth the requirements for the ballot title and summary of a proposed constitutional amendment and provides in relevant part: [T]he substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2000). This Court in Save Our Everglades explained the meaning of section 101.161(1): "[S]ection 101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." This is so that the voter will have notice of the issue contained in the amendment,...
...In fact, it does not cause even a single precipitous and cataclysmic change. And the ballot title and summary fairly apprise the voter of the amendment's chief purpose. Accordingly, we hold that the proposed amendment meets the requirements of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2000)....
...We approve the amendment for placement on the ballot. It is so ordered. WELLS, C.J., and PARIENTE and QUINCE, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which HARDING and LEWIS, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. Section 101.161(1) of the Florida Statutes governs the requirements for ballot titles and summaries and provides, in relevant part: "Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot...." § 101.161(1), Fla....
CopyCited 23 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 639, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 1625, 2008 WL 4191801
...seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. Slough contended that the ballot title and summary for this proposed Amendment 5 are unconstitutionally misleading and fail to adequately inform voters of the chief purposes of the amendment in violation of section 101.161, *145 Florida Statutes (2007)....
...V, § 3(b)(5), Fla. Const. ANALYSIS Standard of Review This Court has stated that any proposed constitutional amendment must be " accurately represented on the ballot; otherwise, voter approval would be a nullity." Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So.2d 7, 12 (Fla.2000). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007), codifies this principle: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot.......
...Reduced to colloquial terms, a ballot title and summary cannot "fly under false colors" or "hide the ball" with regard to the true effect of an amendment. See Armstrong,
773 So.2d at 16. To determine whether the ballot title and summary of proposed Amendment 5 satisfy the requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2007), the Court must consider two questions: "(1) whether the ballot title and summary, in clear and unambiguous language, fairly inform the voter of the chief purpose of the amendment; and (2) whether the language...
...the foundational document that embodies the fundamental principles through which organized government functions. We hold that the trial court was correct and the ballot title and summary for proposed Amendment 5 are misleading and do not comply with section 101.161....
CopyCited 21 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 538
...nt that Proposition Five, a proposed initiative amendment to article X of the Florida Constitution, embraces only one subject and matter directly connected therewith and that the ballot summary accompanying the proposed amendment does not contravene section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1985)....
...Appellants/petitioners urge four grounds in support of their position that the proposed amendment should be removed from the ballot: that it violates the single subject requirement of article XI, section 3; that the ballot summary violates the requirements of section 101.161 and case law; that there was fraud in inducing voters to sign the petition forms; and that the schedule clause of the purposed amendment violates article XI, section 1 of the Florida Constitution....
...ed in a state trust fund, designated State Education Lotteries Trust Fund, for the appropriation by the Legislature. Appellants/petitioners argue that this summary does not adequately inform the voter of the substance of the amendment as required by section 101.161....
CopyCited 19 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...s this amendment contains; that the amendment would violate the "one person-one vote" guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; that the notice of the contents of the amendment which would appear on the ballot violates Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1975); and that the amendment is inadequate to inform the public of the substantial shift in governmental power which it would effect....
CopyCited 17 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...Mann, pro se, Tarpon Springs, amicus curiae, and Nancy Maggiacomo, President, Tallahassee, on behalf of The League of Women Voters of Florida, Interested Parties in Opposition to Proposed Amendment. PER CURIAM. Pursuant to article IV, section 10 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993), the Attorney General has petitioned this Court for an advisory opinion regarding the validity of an initiative petition....
...This amendment shall take effect on the date approved by the electorate; provided however, that no casino gaming shall be authorized to operate in the state until July 1, 1995. Our advisory opinion is limited to determining whether the proposed amendment complies with article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...ment could have broad ramifications. Yet, on its face it deals with only one subject." Id. at 13. Likewise, we find that the Limited Casinos amendment meets the single-subject requirement. The proposed amendment must also satisfy the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1993). Section 101.161(1) provides that the substance of the amendment "shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of." This Court has construed section 101.161(1) to mean that the ballot title and summary for a proposed amendment must state the chief purpose of the measure in clear and unambiguous language....
...in that the word "limited" is subjective and is likely to be perceived by voters as limiting certain types of gambling, or limiting casinos to a few in number, or limiting the number of casinos already in the state. This Court has always interpreted section 101.161(1) to mean that the ballot title and summary must be read together in determining if the ballot information properly informs the voter....
...We find that the ballot title and summary clearly and unambiguously describe to the voter the purpose and substance of the amendment. We do not pass judgment upon the wisdom or merit of the proposed initiative amendment. However, we hold that it meets the requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993)....
CopyCited 17 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...tion, because it embraces more than one subject. He further contends it violates Article XI, Sections 3 and 5, because it attempts to revise several articles other than the one it purportedly amends. Finally, appellant contends the appellee violated Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, when he approved the wording of the substance of the amendment that it is to appear on the ballots....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...Stephen Parker, Atlanta, GA, for Southeastern Legal Foundation; and David Citron, pro se, Fort Lauderdale, suggesting that the Proposed Amendment complies with Florida Constitution, Article XI, Section 3, and that the Title and Ballot Summary comply with Florida Statutes Section 101.161....
...nected therewith." Second, we must address the clarity of the ballot language and determine whether the ballot title and summary are misleading. Our responsibility for the clarity of ballot title and summary language is dictated by the provisions of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1993), which states: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot......
...It is also important so that the question of the initiative's effect on other unnamed provisions is not left unresolved and open to various interpretations. See id. In addressing our responsibility to assure that proposed amendments meet the requirements of section 101.161(1), we have stated that the purpose of this statute "is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment," Askew v....
...tantially affects specific provisions of the constitution without identifying those portions for the voters in violation of the principles established in Fine v. Firestone,
448 So.2d 984 (Fla. 1984), and must be stricken from the ballot. I disagree. Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1993), provides in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot......
...eared by the voters in the affected districts. I also find that the initiative has a logical and natural oneness of purpose and embraces but a single subject. In my opinion, it complies with both article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161(1)....
...CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, I concur in part and dissent in part from the majority opinion. I add a caveat. By phrasing the title to the proposed amendments in the form of a question rather than a statement, the drafters flirt with invalidity. Under section 101.161(1), the title should be a succinct caption by which the proposal can be characterized, and this generally can be best accomplished through an affirmative assertion rather than a query....
...rendum on all new taxes. I would permit this proposed amendment to be placed on the ballot. SHAW, J., concurs. NOTES [1] Identifying an existing section of the constitution that is affected is also important with regard to the clarity requirement of section 101.161....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...ions, is limited to two legal issues: whether the petition satisfies the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and whether the ballot titles and summaries are printed in clear and unambiguous language pursuant to section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1999)....
...Given the context in which "should" is used in the ballot summary, we do not believe the language will be misleading to voters. V. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated, we hold that the initiative petition and proposed ballot title and summary meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 64, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 135, 2009 WL 196401
...See art. IV, § 10, art. V, § 3(b)(10), Fla. Const. We conclude that *179 the proposed amendments comply with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and that the ballot titles and summaries comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008)....
...See EnglishThe Official Language,
520 So.2d at 13. In light of the foregoing, we hold that the proposed amendments comply with article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. B. Ballot Title and Summary The requirement that a ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), was recently explained by this Court as follows: [A]ny proposed constitutional amendment must be "accurately represented on the ballot; otherwise, voter approval would be a nullity." Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So.2d 7, 12 (Fla.2000). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007), codifies this principle: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot.......
...What the law requires is that the ballot be fair and advise the voter sufficiently to enable him intelligently to cast his ballot. " (alteration in original) (quoting Hill v. Milander,
72 So.2d 796, 798 (Fla. 1954))).... To determine whether the ballot title and summary of [the proposed amendment] satisfy the requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2007), the Court must consider two questions: "(1) whether the ballot title and summary, in clear and unambiguous language, fairly inform the voter of the chief purpose of the amendment; and (2) whether the language...
...While ideal summaries for these amendments might have included the words "with the intent," we conclude thatgiven the strict word limitsthe failure of the summaries to include these three words does not render them so misleading as to clearly and conclusively violate section 101.161, Florida Statutes....
...for the failure to mention this purported "effect." III. CONCLUSION In conclusion, we hold that the proposed amendments meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and the ballot titles and summaries comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008)....
CopyCited 15 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 15 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 421, 1990 Fla. LEXIS 1001, 1990 WL 127336
...ailed to comply with the essential requirements of the general law of Florida. Specifically, petitioners challenged the fact that the Board, based upon the advice of its legal counsel, did not provide a summary of the proposed changes as required by section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (Supp....
...ic hearing, advance publication, and media publicity," and "[t]he fact that a ballot may be confusing to some does not mandate a court to invalidate the results of an otherwise properly conducted election."
501 So.2d at 123 (citations omitted). *416 Section
101.161(1) provides, in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot......
...ent, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. (Emphasis added.) Petitioners argue that the lower courts erred in upholding the election result despite finding that the Board had failed to comply with the requirements of section
101.161(1). We agree. The above provisions of section
101.161(1) are mandatory. As this Court stated in Askew: "The purpose of section
101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment."
421 So.2d at 156. "[S]ection
101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional amendment [or other public measure] state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." Id....
...t section 2.11 of the county charter provided prior to amendment. As then Judge Grimes noted in his dissent below: "[T]here was nothing on the ballot to inform the voter of the change to be accomplished by the amendment, which is the very reason why section
101.161(1) requires an explanatory statement."
501 So.2d at 124 (Grimes, J., dissenting)....
...3d DCA) *417 (placement on ballot of proposition to provide that the board of county commissioners shall be the governing board of the fire and rescue service district, but making no mention of the elimination of the existing governing body of the Fire and Rescue District, was misleading to voters and violated section
101.161(1), especially in light of simultaneously conducted election of persons to the existing governing board), review denied,
523 So.2d 577 (Fla....
...The ballot summary should tell the voter the legal effect of the amendment... ."). [1] We also reject the Board's argument that the favorable vote cured any defects in the form of the submission. This defect was more than form; it went to the very heart of what section 101.161(1) seeks to preclude....
...ack on the ordinance, such is not the situation in the present case where the suit was filed only a few weeks after the election.
501 So.2d at 124. [2] *418 Deception of the voting public is intolerable and should not be countenanced. The purpose of section
101.161(1) is to assure that the electorate is advised of the meaning and ramifications of the proposed amendment. Because the ballot at issue failed to comply with the mandate of the legislature expressed in section
101.161(1), the proposed amendments must be stricken....
...KOGAN, J., dissenting with an opinion, in which OVERTON, J., concurs. GRIMES, J., recused. KOGAN, Justice, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. I disagree with the majority's contention that the election results should be invalidated because the ballot did not comply with section
101.161, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1984). I recognize that in our opinion in Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151 (Fla. 1982), we held that section
101.161 is mandatory....
...n lobbying by former legislators and statewide elected officers. The amendment was struck from the ballot because the Court determined the explanatory statement did not adequately inform the public of the true purpose of the amendment as required by section 101.161. Here we are presented with a postelection challenge to the validity of an amendment appearing on the ballot which contained no explanatory statement. While we have declared the ballot requirements of section 101.161 to be mandatory, this is not to say that the absence of strict compliance with the statute constitutes a fatal defect necessitating invalidation of the results of an otherwise properly conducted election, particularly under the circumstances of this case. The purpose of section 101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the meaning and ramifications of the amendment....
...anged by irregularity." Winterfield v. Town of Palm Beach,
455 So.2d 359, 361 (Fla. 1984) (quoting State ex rel. Smith v. Burbridge,
24 Fla. 112, 130,
3 So. 869, 877 (1888)). When it becomes apparent to an individual that a ballot is deficient under section
101.161 because it contains no explanatory statement, the burden is on him or her to institute a timely challenge....
...as been perpetrated or corruption or coercion practiced to a degree to have affected the result. Carn v. Moore,
74 Fla. 77, 88-89,
76 So. 337, 340 (1917). Thus, once a party has been put on notice that a ballot is deficient under the requirements of section
101.161, the defect must be challenged before the election has taken place and the outcome of the vote has been determined....
...of all members then elected or appointed." In effect, the voters of Sarasota County have readopted, but modified the results of the invalid 1984 election. Our conclusion that the 1984 amendment was a nullity because the ballot failed to comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (Supp....
CopyCited 13 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...titution. We have jurisdiction. See art. IV, § 10, art. V, § 3(b)(10), Fla. Const. For the reasons explained below, we conclude that the proposed amendment does not meet the requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution [1] and section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes [2] and should not be included on the ballot for the 2006 general election....
...d this Court for an advisory opinion as to whether the text of the proposed amendment complies with the constitutional requirements of article XI, section 3, and whether the proposed ballot title and summary comply with the statutory requirements of section 101.161(1)....
...However, the Court's inquiry in such cases is limited to two issues: (1) whether the amendment violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2005)....
...to Att'y Gen.Fee on Everglades Sugar Prod.,
681 So.2d 1124, 1128 (Fla.1996). Thus, we find no violation of this aspect of the single-subject requirement. Ballot Title and Summary When a constitutional amendment is submitted for vote by the electorate, a title and summary of the amendment must appear on the ballot. Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2005), which sets forth the statutory requirements for the title and summary, is a "codification of the accuracy requirement implicit in article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution." Advisory Op....
...Therefore, an accurate, objective, and neutral summary of the proposed amendment is the sine qua non of the citizen-driven process of amending our constitution. Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Additional Homestead Tax Exemption,
880 So.2d 646, 653-54 (Fla.2004) (citation omitted). Section
101.161(1) provides in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment......
...explain every detail or ramification of the proposed amendment. Carroll v. Firestone,
497 So.2d 1204, 1206 (Fla.1986). The ballot must, however, give the voter fair notice of the decision he or she must make. Askew,
421 So.2d at 155. The purpose of section
101.161 is to ensure that voters are advised of the amendment's true meaning....
...CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, we conclude that the proposed amendment does not comply with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and that the ballot summary is misleading and does not comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2005)....
...the same initiative does not meet the single-subject requirement. CANTERO and BELL, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] Article XI, section 3 gives Florida citizens the power to revise or amend the Florida Constitution through the citizen initiative process. [2] Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2005), governs the placement of constitutional initiatives and referenda on the ballot. [3] See art. III, § 16, Fla. Const. [4] The Secretary of State determined that a petition to establish additional standards for legislative and congressional districts exceeded the statutory word limitation set forth in section 101.161....
...ssion Initiative. [5] Section
100.371(3), Florida Statutes (2005), requires the sponsor of an initiative amendment to register as a political committee and submit the text of the proposed amendment to the Secretary of State for approval of the form. Section
101.161(2), Florida Statutes (2005), provides that the substance and ballot title of a proposed initiative amendment must be prepared by the sponsor and approved by the Secretary of State....
CopyCited 13 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1988 WL 9839
...on or amendment by initiative petition, to petition this Court for an advisory opinion regarding the compliance of the text thereof with article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and compliance of the proposed ballot title and substance with section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1987)....
...connected to establishing English as the official state language. The attorney general further suggests that this Court may also wish to consider whether the ballot title and the explanation of the substance of the amendment meet the requirements of section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1987)....
...by the statute must explain in detail what the proponents hope to accomplish by the passage of the amendment. We hold that the initiative petition meets the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution as well as those of section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1987)....
CopyCited 12 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2002 WL 1042295
...The trial court denied Johnson's motion for summary judgment and motion for temporary and permanent injunction on September 6, 1996, finding that the proposed amendment was not contrary to the Florida Constitution and that the ballot language did not violate section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1995)....
CopyCited 12 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2006 WL 721779
...The Attorney General has requested that we review the text of a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution to determine compliance with article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and to consider whether the proposed ballot title and summary are within the requirements of section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes (2005)....
...ions, is limited to two legal issues: whether the petition satisfies the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and whether the ballot titles and summaries are printed in clear and unambiguous language pursuant to section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1999)....
...e function of multiple branches of government. The foregoing analysis causes us to conclude that the proposed amendment satisfies the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. REVIEW OF BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY Section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes (2005), provides the requirements for the ballot title and summary of proposed constitutional amendments....
...re shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure.... The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2005). This Court has explained this statutory provision, noting: "[S]ection 101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." Askew v....
...In Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re Property Rights, the Attorney General requested that we review three proposed amendments to ensure compliance with applicable law. See
699 So.2d at 1306. After reviewing all three proposed amendments, we determined that none satisfied the requirements of section
101.161 of the Florida Statutes, and concluded that all three should not appear on the ballot....
...The opponents direct attention to our decision in Save Our Everglades,
636 So.2d 1336 (Fla.1994), as support for the contention that the current ballot title and summary *1239 constitute political rhetoric. In Save Our Everglades, we concluded that the ballot title and summary at issue did not satisfy the requirements of section
101.161 of the Florida Statutes....
...ed by this subsection, or if the Supreme Court has rejected the initial submission... and no redraft has been approved by the Supreme Court by 5 p.m. on the 75th day before the election, the following statement shall appear on the ballot pursuant to s.
101.161(1): "The financial impact of this measure, if any, cannot be reasonably determined at this time." §
100.371(6)(a)-(b), Fla....
...(2005). CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, we hold that the initiative petition and proposed ballot title and summary for the "Florida Marriage Protection Amendment" meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161(1) of the Florida Statutes (2005)....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2003 WL 22103776
...We acknowledge that courts have made an exception to this rule if the party asserting the claim is protecting the rights of non-parties who are unable to challenge the statute on their own. However, the exception does not apply here. Citizens who are adversely affected by the exemption in section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2000), can make the argument for themselves....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1989 WL 20707
...ppose) the passage of particular legislation. On this question, there is a paucity of precedent in this or any other jurisdiction. THE BALLOT LANGUAGE The preliminary test which a ballot summary must meet is established by the Florida Election Code, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1987), which provides in pertinent part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printe...
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 617, 1992 Fla. LEXIS 1798, 1992 WL 277301
...All such leasehold interests created prior to November 5, 1968, including renewal options and extensions thereof provided in the initial lease, shall be taxed as intangible personal property. The Commission also prepared a ballot summary for Proposition 7, as required by section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1991)....
...l options and extensions provided in the initial lease, shall be taxed as intangible personal property. Appellees filed a complaint in the circuit court alleging in relevant part that the ballot summary was defective in that it failed to comply with section 101.161 and that the provisions of Proposition 7 violate the right to equal protection of the laws....
...unclear as to whether the amendment affects the historic tax exemptions on property used for public purposes. The circuit court's final judgment enjoined the Secretary of State from placing Proposition 7 on the November 1992 general election ballot. Section 101.161(1) provides, in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot......
...."
421 So.2d at 156. At best, the ballot summary is ambiguous about its chief purpose and therefore cannot be included on the general election ballot. While we are reluctant to remove proposed amendments from a vote of the public, we are required by section
101.161 to ensure that the ballot summary clearly communicates what the electorate is being asked to vote upon....
...the chance to vote on the merits of the proposal. Neither party argues that this Court has the authority to independently rewrite the ballot summary to conform to the statute, and our independent research has revealed no authority to do so. In fact, section 101.161 *622 specifically provides that the wording of the ballot summary shall be embodied in the Commission proposal itself....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...Appellants suggest that the ballot summary fails to disclose or put voters on notice of the total effect of this amendment. We disagree with appellants and hold that the ballot summary clearly and unambiguously gives voters notice of the effect of this amendment. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1981), which sets out the prerequisites for submission *305 of a constitutional amendment or other public measure to the vote of the people, states in pertinent part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other pub...
...pose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of... . Recently in Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151 (Fla. 1982), we said that the purpose of section
101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the meaning and ramifications of the amendment....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1994 WL 60863
...such inconsistency. (3) This amendment shall take effect on the date it is approved by the electorate. Our advisory opinion is limited to determining whether the proposed amendment complies with article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...rpose of the single-subject limitation. Therefore, the proposed amendment fails the single-subject requirement of article IV, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. To be placed on the ballot, the ballot summary also must be legally sufficient under section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...IFICATIONS Restricts laws related to discrimination to classifications based upon race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, handicap, ethnic background, marital status or familial status. Repeals all laws inconsistent with this amendment. Subsection 101.161(1) provides, in pertinent part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot......
...The substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. The purpose of section 101.161 is "to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment." Askew v....
...be included in the state constitution. Accordingly, we hold that the initiative petition and ballot summary should be stricken from the ballot for failure to comply with the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...es (1993). We have original jurisdiction to determine only whether the proposed amendment complies with the technical legal requirements concerning the single-subject rule and the clarity of the ballot title and summary. Art. IV, § 10, Fla. Const.; § 101.161, Fla....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2004 WL 1574226
...this Court for an advisory opinion as to whether the text of the proposed amendment complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and whether the ballot title and summary comply with the requirements of section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2003)....
...Therefore, no conventional standard of review applies. Instead, the Court limits its inquiry to two issues: (1) whether the amendment violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
...re Fee on Everglades Sugar Prod.,
681 So.2d 1124, 1128 (Fla.1996) (quoting Limited Casinos,
644 So.2d at 74). Accordingly, the proposed amendment satisfies the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, of the Florida Constitution. IV. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY Section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2003), sets forth the requirements for the ballot title and summary of a proposed constitutional amendment and provides in relevant part: [T]he substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. §
101.161(1), Fla....
...med ballot." See Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Fee On Everglades Sugar Prod.,
681 So.2d 1124, 1127 (Fla.1996). The Court in In re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney GeneralSave Our Everglades,
636 So.2d 1336 (Fla.1994), explained further: "[S]ection
101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." Askew v....
...t, only the chief purpose." Carroll v. Firestone,
497 So.2d 1204, 1206 (Fla.1986) Save Our Everglades,
636 So.2d at 1341; see also Ltd. Casinos,
644 So.2d at 74. Specifically, in conducting its inquiry into the validity of a proposed amendment under section
101.161(1), the Court asks two questions....
...The citizen initiative constitutional amendment process relies on an accurate, objective ballot summary for its legitimacy. Voters deciding whether to approve a proposed amendment to our constitution never see the actual text of the proposed amendment. See § 101.161(1), Fla....
...Based on the foregoing analysis, therefore, we hold that the present initiative petition complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution. The ballot summary in this case, however, is misleading and does not comply with the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
...submit the amendment itself in lieu of a summary. PARIENTE, C.J., concurs. QUINCE, J., concurring in result only. I agree with the majority that the ballot summary for the proposed amendment is misleading and does not comply with the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
...While I agree with the majority that this proposed amendment should not be placed on the ballot, I do so on another ground. I believe the ballot summary is misleading because it fails to inform the voter that not all homeowners will be entitled to this additional homestead exemption. As the majority explains, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003), requires this Court to consider whether the ballot title and ballot summary fairly inform the voter of the chief purpose of the amendment, and whether the title summary is misleading to the public....
...to Att'y Gen. Re Right of Citizens to Choose Health Care Providers, *655
705 So.2d 563 (Fla.1998) (holding that this Court must determine whether the language of the ballot title and ballot summary misleads the public). The ballot summary in this case violates section
101.161(1) because it misleads voters by failing to inform them that the proposed homestead exemption is not applicable to all homeowners....
...Thus, the failure of the ballot summary to state that the increased exemption will not apply to property upon which dependents of the owner reside does not, in my view, constitute a clear and conclusive defect that would render the summary misleading in violation of section 101.161(1) of the Florida Statutes....
...of review, the majority has placed its thumb on the scales to ensure that the instant initiative does not appear on the ballot in the upcoming election. The majority's decision is out-of-step with the seasoned precedent that has shaped this Court's section 101.161(1) analysis....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...ions, is limited to two legal issues: whether the petition satisfies the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution, and whether the ballot titles and summaries are printed in clear and unambiguous language pursuant to section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1999)....
...ional Conduct, but it does not appear to otherwise have a wide-reaching impact on other constitutional provisions. Thus, we conclude that the amendment, as proposed, does not violate the single-subject requirement. REVIEW OF BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY Section 101.161(1) of the Florida Statutes governs the requirements for ballot titles and summaries and provides, in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot.... § 101.161(1), Fla....
...Under the scope of our review, we find the wording of the title and summary sufficient to communicate the chief purpose of the measure. Thus, we conclude that the ballot summary explains the "chief purpose" of the proposed amendment and meets the statutory requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
...CONCLUSION For the reasons stated, we hold that the initiative petition and proposed ballot title and summary for "The Medical Liability Claimant's Compensation Amendment" meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
...ounty v. Shiver,
365 So.2d 210, 213 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)). Accordingly, I concur in the majority's approval of this ballot title and summary for placement on the ballot. QUINCE, J., concurs. LEWIS, J., dissenting. It is well settled that the intent of section
101.161(1) is to ensure that voters are advised of the true meaning and purpose of a proposed constitutional amendment....
CopyCited 10 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 662, 1994 Fla. LEXIS 1973, 1994 WL 708403
...of government. See generally Art. XI, Fla. Const. We decline to impose a single-subject requirement on this process. We find no merit to respondents' further claim that the ballot question fails to adequately advise voters of the proposal's purpose. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1991), provides in part: 101.161 Referenda; ballots....
CopyCited 9 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2015 WL 9258263
that the ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2015). Finally, we conclude
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 565, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 1636, 2010 WL 3911323
...r of students per classroom does not exceed the requirements of this subsection. FEA, Andy Ford, and Lynette Estrada filed a complaint on July 23, 2010, asking the trial court to determine whether the ballot summary complies with the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2009)....
...The purpose of this requirement is above reproachit is to ensure that each voter will cast a ballot based on the full truth. To function effectivelyand to remain viablea constitutional democracy must require no less. Id. at 21 (emphasis omitted). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2009), is a "codification of the accuracy requirement implicit in article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution." Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Referenda Required for Adoption & Amend. of Local Gov't Comprehensive Land Use Plans,
902 So.2d 763, 770 (Fla.2005). Thus, section
101.161(1) provides that the substance of a proposed constitutional amendment must be printed on the ballot in "clear and unambiguous language." In reviewing the validity of ballot language submitted to the voters for a proposed constitutiona...
...Dep't of State v. Slough,
992 So.2d 142, 147 (Fla.2008); Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151, 155 (Fla. 1982). Rather, our task is to determine whether the ballot language sets forth the substance of the amendment in a manner that satisfies the requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes, and article XI, section 5, of the Florida Constitution....
...Legislature, not the local school boards. Id. at 584-85. In addition to whether the amendment met the single subject requirement, this Court evaluated whether the ballot information properly informed the voters in accordance with the requirements of section 101.161(1)....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 18574
...framed fatally defective. In the context of the bewildering and conflicting decision-making facing the voters, the language of the proposition is both misleading, see Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151 (Fla. 1982), and contrary to the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1987), that a ballot question set forth "the substance of ......
...The substance of the referendum ballot at issue specifically provides "that the Board of Dade County Commissioners shall be the governing body of the Metro-Dade Fire Rescue Service District." These words unambiguously set out the chief purpose of the proposal as required by section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1987)....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 102, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 145, 2009 WL 217983
...V, § 3(b)(10), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed below, we conclude that the proposed amendment is exempt from the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, but the ballot summary is misleading and does not comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007), and should not be included on the ballot....
...ritten opinion as to whether the proposed amendment complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and as to whether the ballot title and summary of the proposed constitutional amendment comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007)....
...The Court's inquiry in such cases is limited to two issues: (1) whether the amendment violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007)....
...3 because it is an initiative that limits the power of government to raise revenue. B. Ballot Title and Summary When a constitutional amendment is submitted for vote by the electorate, a title and summary of the amendment must appear on the ballot. Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes, which sets forth the statutory requirements for the title and summary, is a codification of the accuracy requirement implicit in article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution....
...re Referenda Required for Adoption & Amendment of Local Gov't Comprehensive Land Use Plans,
902 So.2d 763, 770 (Fla.2005). This accuracy requirement in article XI, section 5 functions as a kind of "truth in packaging" law for the ballot. See Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So.2d 7, 13 (Fla.2000). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007), provides in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment....
...proposed amendment. See Carroll v. Firestone,
497 So.2d 1204, 1206 (Fla.1986). However, the ballot must give the voter fair notice of the decision he must make. See Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151, 155 (Fla.1982). We have said that the purpose of section
101.161 is to ensure that voters are advised of the amendment's true meaning....
...re Right of Citizens to Choose Health Care Providers,
705 So.2d 563, 566 (Fla.1998)). In this case the ballot title for the proposed amendment is "1.35% property tax cap, unless voter approved." The ballot title in this case complies with the technical requirements of section
101.161(1)....
...is not left unresolved and open to various interpretations. See id.; see also Tax Limitation I,
644 So.2d at 490 n. 1 ("Identifying an existing section of the constitution that is affected is also important with regard to the clarity requirement of section
101.161.")....
...tion because it directly limits the power of government to raise revenue, and that the financial impact statement complies with section
100.371, Florida Statutes (2007). However, we find that the ballot summary is misleading and does not comply with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007)....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 120, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 217, 2010 WL 546768
...ments of article XI, section 5(d); and (8) a uniform process must exist through which initiative sponsors submit initiative petitions to the State to confirm compliance with the explicit and implicit requirements of article XI, sections 3 and 5, see § 101.161(2), Fla....
...section 5 implicitly requires accuracy, clear expression, and locational specificity with regard to all amendment or revision proposals. See art. *1068 IV, § 10, Fla. Const.; art. V, § 3(b)(10), Fla. Const.; Armstrong,
773 So.2d at 14-22; see also §
101.161(1), Fla....
...Consistent with these well-established principles regarding our state constitution and legislative power, the Florida Legislature regulates the initiative process well beyond the four issues addressed in the text of article XI, section 3 to ensure ballot integrity and a valid election process. For example, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007), requires any initiative amendment to contain a ballot summary, which is not prescribed by article XI, section 3....
...b)(10) of the Florida Constitution advising him that this initiative proposal's ballot title and summary comply with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, and the implicit accuracy requirement of article XI, section 5, codified at section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2006)....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 1996 WL 607973
...pose such a requirement. Appellants' second, and final, argument is that the language of the ballot question [6] approved by the County Commission for placement on the general election ballot is violative of section 7.01 of the Home Rule Charter and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1995)....
...Lehtinen,
528 So.2d 394 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied,
528 So.2d 1182 (Fla.1988). Section 7.01(4) of the Charter provides that a proposal submitted to the electors must be "in such a manner as provides a clear understanding of the proposal." Likewise, section
101.161 requires "that a ballot question set forth the substance of ... [the] public measure ... in clear and unambiguous language ... [which contains] the chief purpose of the measure...." Kobrin,
528 So.2d at 393 (quoting subsection
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1987))....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1997 WL 719476
...May be suspended in any fiscal year by a bill adopted by 2/3 vote of each legislative house. Effective following third fiscal year after approval. Our advisory opinion is limited to determining whether the proposed amendment complies with article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1995)....
...Article XI, section 3 requires that a proposed amendment "shall embrace but one subject and matter directly connected therewith." If the proposed amendment is determined to be in compliance with this constitutional requirement, we review the ballot title and summary for compliance with section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1995)....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 33 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 966, 2008 Fla. LEXIS 2391, 2008 WL 5245678
...IV, § 10, art. V, § 3(b)(10), Fla. Const. For the reasons explained below, we conclude that the proposed amendment complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, that the ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), and that the financial impact statement complies with section
100.371, Florida Statutes (2008)....
...ss, the Court limits its inquiry to two issues: (1) whether the amendment itself violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate the clarity requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008)....
...only interact with, not substantially affect, other provisions of the Florida Constitution. In sum, the proposed amendment complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution. B. Ballot Title and Summary Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2008), sets forth the requirements for the ballot title and summary of a proposed constitutional amendment: [T]he substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure.... The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). This Court has explained that [I]n conducting its inquiry into the validity of a proposed amendment under section 101.161(1), the Court asks two questions....
...purpose." In re Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Save Our Everglades,
636 So.2d 1336, 1341 (Fla.1994) (quoting Carroll v. Firestone,
497 So.2d 1204, 1206 (Fla.1986)). The ballot title and summary in this case comply with the word-length limitations of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008)....
...ictims of discrimination by the Florida Constitution. Id. at 894. In Health Care Providers, the Court found that the title and summary, which stated that the amendment would establish "the right of citizens to choose health care providers," violated section 101.161 because in reality the amendment would likely make it more difficult for some to choose a health care provider by prohibiting insurers from contracting with insured individuals on the issue of health care providers....
...ncerning the petition process does not render the title and summary misleading. In conclusion, we conclude that the ballot title and summary are not materially misleading due to omission. The ballot title and summary satisfy the requirements *124 of section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2008)....
...ambiguous. *125 III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, we conclude that the proposed amendment complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, that the ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), and that the financial impact statement complies with section
100.371, Florida Statutes (2008)....
...Which Replaces Apportionment by Legislature,
926 So.2d 1218, 1227 (Fla.2006) ( Apportionment ) (emphasis added) (quoting Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Additional Homestead Tax Exemption,
880 So.2d 646, 653-54 (Fla.2004)). This is not only mandated by this Court, but it is also required by statute. Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), provides in relevant part that "[w]henever a constitutional amendment ......
...shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure.... The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of." §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). Further, we have explained that section
101.161(1), which sets forth the statutory requirements for the title and summary, "is a codification of the accuracy requirement implicit in article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution." Land Use Plans 2005,
902 So.2d at 770....
...in sixty days at the local election office a petition calling for such a referendum. Defines terms and establishes petition requirements. Preempts all other land use proposals. As revised, this title and summary provide the clarity and accuracy that section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes, requires which the current title and summary lack....
...voters are fairly informed. See generally Advisory Opinion to the Attorney Gen. re Tax Limitation,
644 So.2d 486, 490 (Fla. 1994) (noting that it is this Court's responsibility to ensure the clarity of ballot titles and summaries in accordance with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes); Armstrong,
773 So.2d at 13-14 (the accuracy of the title and summary is "of paramount importance" *132 because the text of the constitutional amendment will not be present in the voting booth)....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 35 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 467, 2010 Fla. LEXIS 1452, 2010 WL 3398795
the ballot title and summary requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes. However, because this Court’s
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
Constitution; the ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2012); and the financial
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...ss, the Court limits its inquiry to two issues: (1) whether the amendment itself violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate the clarity requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2006)....
...re Additional Homestead Tax Exemption,
880 So.2d 646, 649-50 (Fla.2004). II. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY The Court must also review the ballot title and summary for each proposed amendment to ensure they provide fair notice of the content of the amendment to the voters. Section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2006), sets forth the requirements for the ballot title and summary of a proposed constitutional amendment and provides in relevant part: [T]he substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. . . . The ballot title shall consist *479 of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. §
101.161(1), Fla....
...e misled as to its purpose, and can cast an intelligent and informed ballot." See Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Fee On Everglades Sugar Prod.,
681 So.2d 1124, 1127 (Fla.1996). In conducting its inquiry into the validity of a proposed amendment under section
101.161(1), the Court asks two questions....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...The remaining provisions, which provide the details of the scope and implementation of that limitation, are logically connected to the subject of the amendment. The remaining issue to be decided is whether the proposed ballot title and substance comply with section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
...The proposed ballot summary reads as follows: HOMESTEAD VALUATION LIMITATION Providing for limiting increases in homestead property valuations for ad valorem tax purposes to a maximum of 3% annually and also providing for reassessment of market values upon changes in ownership. This Court has interpreted section 101.161 as requiring the ballot and title to "be fair and advise the voter sufficiently to enable him intelligently to cast his ballot." Askew v....
...." In re Advisory Opinion to Attorney General English Official Language,
520 So.2d 11, 13 (Fla. 1988). We hold that the initiative petition and proposed ballot summary meet the requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1989)....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 319, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 834, 2012 WL 1476065
was misleading and thus did not comply with section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes. See id. at 502 (citing
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2008 WL 4191154
...I fully concur in the decision of the majority that TBRC lacked the authority to propose Amendments 7 and 9. I write separately to emphasize that, even if TBRC possessed the authority, proposed Amendment 9 is defective and would have been removed from the 2008 November general election ballot because of its misleading title. Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007), which governs the statutory requirements for ballot titles and summaries for constitutional amendments, states: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the p...
...These options would produce a ballot title and summary that would not be misleading. However, the use of a highly specific title, which completely fails to mention a very major and significant aspect of the amendment, causes a proposal to violate the statutory requirements of section 101.161....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2002 WL 31059217
...rts to adhere to decisions of the United States Supreme Court, when, in fact, it reduces an existing right in the Florida Constitution. As the challenge to the 1998 ballot summary was working its way through the court system, the Legislature amended section 101.161(1), the statute governing ballot summaries for proposed constitutional amendments....
...The effect of this change in the statute is to exempt the Florida Legislature from the 75-word limit applicable to a ballot summary for an amendment by citizen initiative or by another authorized method of amending the constitution. Following the 2000 revision of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes, and the Armstrong decision, the Legislature passed a joint resolution adopting the proposed Amendment to article 1, section 17, this time with a more detailed ballot summary....
...riminal punishment. The supervisors also contend that the ballot summary for Amendment 1 is not truly a "summary" of the amendment, because it is too long. However, the Florida Constitution does not impose a brevity requirement for ballot summaries. Section 101.161(1) provides that a ballot summary shall not be more than 75 words, but this provision no longer applies to amendments submitted by a joint resolution of the legislature under article XI, section 1....
...s case is invalid, but the situation here is different. Nothing in the language of the ballot summary for Amendment 1 is untrue or misleading. Perhaps the summary could have been more concise, but that is not the test of its constitutional validity. Section 101.161(1) does effectively impose a brevity requirement by limiting the ballot summary for a proposed constitutional amendment to 75 words....
...North Florida Women's Health and Counseling Servs., Inc., 26 Fla. L. Weekly D419, ___ So.2d ___,
2001 WL 111037 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), review granted,
799 So.2d 218 (Fla.2001). However, the exception does not apply here. Citizens who are adversely affected by the exemption in section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2000) can make the argument for themselves....
...For these reasons, we conclude that the ballot summary for Amendment 1 gives fair notice of the purpose and effect of the amendment. It is not necessary to consider any of the other arguments raised in briefs, because our decision on this point is controlling. The ballot summary does not violate section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2000) or any of the applicable provisions of the Florida Constitution....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...In Armstrong, the supreme court considered, after the election, whether violation of Florida's statutory accuracy requirement for constitutional provisions would be cured by a subsequent election. *565
773 So.2d at 18-21. The accuracy requirement, codified as section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1997), provided the fulcrum for the Armstrong decision....
...rement. Id. at 16. Quite significantly, the supreme court, in conducting that particular analysis, relied entirely upon Wadhams v. Board of County Commissioners,
567 So.2d 414 (Fla.1990). Armstrong,
773 So.2d at 21. In Wadhams, the court had applied section
101.161(1) to an amendment by referendum of the Sarasota County Charter....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2004 WL 1574024
...roposed by initiative is limited to two issues: (1) whether the proposed amendment satisfies the single-subject limitation of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and summary satisfy the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
...has repeatedly stated that "the possibility that an amendment might interact with other parts of the Florida Constitution is not sufficient reason to invalidate the proposed amendment." Limited Casinos,
644 So.2d at 74. IV. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes, requires that the ballot title not exceed fifteen words, that the ballot summary not exceed seventy-five words, and that the two "state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." See Askew v....
...Third, they assert that the phrase "three or more incidents" is ambiguous and should be defined because it could be construed to mean three separate lawsuits, acts involving three different patients, or even three separate acts of negligence arising from treatment of the same patient. It is worth repeating that section
101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary "state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." Askew,
421 So.2d at 154-55....
...ds derive from the text of the proposed amendment itself. V. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we hold that the proposed amendment and ballot title and summary meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2003)....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 1993 WL 383011
...1990) (alteration in original), the supreme court rejected a similar argument when addressing the issue of defective ballot summaries: We also reject the Board's argument that the favorable vote cured any defects in the form of the submission. This defect was *522 more than form; it went to the very heart of what section 101.161(1) seeks to preclude....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2000 WL 1459712
...he local option vote required by article V, section 10(b)(3)a, Florida Constitution, is unclear and ambiguous and thus should be invalidated. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b), Fla. Const. Upon review, we find the ballot language provided by section 101.161(3)(c) and (e), Florida Statutes (1999), as amended by chapter 2000-361, section 1, at 4035-36, Laws of Florida., is not clearly and conclusively defective to warrant relief here....
...ieve directly opposite results in removing the present lobbying ban. Id. at 156-57. The essential holding of the Court in Askew was that a change to the Constitution must stand on its own merits and not be disguised as something else. The purpose of section 101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment. A proposed amendment cannot fly under false colors; this one does. The burden of informing the public should not fall only on the press and opponents of the measurethe ballot title and summary must do this. Id. at 156. Of course, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1999), contains the statutory mandate that the ballot title and summary be in such clear and unambiguous language so as to give the voter fair notice of the decision she must make....
...[4] In essence, we held that if Florida citizens are to be deprived of this important right they must be told so. Hence, both Askew and Armstrong present clear-cut cases of flawed ballot summaries that violate fundamental constitutional safeguards as well as both the letter and spirit of section
101.161 which was enacted "to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment." Askew,
421 So.2d at 156....
...e vote "shall" be held in the 2000 general election. Article V, section 10(b)(3)a. did not contain a provision setting forth the ballot question to be used for the local option *1034 referendum. Consequently, in 1999, the Florida Legislature enacted section 101.161(3)(c) and (3)(e), Florida Statutes (1999), in order to place the local option question on the ballot in each county and circuit and to provide for the language of the ballot summary....
...4036, Laws of Fla. The Legislature approved this amendment on May 3, 2000, and the amended legislation became law on July 1, 2000. On August 14, 2000, the petitioners filed the original mandamus action in this Court challenging the 2000 revision of section 101.161 on the grounds that the provision failed to provide fair notice to voters because it did not contain the words "merit selection and retention." Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1999), requires that "[w]henever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and un...
...be implemented. See Wadhams v. Board of County Commissioners,
567 So.2d 414 (Fla.1990); Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151 (Fla.1982); Hill v. Milander,
72 So.2d 796 (Fla.1954). Here, with the constitutionally mandated vote requiring implementation, section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1999), as amended by chapter 2000-361, § 1, Laws of Florida, along with its interpretive decisions become applicable....
...I think it is important to note that if this Court were to invalidate the present ballot question, it has no authority to simply rewrite the question to be that which it deems "correct." Attempting to revert to the 1999 version of the ballot question as set forth in section 101.161(3)(c) and (3)(e), Florida Statutes (1999), would be disastrous, because such does not even give the public instruction that the "election" concept as to trial judges would be eliminated....
...resolution and those members of the legislature who voted for it intentionally set out to mislead or deceive the voters. That is undoubtedly not the case. All I say is that the end result of their well-intentioned efforts was not in compliance with section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1981). Askew,
421 So.2d at 158 (Ehrlich, J., concurring). [3] Section
101.161 requires a ballot summary to be in clear and unambiguous language....
...rcuit and county at the general election in the year 2000. [9] The 1999 statute phrased the ballot question as follows: "Shall circuit court judges in the ( number of the circuit ) judicial circuit be selected through merit selection and retention?" § 101.161(3)(c), Fla. Stat. (1999). Section 101.161(3)(e) included the same language, but concerned county court judges....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2001 WL 1266347
...stered voters on the ballot. We hold that because section
166.031(1), Florida Statutes (2000), requires the governing body to place the proposed amendment on the ballot, it is that body's responsibility to provide a ballot summary in compliance with section
101.161(1)....
...75 words. The City Commission then passed another resolution in June of 2000 urging the Broward County supervisor of elections to refuse to place the proposal on any ballot because it contained a ballot summary in excess of 75 words, a violation of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2000)....
...He requested that the court either delete the now obsolete language "all commencing before the municipal election of March 1999" or otherwise place the proposal before the voters in a timely manner as the court directed. After a hearing, the court ruled that the ballot summary was defective under section 101.161(1) because it contained more than 75 words....
...cipality or at a special election called for such purpose. Because appellant's proposal met the above requirements, the City was required to put the amendment to a vote of the electors. When such proposals are submitted to the voters at an election, section 101.161 governs the requirements for placing the proposal on the ballot....
...ignating number for convenient reference.... The Department of State shall furnish the designating number, the ballot title, and the substance of each amendment to the supervisor of elections of each county in which such amendment is to be voted on. § 101.161, Fla....
...After appellant submitted the proposed amendment petition, signed by the duly authenticated signatures of 10% of the registered voters, the City Commission was required to place the proposal to the voters at the next election. See §
166.031(1), Fla. Stat. Pursuant to section
101.161(1), the substance of that public measure shall be placed on the ballot, and the wording of the substance shall be contained in the resolution and must not exceed 75 words....
...Because it is the City Commission's responsibility to pass the ordinance containing the wording of the substance of the amendment, it must also comply with the word limitation in order to place the proposal on the ballot. While the City contends that it is the sponsor which must submit the ballot language, section 101.161 only places that responsibility on the sponsor of proposed constitutional amendments by initiative. See § 101.161(2), Fla....
...s directed by law.'" Shea v. Cochran,
680 So.2d 628, 629 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (quoting Town of Manalapan v. Rechler,
674 So.2d 789, 790 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)). The City failed to comply with its legal duty to prepare a ballot summary in accordance with section
101.161(1)....
...The trial court erred in denying the petition for writ of mandamus. We therefore reverse and remand to the trial court with directions to order the City *803 to pass a resolution to place the proposed amendment on the ballot with a ballot summary which complies with section 101.161(1)....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17664, 2005 WL 2991048
...ubstance of the amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot.... [T]he *487 substance of the amendment or public measure shall be an explanatory statement... of the chief purpose of the measure." § 101.161(1), Fla....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2014 WL 289984
...Const.
Our review of the proposed amendment is confined to two issues: (1)
whether the proposed amendment itself satisfies the single-subject requirement of
article XI, section 3, of the Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and
summary satisfy the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2013).
See Advisory Op....
...For the reasons we explain, we conclude that the proposed
amendment embraces a single subject, which is the medical use of marijuana, and
therefore complies with article XI, section 3.
We also conclude that the ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161(1) because they are not clearly and conclusively defective....
...initiative process, our inquiry is limited to two legal issues: (1) whether the
proposed amendment violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section
3, of the Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate
the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
... state constitution authorizing the medical use of marijuana, as determined by a
licensed Florida physician, under Florida law. We therefore reject the opponents’
assertion that the amendment “would allow far wider marijuana use than the ballot
title and summary reveal.”
Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, governs the requirements for the ballot
title and summary of an initiative petition....
...The ballot title shall consist of a
caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is
commonly referred to or spoken of. This subsection does not apply to
constitutional amendments or revisions proposed by joint resolution.
§ 101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2013).
- 15 -
In Save Our Everglades, this Court explained the meaning of section
101.161 in the following way:
“[S]ection 101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary
for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and
unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure.” This is so
that the voter will have notice of the issue containe...
...2002) (“[T]he ballot title and summary may not be read in isolation, but
must be read together in determining whether the ballot information properly
informs the voters.”); Tax Limitation,
673 So. 2d at 868 (rejecting the Attorney
General’s argument because “[s]ection
101.161 requires the ballot summary and
title to be read together”)....
...amendment on federal statutory law as it exists at this moment in time. Moreover,
the statements in the ballot summary are legally accurate. Therefore, the ballot
summary’s discussion of federal law is not “so misleading as to clearly and
conclusively violate section 101.161.” Legislative Dist....
...access to courts and the right of access to public records.
- 41 -
These issues, however, do not involve the chief purpose of the amendment
or even a significant effect that would result from the amendment if passed. See
§ 101.161(1), Fla....
...Moreover, we note that these allegations are
largely speculative and in some instances—such as the right of access to courts—
actually inaccurate as to the effect of the proposed amendment.
For all these reasons, we conclude that the ballot title and summary comply
with the clarity requirements of section 101.161.
V....
...us.”).
VI. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the initiative petition and ballot
title and summary satisfy the legal requirements of article XI, section 3, of the
Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
...to the Att’y Gen. re Fairness Initiative Requiring Leg.
Determination That Sales Tax Exemptions and Exclusions Serve a Pub. Purpose,
880 So. 2d 630, 635-36 (Fla. 2004) (detailing this Court’s review of the validity of
a ballot title and summary under section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes)....
...e treated by
the use of medical marijuana. When determining the validity of initiative petitions
such as this, the Court’s inquiry is limited to whether the petition satisfies the
constitutional single-subject requirement and the requirement of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2013). See Advisory Op. to Att’y Gen. re Amend. to
Bar Gov’t from Treating People Differently Based on Race in Pub. Educ.,
778 So.
2d 888, 890-91 (Fla. 2000). Section
101.161(1) requires that that ballot title and
summary state “in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the
measure.” Advisory Op....
...Although the Court is reluctant to remove proposed
amendments from a vote of the public, this Court has not been reluctant to strike a
summary that fails to clearly and fully inform the voter of the significant effects of
the amendment. As we held in Smith, “we are required by section 101.161
[Florida Statutes] to ensure that the ballot summary clearly communicates what the
electorate is being asked to vote upon....
...from revealing all the details or ramifications of the proposed amendment.” Smith,
606 So. 2d at 621. Even so, the summary must clearly state the amendment’s chief
purpose. 2 In this case, the chief purpose of the proposed amendment is
2. Section
101.161(1), Fla....
...provide the clarity necessary for placement on the ballot. The Legislature provided
a similar corrective mechanism for legislatively proposed constitutional
amendments where the ballot statement proposed by legislative joint resolution is
found to be defective. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, was amended in 2011 to
provide in subsection (3) that if the court finds the Legislature’s ballot statement to
be defective, the Attorney General may prepare and submit a revised ballot
statement, unless otherwise provided in the joint resolution. See § 101.161(3)(b)2.,
Fla....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 1988 WL 15102
...IV, § 10, Fla. Const.; §
16.061, Fla. Stat. (1987). We examine the text of the proposed amendment to determine if it meets the single subject test of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and the ballot title and substance for compliance with section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1987)....
...The committee argues that it has fully complied with all the constitutional provisions, to date, of placing a proposed amendment on the ballot and it cannot constitutionally be prevented from doing so because of any failure, or alleged failure, to meet the additional statutory requirements of section 101.161....
...Further, as the committee points out, proposed amendments to the constitution are not required to be consistent with statutory law or jury instructions and may require modification in such law or instructions. We conclude that the ballot summary accurately tracks and describes the proposed amendment and thus complies with section 101.161. Having so concluded, it is not necessary to reach the issue of whether noncompliance with section 101.161 bars a proposed amendment from the ballot. We hold that the initiative petition meets the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution and the ballot summary meets those of section 101.161....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
length, of the chief purpose of the measure. §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2018) ; see also
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2006 WL 1459775
...As previously noted, the sole basis on which the trial court found the ballot summary misleading was the alleged amendment by implication of the citizen initiative and referendum provision. In all other respects, the court found that the summary tracked the proposed amendments fairly and in sufficient detail. See § 101.161(1), Fla....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2002 WL 1025974
...Thus, we find that the proposed amendment is functionally and facially unified and therefore complies with the single-subject requirement. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY REQUIREMENTS The second issue is whether the ballot title and summary express the chief purpose of the proposed amendment in plain and unequivocal language. Section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes governs the requirements for ballot titles and summaries and provides, in relevant part: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment ......
...[T]he substance of the amendment ... shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1), Fla....
...chief purpose of the measure"). These requirements make certain that the "electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment." Advisory Op. to the Att'y Gen. re Tax Limitation,
644 So.2d 486, 490 (Fla.1994). The purpose of section
101.161(1) is "to provide fair notice of the content of the proposed amendment so that the voter will not be misled as to its purpose, and can cast an intelligent and informed ballot." See Advisory Op....
...ystem to the Florida Board of Education pursuant to sections 229.001-229.0082, Florida Statutes (2001). We reject this contention. This Court recently held that a ballot summary banning smoking in enclosed workplaces fulfilled the requirements under section 101.161 even though it failed to disclose the effect that the proposed amendment would have on existing statutory law restricting smoking in public places....
...sleading in this regard. See Advisory Op. to the Att'y Gen. re Prohibiting Pub. Funding of Political Candidates' Campaigns,
693 So.2d 972 (Fla.1997) (determining that the ballot title and summary were not misleading and satisfied the requirements of section
101.161 even though opponents argued that the proposed amendment effectively invalidated existing statutory law)....
...re Protect People from the Health Hazards of Second-Hand Smoke,
814 So.2d 415 (Fla.2002). Accordingly, we hold that the initiative petition and proposed ballot title and summary meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2001)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 342, 2012 WL 1623041, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 933
and that the ballot language did not violate section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1995). Id. The trial court
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 10016, 2007 WL 1827633
...Prior to the election date, Delgado brought this suit. Delgado maintained that the ballot question failed the statutory requirement that "the substance of such . . . public measure . . . be presented in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot. . . ." § 101.161(1), Fla....
...aw Ballot" question. 3. The Court orders that all votes on this issue be preserved until appellate review, if any, of this Court's order. STANDING A voter has standing to challenge ballot language on a claim that the language fails to comply with subsection
101.161(1), Florida Statutes. The First District Court of Appeal has squarely so held. Sancho v. Smith,
830 So.2d 856, 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)("Citizens who are adversely affected by the exemption in section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2000) can make the argument for themselves.")....
...The present case is a challenge by a voter to ballot language, not a challenge by a taxpayer to a governmental spending decision. The trial court was entirely correct in ruling that Delgado had standing as a citizen and voter. THE STRAW BALLOT LANGUAGE As set out above, subsection 101.161(1) requires that the substance of the public measure be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot....
...We conclude that the ballot language sufficiently complied with the statute. That being said, the votes may be counted and the results may be publicly released. For the stated reasons, we affirm on the issue of standing, reverse on the merits, and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith. NOTES [1] Subsection 101.161(1) provides: (1) Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the bal...
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1995 WL 353438
...two (2) consecutive terms (totalling four (4) years). This would amend Sections 4.02 and 8.01 of the City Charter. Two lawsuits were filed attacking the validity of this amendment, one on constitutional grounds, and the other based on a violation of section 101.161, Fla. Stat. (1984), which provides in pertinent part: 101.161 Referenda; ballots Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot ......
...Term limits, the subject of the amendment in the present case, is a general concept, and voters who are interested are either for or against limits. While voters in favor of term limits might think that this amendment, because of the exception, did not go far enough, the amendment would not mislead voters. It complies with § 101.161, which requires the ballot summary to contain the "substance of the amendment ......
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1998 WL 299359
...tive way to the provisions of ss.
125.60-125.64, inclusive, the board of county commissioners may propose by ordinance a charter consistent with the provisions of this part and provide for a special election pursuant to the procedures established in s.
101.161(1) with notice published as provided in s....
...While appellants mount an attack upon the election procedures on numerous grounds, the primary thrust of this attack is more focused and we, therefore, accordingly narrow our discussion of the reasons for our affirmance to the more narrowly focused issue. Appellants' primary attack grows out of the provisions of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1995), which provides as follows: (1) Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed i...
...ording of the proposed ballot title as set forth in the enabling ordinance and that contained in the subsequent resolution. See Miami Dolphins, Ltd. v. Metropolitan Dade County,
394 So.2d 981 (Fla.1981); Boardman v. Esteva,
323 So.2d 259 (Fla.1975). Section
101.161(1) provides that the ballot title shall speak in terms "by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of." Section
125.60 speaks specifically in terms of "a county home rule charter." We conclude in regard to the ballot title...
...court has on several occasions approved the action of the voters taken in such an election. See Eight is Enough in Pinellas v. Ruggles,
678 So.2d 898 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Wadhams v. Board of County Commissioners,
567 So.2d 414 (Fla. 1990). Moreover, section
101.161(1) seems to contemplate a special election vote being held in conjunction with a general election because it provides that "the substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot after the list of candidates....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 34 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 62, 2009 Fla. LEXIS 130, 2009 WL 196406
...Milander,
72 So.2d 796, 798 (Fla. 1954))). Accordingly, we have an obligation to review the ballot as a whole to ensure that no part of the ballotwhich includes the financial impact statement is misleading. Our conclusion is supported by the applicable statutes. Section
101.161 requires that ballot titles and summaries "be printed in clear and unambiguous" language. §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2008). Similarly, section
100.371 requires that the financial impact statement be "clear and unambiguous." §
100.371(5)(c)2., Fla. Stat. (2008). We have held that the "clear and unambiguous" language in section
101.161(1) requires us to consider whether ballot titles and summaries are misleading to the public....
...Therefore, I dissent. CANADY and POLSTON, JJ., concur. NOTES [1] We addressed whether the proposed amendments comply with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, and whether the ballot titles and summaries comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), in the companion case Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re Standards for Establishing Legislative District Boundaries, Nos....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2008 WL 4181135
...The ... election of the County Mayor shall be held in even number years, beginning with the general election held in the year 2008 " were self-limiting to the 2006 election. Second, he argued that the Ballot Summary was misleading in violation of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), [6] because it failed to adequately inform the electorate that the amendment would effectively remove certain powers from the Board of County Commissioners and transfer them to the County Mayor....
...for the next general election after he had certified them, which, in this case, was 2008. [7] The Sponsor adopted the Supervisor's position and argued further that Mr. Shirk had not shown a clear and conclusive violation of the governing law, *1273 section 101.161(1), and that a commonsense reading of the petition showed that a vote to elect the County Mayor could not be held in 2008, the same election at which the voters would decide whether to amend the County Charter to have a County Mayor....
...s before us. On appeal, the Sponsor challenges the circuit court's third finding and claims that the final judgment should be reversed because the Charter Amendment is not "clearly and conclusively defective" and the Ballot Title and Summary satisfy section 101.161(1) in that they are clear, unambiguous, and not misleading....
...In the interest of expediting the resolution of this case, rather than addressing each issue as raised in the appeal and cross-appeal, our discussion will relate to the single overarching question: whether the Ballot Title and Summary satisfy the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2007)....
...[T]he substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure.... The ballot title shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of. § 101.161(1). The supreme court has set forth our guiding principles in analyzing a proposed amendment under this section: The basic purpose of this provision [in section 101.161(1)] is "to provide fair notice of the content of the proposed amendment so that the voter will not be misled as to its purpose, and can cast an intelligent and informed ballot." In conducting its inquiry into the validity of a proposed amendment under section 101.161(1), the Court asks two questions....
...y, we conclude that the Ballot Summary is misleading in that it fails to inform the voter that a County Mayor will not, in fact, be elected in the year 2008. Therefore, we hold that the amendment does not meet the statutory requirements set forth by section 101.161(1), and the trial court correctly removed the proposed amendment from the ballot....
...us pushing back the proposal to 2008. Taking Back Hillsborough County Political Comm., Case No. 06-CA-005933 (Fla. 13th Jud. Cir. 2006). This judgment was not appealed. [6] Chapter 101 of the Florida Statutes regulates voting procedures and methods. Section 101.161(1) deals with referenda and ballots....
...There is no dispute that the format of the petition is in accordance with governing law. See Fla. Admin. Code. R.1S-2.009, Constitutional Amendment by Initiative Petition (adopted under the specific authority of sections
20.10(3),
97.012(1),
100.371(3), (7),
101.161(2), Fla. Stat. (2007), and implementing §§
100.371 and
101.161)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
part of it." Id. § 2 (c). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2018), provides the following
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 2015 WL 6387952
title and summary satisfy the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2014). That statute provides
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
Article XI, Section 5, Florida Constitution, and Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes. On August 20, 2018
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 5th District Court of Appeal | 2004 WL 2633924
...District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. November 18, 2004. Lesley Blackner of Blackner, Stone Assoc., Palm Beach, for Appellant. C. Allen Watts of Cobb Cole, DeLand, for Appellee. TORPY, J. The issue here is whether a proposed amendment to the Volusia County Charter comports with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004)....
...ised Volusia County Charter, incorporating said amendment, with the Florida Department of State. For purposes of this Section, UGB means an area designated for future urban growth and public services, and for possible future municipal incorporation. Section 101.161(1) requires that the ballot summary not exceed 75 words and "state in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure." Askew v....
...proposed amendment. Id. Here, the ballot summary does not comply with the statute. The first sentence of the ballot summary is not descriptive of the contents of the amendment and amounts to mere "political rhetoric," the inclusion of which violates section 101.161(1)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 7998, 2015 WL 3390177
...of public park property, unless each such structure, lease,
license, renewal, expansion, extension, concession or use
shall be approved by a majority vote of the voters in a
county-wide referendum.
In addition, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2012), states:
for only an additional eight years, or until 2013; 3) On October 22, 2002, the
BOCC approved an amendment to the Master Plan to allow existing boat dry
storage facility at the Crandon Park Marina...
...Matheson then brought suit against Miami-Dade County to declare
the referendum unlawful. IPC moved to intervene, and the trial court allowed the
intervention. In his complaint, Matheson alleged three counts: 1) that the
referendum “flew under false colors” and “hid the ball,” in violation of section
101.161(1) because it did not disclose that the expansion was prohibited by the
Settlement Agreement, the Master Plan and the Declaration of Restrictive
Covenants, and because it could not be implemented without approval of the
Amendment...
...The trial court denied Matheson’s motion and granted summary
judgment against Matheson on all three counts of his complaint. On appeal,
8
Matheson contends that the ballot language fails the requirements of section
101.161(1) by “hiding the ball” and “flying under false colors.”
The standard of review of a trial court’s ruling on a summary judgment motion
is de novo....
...However, with regard to the ballot question at issue in this appeal, this
Court should invalidate it “only if the record shows that the [ballot language] is
clearly and conclusively defective.” Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So. 2d 7, 11 (Fla.
2000).
Section
101.161(1) requires that the substance of the public measure be printed
in “clear and unambiguous” language on the ballot....
...re so
that he or she will not be misled as to its purpose and may intelligently cast his or
her vote.” See also Askew v. Firestone,
421 So. 2d 151, 155 (Fla. 1982) (“the
ballot must give the voter fair notice of the decision he must make”). Section
101.161(1) requires that the County and IPC explain to voters, in a summary not
exceeding seventy-five words, the “chief purpose of the measure.” Florida law
makes it clear that the ballot question does not have to “explain every detail or
ramification of the proposed amendment.” City of Riviera Beach v....
...3d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013).
Matheson contends on appeal that the ballot did not contain sufficient details.
However, there is no requirement that all the details of a proposal must be
explained to voters. Florida courts have previously held that section 101.161(1)
does not require excessive detail....
...As previously discussed, the
Crandon Park Tennis Center improvements hinge on several approvals. As the
County contends, it would be impossible for it to present any question listing all
the required development approvals that were needed within the seventy-five word
limit required by section 101.161(1)....
...“modification and extension of agreements with the operators of the Sony Open
Tennis Tournament or its successors." Because the chief purpose of the referendum
did not alter or change procedures for amending the Crandon Park Master Plan, the
referendum did not violate section 101.161(1)....
...e of their financial
interests.
Id.
The appellants sued the Secretary of State to prevent inclusion of the proposed
title and substance on the November ballot. Appellants claimed the title and
substance were misleading under section 101.161 because, among other things,
“the instant summary discloses only the proposed addition of financial disclosure
as a condition to after-term lobbying and fails to reveal that the proposal would
repeal the existing, more stringent...
...concerning meetings of the county’s Charter Review Board. Id. at 415. The
proposed amendments were approved by a majority of the voters. Id. Petitioners
then filed a complaint challenging the amendment to the county charter,
contending that the referendum failed to comply with section 101.161(1) because it
did not provided a summary of the proposed changes....
...ndment. As then
Judge Grimes noted in his dissent below: “[T]here was
nothing on the ballot to inform the voter of the change to
be accomplished by the amendment, which is the very
reason why section 101.161(1) requires an explanatory
statement.” 501 So.2d at 124 (Grimes, J., dissenting)....
...governing board of the fire and rescue service district,
but making no mention of the elimination of the existing
governing body of the Fire and Rescue District, was
misleading to voters and violated section
101.161(1),
especially in light of simultaneously conducted election
of persons to the existing governing board), review
denied,
523 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1988).
Id. at 416-17 (emphasis in original).
17
Again, the ballot question was misleading because it failed to include the
explanatory statement required by section
101.161(1), and thus failed to inform the
voters of the “chief purpose” of the measure....
...The referendum at issue before us simply provided
voters with detailed information regarding the Crandon Park expansion, consistent
with Florida law and Article 7 of Miami-Dade County’s Home Rule Charter.
In sum, the referendum did not “hide the ball” or “fly under false colors.”
Section 101.161, of the Florida Statutes, required that IPC and Miami-Dade
County tell the voters, in clear and unambiguous language, the chief purpose of the
referendum....
...rs”. The referendum did not
change in any way the procedure for amending the Crandon Park Master Plan. The
20
referendum language complied with Article 7 of Miami-Dade County’s Home
Rule Charter and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2012)....
...4th DCA 2012) (quoting
Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So. 2d 7, 11 (Fla. 2000)).
I agree that the language of the ballot summary informed the voters of the
“chief purpose” of the referendum without “flying under false colors” or “hiding
the ball,” thus satisfying section
101.161, which requires that “the voter have
notice of that which he must decide....
...3D14-405
WELLS, Judge (dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. Because I find that the ballot summary misled the
voters and failed to disclose material information necessary for the public to make
an informed decision under section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes (2012), I would
reverse.
1....
...Matheson filed the instant action against
the County seeking to invalidate the referendum on three grounds: first, he claimed
38
that the ballot title and summary of the referendum failed to comply with section
101.161 of the Florida Statutes (count I); second, he claimed that the ballot title
and summary of the referendum violated article 7 of the County’s Home Rule
Charter (count II); and third, he claimed that the County’s misstatements an...
...The
Board of County Commissioners conditionally approved that agreement.
In August 2013, Matheson moved for entry of final summary judgment. As
to count I, he argued that the ballot title and summary of the referendum violated
the accuracy requirements of section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes by failing to
inform the electorate of the existence of the Settlement Agreement and Amended
Final Judgment in the White litigation, as well as the Crandon Park Master Plan
and the Declaration of Restrictive...
...County and IPC that had yet to be negotiated. Matheson made no arguments in his
motion with respect to count III.
The County opposed the motion and also moved for summary judgment on
Matheson’s claims. As to count I, the County argued that section 101.161 was not
violated because the required amendment of the Master Plan by three of four voters
on the Committee on Amendment of the Crandon Park Master Plan was “the
needle in the proverbial haystack of development approvals required...
...Legal Analysis
The standard of review of the instant final summary judgment is de novo.
See Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Vill. of Pinecrest,
994 So. 2d 456, 457 (Fla. 3d DCA
2008) (applying a de novo standard of review in determining whether a local
referendum complied with the accuracy requirements of section
101.161 of the
Florida Statutes).
Florida law requires that every ballot initiative placed before the public for a
vote must be accompanied by a short title and a summary which clearly and
unambiguously state the primary purpose of the ballot initiative:
Whenever a ....
...public measure shall
be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the
chief purpose of the measure. . . . The ballot title shall consist of a
caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is
commonly referred to or spoken of.
§
101.161(1), Fla. Stat (2012) (emphasis supplied); Askew v. Firestone,
421 So. 2d
151, 155-56 (Fla. 1982) (confirming that section
101.161 applies to “all ballots”);
see also Wadhams v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs of Sarasota Cnty.,
567 So. 2d 414, 416
41
(Fla. 1990) (applying section
101.161 to a county ballot initiative to amend a
county charter).
The purpose of these requirements “is to assure that the electorate is advised
of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment” so that the electorate is...
...lleagues is wrong, it is appropriate
for that body to pass a joint resolution and to ask the citizens to
modify that prohibition. But such a change must stand on its own
merits and not be disguised as something else. The purpose of section
101.161 is to assure that the electorate is advised of the true meaning,
and ramifications, of an amendment....
...y a nonbinding
opinion poll”), with City of Hialeah v. Delgado,
963 So. 2d 754, 757 (Fla. 3d DCA
2007) (finding that a straw ballot which asked “Would you support a voter
petition” to resolve the same issue addressed in Staats complied with section
101.161(1) because the ballot language adequately informed the voters that the
ballot measure had no binding effect).
The ballot summary also “hid[] the ball” by failing to mention or disclose
that approval of the proposed chang...
...This all could have been avoided simply by advising voters that the
approvals being sought were conditioned on approval by a third party, all of which
48
easily could have been accomplished in seventy five words as required by section
101.161:
In accordance with Home Rule Charter Article 7, and subject to
Crandon Park Master Plan Amendment Committee approval, do you
approve as Resolution R-660-12 provides:
Erection of permanent structures and ex...
...use, to be funded solely by tennis center and tournament revenues and
private funds; and
Modification and extension of agreements with operator of Sony
Open Tennis Tournament or its successors.
In finding that the ballot summary fails to comply with section 101.161(1), I
do not disagree with the County’s contention that Article 7 of the County’s Home
Rule Charter requires that voters also approve of the proposed expansion of the
tennis complex and modification/extension of agreements with IPC in a County-
wide referendum....
...be addressed in this appeal.
4. Conclusion
Because the ballot summary misled the voters as to the true legal effect of
the referendum and failed to disclose material information necessary for the public
to make an informed decision under section 101.161, I would find that the ballot is
defective and that the post-election results of the subject referendum must be
invalidated....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 267, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 673, 1997 WL 251273
“printed in clear and unambiguous language.” §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (1995). As we have previously expressed
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 22 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 271, 1997 Fla. LEXIS 674
and summary are misleading, in violation of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1995). Concerning the
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2007 WL 935084
...The trial court granted a final summary judgment in favor of appellees. Appellants raise three issues on appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment based on its finding that SJR 2394's ballot language met the minimum requirements set out in section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004); (2) whether the trial court erred in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment based on its finding that appellee properly noticed the proposed revision pursuant to article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution; and (3) whether the trial court erred in granting appellee's motion for summary judgment based on its finding that section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004), is constitutional....
...Count II: The ballot summary for Constitutional Amendment No. 2 violated article XI, section 5(b) of the Florida Constitution because the summary was not published in local newspapers as required in the tenth and sixth weeks preceding the general election. Count III: Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004), violates the equal protection clause of the Florida Constitution, as considered with article I, section I, of the Florida Constitution because the statute exempts the Legislature from the 75-word limit bal...
...s relying on nearby metropolitan areas. Further, while both parties concede the notice was untimely by days in some publications, the notices substantially complied with the statutory requirements and did not amount to a "November surprise;" and (3) section 101.161(1), Florida Statute's legislative exemption from the 75-word ballot summary limit is constitutional....
...en's initiatives; thus, the need to explain the proposed legislation with more than 75 words is necessary. Appellants seek review of this order. Appellants first assert the ballot title and summary are misleading and fail to meet the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes. A ballot title and summary are required whenever a constitutional amendment is submitted for a vote to the electorate. Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004), codifies article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution's accuracy in proposed amendments requirement and serves as a "truth in packaging" law for ballot summaries. Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So.2d 7, 13 (Fla.2000). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004), provides: Whenever a constitutional amendment ....
...explain every detail or ramification of the proposed amendment. Carroll v. Firestone,
497 So.2d 1204, 1206 (Fla. 1986). The ballot must, however, give the voter fair notice of the decision he or she must make. Askew,
421 So.2d at 155. The purpose of section
101.161 is to ensure that voters are advised of the amendment's true meaning....
...[for Non-Violent Drug Offenses], 818 So.2d [491] at 497 [(Fla.2002)], and [ Advisory Opinion to the Attorney General re ] Right [of Citizens] to Choose Health Care Providers, 705 So.2d [563] at 566 [(Fla.1998)]). (Emphasis added). In the instant case, appellants assert the summary and title violated section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes' "truth in packaging" requirements for the following reasons: (1) the ballot title, "Constitutional Amendments Proposed by Initiative," merely referenced the very general subject area of the proposed revision, and...
...Rather, "those challenging the legislative judgment must convince the court that the legislative facts on which the classification is apparently based could not reasonably be conceived to be true by the governmental decisionmaker." (citing Vance,
440 U.S. at 111,
99 S.Ct. 939). The State asserts that the Legislature enacted section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004), to ensure ballot integrity and a valid election process. A law which requires a minimum word limit on ballot summaries clearly insures ballot integrity by limiting the ballot to a workable and user friendly length. To the extent appellants argue that section
101.161(1) as applied, is discriminatory, appellants must show (1) that they were treated differently under the law from similarly situated persons, (2) that the statute intentionally discriminates against appellants, and (3) that there was no rational basis for the discrimination. McElrath v. Burley,
707 So.2d 836, 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). While section
101.161(1) exempts the Legislature from the 75-word limit, the statute does not rise to the level of unconstitutional discrimination....
...mmary. For all these reasons, it is apparent the challenged statute (1) applies to all similarly situated persons to appellants; (2) does not intentionally discriminate against appellants alone; and (3) passes a rational basis scrutiny. Accordingly, section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes, should not be invalidated as unconstitutional under the equal protection clause....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 612, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 910, 1988 WL 18575
...We agree with the trial court that the proposed ballot question in issue here [1] is both affirmatively misleading in critical respects, [2] see Askew v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151 (Fla. 1982), and, even more clearly, does not satisfy the requirement of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1987), that the "substance of ......
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 546, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1460
summary comport with the accuracy requirement in section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1999). During this pre-election
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1989 WL 75760
...unty Commission required to adopt geographic exceptions disapproved by the Planning Council after local government and public input? The appellants argued that the ballot question failed to reveal the chief purpose *117 of the measure as required by section 101.161, Florida Statutes (1987), and that it was misleading and deceptive....
...1982] Removing the amendment from the voters' right to be heard should require clear and convincing evidence of almost unassailable constitutional or statutory violation. The Court easily reaches the decision that there is no violation of Florida Statute Section 101.161....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2008 WL 239078
...Before WELLS, ROTHENBERG and SALTER, JJ. WELLS, Judge. Judith Feldman appeals from a final summary judgment in the City of North Miami's, favor, rejecting Feldman's claim that a Municipal Charter Amendment adopted by popular vote was invalid because the ballot summary violated section 101.161 of the Florida Statutes....
...Harris,
769 So.2d 1029, 1030 (Fla.2000) (citing Florida League of Cities v. Smith,
607 So.2d 397, 399 (Fla.1992) for the proposition that "no relief is possible unless the ballot summary is clearly and conclusively defective"). Affirmed. NOTES [1] Section
101.161 in pertinent part provides: Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or other public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language...
...rejection. . . . Except for amendments and ballot language proposed by joint resolution, the substance of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure. § 101.161(1), Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 361
...The Board of County Commissioners shall pay reasonable expenses of the Charter Review Board." YES (Punch Card Number) NO (Punch Card Number) The Board, on advice of its legal counsel, did not provide a summary of the proposed changes as required by section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (Supp....
...of the Charter Review Board brought this suit. In their amended complaint, they charged that the Board's failure to include an explanatory statement not exceeding 75 words stating the purpose or substance of the proposal violated the requirements of section 101.161(1)....
...of limitations, waiver, estoppel and laches. Following a nonjury trial at which testimony and exhibits were presented, the court allowed counsel to submit written arguments and legal memoranda. The court focused on the following issues: (1) whether section 101.161(1) is directory or mandatory; (2) whether the plaintiffs were precluded from the relief they seek because of their delay in formally seeking a remedy; and (3) whether the ballot gave fair notice to the voters of the decision they were called on to make. The court observed in its final judgment that the issues before it required it to make both legal and factual determinations. *123 The trial court concluded that section 101.161(1) is mandatory and was not substantially complied with by the Board....
...concluded the charter amendments were properly adopted by the voters of Sarasota County. The unsuccessful plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in upholding the election results after finding that the ballot did not comply with the requirement of section 101.161(1)....
...GRIMES, Acting Chief Judge, dissents with opinion. The majority framed the issue as "whether there has been substantial compliance with the applicable statutory requirements." The trial court held that there was no substantial compliance and the majority has never stated otherwise. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes (Supp....
...However the existing constitutional provision contained an absolute two year ban on lobbying by such persons, so the actual effect of the amendment was to relax the ban for those who made financial disclosure. The supreme court struck the amendment from the ballot because the explanatory statement required by section 101.161 did not inform the public of the true purpose of the amendment....
...By simply reading the amendment, one could readily conclude that its intent was to establish the charter review board in the first place. There was nothing on the ballot to inform the voter of the change to be accomplished by the amendment, which is the very reason why section 101.161(1) requires an explanatory statement....
...The majority seems to be saying that even though there was no explanatory statement, it doesn't make any difference because the amendment received substantial publicity and passed by a comfortable margin. To apply this rationale thwarts the whole intent of section 101.161(1)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1990 WL 223866
...heir trust with the public and was permeated by fraud on the electorate, gross wrongdoing, and substantial violations of law." The complaint also alleged that the Leon County Commissioners, in approving the wording of the referendum ballot, violated section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1987), in that the ballot question was not presented in a clear, unambiguous manner and was affirmatively misleading....
...urt nonetheless elected to retain jurisdiction to consider the question of whether passage of the referendum was "tainted" by the ballot language employed or by inappropriate expenditures. The Hudspeth court found the ballot language did not violate section 101.161(1)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19112, 2010 WL 5093247
...tutes, by purporting to use the initiative or referendum process to alter a development order. Count II sought a determination of the constitutionality of the proposed amendment based on whether the amendment was clear and unambiguous as required by section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida | 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 367, 2002 Fla. LEXIS 828, 2002 WL 717323
clear and unambiguous language pursuant to section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2001). See Advisory Opinion
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 5571, 2012 WL 1192160
...amendment invalid only if the record shows that the proposal is clearly and conclusively defective." Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So.2d 7, 11 (Fla.2000). O'Connell asserts that the ballot title set forth in the Resolution, "ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE AD VALOREM TAX EXEMPTION," does not comply with the mandate of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes, requiring a ballot title to use common language. Section
101.161(1), requires that ballot titles "consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is commonly referred to or spoken of." The referendum was referred to in public discourse as a "Tax Abatement Referendum" or "Jobs Referendum" in advertisements supporting the measure. O'Connell further maintains that the ballot summary is misleading, because it speaks of allowing Martin County to "encourage job creation," when the true purpose and effect of Ordinance 864 is to encourage development. Section
101.161(1) provides: "The ballot summary of the amendment or other public measure shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure." The trial court held, and Martin County argues, that the primary legal effect of the ordinance is job creation, as new and expanding businesses create new jobs, and the ballot title and summary provided fair notice of this effect. The "Court has always interpreted section
101.161(1) to mean that the ballot title and summary must be read together in determining if the ballot information properly informs the voter." Advisory Opinion to the Atty....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
the Supreme Court considered, as required by section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2012), whether the ballot
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
manner consistent with section
101.161, Florida Statutes (2018). Section
101.161(1) requires that a
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 394, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 1630
the ballot titles and summaries comply with section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1995). Consequently, we
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2002 WL 31059227
...sion to the voters at the November 5, 2002, general election. Concluding that the ballot summary does not clearly and unambiguously express the substance of the proposed amendment, as required by Article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes, we reverse the order under review and direct that the ballot title and summary be stricken from the general election ballot....
...ther public measure shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the ballot.... The wording of the substance of the amendment or other public measure and the ballot title to appear on the ballot shall be embodied in the joint resolution.... § 101.161(1), Fla....
...This section does not operate to deauthorize any exemption or exclusion not expressly deauthorized in such resolution, nor does it prohibit subsequent reenactment by law of any exemption or exclusion that was deauthorized. The joint committee is dissolved July 1, 2006. In accordance with the requirements of section 101.161(1), the joint resolution provides for the following title and summary to appear on the ballot: REVIEW OF EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS FROM THE TAX ON SALES, USE, AND OTHER TRANSACTIONS....
...In their injunctive and declaratory actions in the trial court, the appellants contended that the ballot summary should be stricken from the general election ballot because it does not satisfy the fair notice requirements of the Florida Constitution and section 101.161(1)....
...conclusively defective. Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So.2d 7 (Fla.2000). As the supreme court explained in Armstrong, in requiring that a ballot summary express the "substance" of a proposed constitutional amendment in "clear and unambiguous language," section
101.161(1) merely codifies the requirement of Article XI, section 5 of the Florida Constitution that a proposed constitutional amendment must be accurately represented on the ballot....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 493, 1994 Fla. LEXIS 1492
must be stricken from the ballot. I disagree. Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1993), provides in relevant
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 739, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 1973, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 739
summary are clear and unambiguous pursuant to section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1999). See Advisory Opinion
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
ballot language satisfies the requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes. See Fla. Educ. Ass’n v
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 543, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 1747
the ballot title and summary requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1993). Advisory Opinion
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
...ion or
amendment, except for those limiting the power of government to raise revenue,
shall embrace but one subject and matter directly connected therewith.” Second,
we must determine if the ballot title and summary satisfy the requirements of
section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2014). That statute provides that when a
constitutional amendment is submitted to the vote of the people, “a ballot summary
of such amendment . . . shall be printed in clear and unambiguous language on the
ballot.” §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. Section
101.161(1) also mandates that the ballot
summary of the amendment “shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75
words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure.” §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. The
ballot shall also include a separate Financial Impact Statement concerning the
measure prepared by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference according to the
requirements of section
100.371(5), Florida Statutes (2014). See §
101.161(1), Fla.
Stat.; §
100.371(5), Fla....
...2d 841,
842 (Fla. 1958)).
As noted earlier, in determining the validity of an amendment to the
constitution arising from a citizen’s initiative, this Court examines two
requirements: (1) the ballot title and summary must satisfy the requirements of
section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes; and (2) the proposed amendment must satisfy
the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3, of the Florida Constitution.
Use of Marijuana for Certain Med....
...For the reasons set forth above, we hold that the proposed citizen
initiative amendment does not violate the single-subject requirement of article XI,
section 3, of the Florida Constitution. We turn next to the question of whether the
ballot title and summary comply with the requirements of section 101.161, Florida
Statutes.
IV. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY
Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part that the
substance of the amendment shall be “printed in clear and unambiguous language
on the ballot” and that the “summary of the amendment ....
...meets the requirements of law.
VI. CONCLUSION
For the reasons set forth above, we conclude that the initiative petition and
ballot title and summary meet the legal requirements of article XI, section 3,
Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
...However, because I conclude that the
ballot summary is confusing and does not accurately describe the scope of the
proposed amendment, I would not approve the initiative for placement on the
ballot.
- 20 -
Section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2014), provides the following clarity
requirements for the ballot summary:
The ballot summary of the amendment or other public measure shall
be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the
chief purpose of the measure....
...be misled as to its purpose, and can
cast an intelligent and informed ballot.” Advisory Op. to Att’y Gen. re Term
Limits Pledge,
718 So. 2d 798, 803 (Fla. 1998).
This Court’s review of the validity of a ballot title and summary under
section
101.161(1) involves two inquiries:
First, the Court asks whether “the ballot title and summary ....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
proposed amendments on the ballot. See §
101.161(2), Fla. Stat. (2018) (directing the Secretary
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2008 WL 4901370
...The Citizens Committee contends that the ballot title and summary pertaining to the "shrink the commission" proposal were not misleading, and that the trial court erred in ruling otherwise. [2] "The standard of review ... [on this question] is de novo." Fla. Dep't of State v. Slough,
992 So.2d 142, 147 (Fla.2008). Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2008), requires a "ballot title" which "shall consist of a caption, not exceeding 15 words in length," along with a description of "the substance of the amendment ......
...[which] shall be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the chief purpose of the measure." These requirements are designed to make certain that the "electorate is advised of the true meaning, and ramifications, of an amendment." The purpose of section
101.161(1) is "to provide fair notice of the content of the proposed amendment so that the voter will not be misled as to its purpose, and can cast an intelligent and informed ballot." Nevertheless, "the title and summary need not explain every detail or ramification of the proposed amendment." In re Advisory Opinion to the Attorney Gen. re Local Trs.,
819 So.2d 725, 731 (Fla.2002) (citations omitted). Section
101.161(1) also applies when amendments to the Florida Constitution are proposed....
...rder for a court to interfere with the right of the people to vote on a proposed ... amendment the record must show that the proposal is clearly and conclusively defective." Askew *1055 v. Firestone,
421 So.2d 151, 154 (Fla.1982) (citation omitted). Section
101.161(1) outlaws "advantageous but misleading `wordsmithing' ......
...re Physician Shall Charge the Same Fee for the Same Health Care Serv. to Every Patient,
880 So.2d 659, 661 (Fla.2004). Although the ballot language describing the "shrink the commission" proposal does not specify dates, it is not misleading within the meaning of section
101.161(1), nor does it contain any "date-specific language" that calls for an impossibility....
...is unambiguous and clearly states the amendment's chief purpose." Grose v. Firestone,
422 So.2d 303, 305 (Fla.1982). The circuit court's ruling upholding the adequacy of the ballot language describing this proposed amendment is fully in keeping with the requirements of section
101.161(1)....
...In Kobrin, the placement on the ballot of a proposition making the Board of County Commissioners the governing board of the fire and rescue service district, but making no mention of elimination of the existing governing board, was found to be misleading to voters and a violation of § 101.161, Fla....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 2006 WL 1479788
...tors. Appellee/Cross-Appellant, Citizens for Open Government, Inc., filed suit and contended that the proposed amendment violated the requirements of the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutes, that the ballot summary violated the requirements of section 101.161, Florida Statutes (2005), and that the petition in support of the referendum was not properly notarized....
...Citizens for Open Government, Inc., South Florida AFL-CIO, and the Transport Workers Union of America, Local 291, AFL-CIO are referred to collectively as "Appellees." The Circuit Court found that the proposed ballot summary met the requirements of section 101.161, and that the petition was properly notarized....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
implementing the initiative right. See, e.g., §
101.161, Fla. Stat. (2018). For example, “[w]henever a
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
title and summary satisfy the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2015). And third, this
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2000 WL 257186
...its failure to inform the public that the change, if approved, would amend an existing charter provision and "abolish" an existing form of government (seven commissioners elected at large appoint a county manager) in favor of another (strong mayor). Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, as follows, governs the analysis of whether a ballot summary is sufficient: (1) Whenever a constitutional amendment or other public measure is submitted to the vote of the people, the substance of such amendment or...
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
and summary comply with the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2019). Accordingly, we
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 31 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 173, 2006 Fla. LEXIS 484
section 3 of the Florida Constitution1 and section
101.161 of the Florida Statutes2 and should not be
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 1978).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
it reflects the substance of the amendment. Section
101.161, F. S.; AGO 076-189. Presumably the Legislature
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
and summary comply with the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2019). Accordingly, we
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 258, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 953
“printed in clear and unambiguous language,” section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (1993); and (2) whether
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
title and summary satisfy the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (201[9]).” Advisory Op
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
chief purpose of the measure.” §
101.161(1), Fla. Stat. In construing §
101.161, the “[Florida Supreme Court]
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
summary comply with the clarity requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2020). The Attorney
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 368, 1994 Fla. LEXIS 1011
and cannot exceed seventy-five words in length. §
101.161, Fla.Stat. The ballot summary “need not explain
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 29 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 395, 2004 Fla. LEXIS 1008
clear and unambiguous language pursuant to section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1999). In order for the
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 29 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 399, 2004 Fla. LEXIS 1001
clear and unambiguous language pursuant to section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1999). See Advisory Opinion
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 19 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 381, 1994 Fla. LEXIS 1028, 1994 WL 363979
constitution. BALLOT TITLE AND SUMMARY REQUIREMENTS Section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1993), sets forth the requirements
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
substantive and technical requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2018).1 In addition
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
summary satisfy the clarity requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes.” In re Advisory Op. to
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 20, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 2
the ballot title and summary requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1995). SINGLE SUBJECT REQUIREMENT
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
...Const.
Our review of the proposed amendment is confined to two issues: (1)
whether the proposed amendment itself satisfies the single-subject requirement of
article XI, section 3, of the Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and
summary satisfy the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2013).
See Advisory Op....
...For the reasons we explain, we conclude that the proposed
amendment embraces a single subject, which is the medical use of marijuana, and
therefore complies with article XI, section 3.
We also conclude that the ballot title and summary comply with section
101.161(1) because they are not clearly and conclusively defective....
...initiative process, our inquiry is limited to two legal issues: (1) whether the
proposed amendment violates the single-subject requirement of article XI, section
3, of the Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the ballot title and summary violate
the requirements of section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
... state constitution authorizing the medical use of marijuana, as determined by a
licensed Florida physician, under Florida law. We therefore reject the opponents’
assertion that the amendment “would allow far wider marijuana use than the ballot
title and summary reveal.”
Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, governs the requirements for the ballot
title and summary of an initiative petition....
...The ballot title shall consist of a
caption, not exceeding 15 words in length, by which the measure is
commonly referred to or spoken of. This subsection does not apply to
constitutional amendments or revisions proposed by joint resolution.
§ 101.161(1), Fla. Stat. (2013).
- 15 -
In Save Our Everglades, this Court explained the meaning of section
101.161 in the following way:
“[S]ection 101.161 requires that the ballot title and summary
for a proposed constitutional amendment state in clear and
unambiguous language the chief purpose of the measure.” This is so
that the voter will have notice of the issue containe...
...2002) (“[T]he ballot title and summary may not be read in isolation, but
must be read together in determining whether the ballot information properly
informs the voters.”); Tax Limitation,
673 So. 2d at 868 (rejecting the Attorney
General’s argument because “[s]ection
101.161 requires the ballot summary and
title to be read together”)....
...amendment on federal statutory law as it exists at this moment in time. Moreover,
the statements in the ballot summary are legally accurate. Therefore, the ballot
summary’s discussion of federal law is not “so misleading as to clearly and
conclusively violate section 101.161.” Legislative Dist....
...access to courts and the right of access to public records.
- 41 -
These issues, however, do not involve the chief purpose of the amendment
or even a significant effect that would result from the amendment if passed. See
§ 101.161(1), Fla....
...Moreover, we note that these allegations are
largely speculative and in some instances—such as the right of access to courts—
actually inaccurate as to the effect of the proposed amendment.
For all these reasons, we conclude that the ballot title and summary comply
with the clarity requirements of section 101.161.
V....
...us.”).
VI. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the initiative petition and ballot
title and summary satisfy the legal requirements of article XI, section 3, of the
Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
...to the Att’y Gen. re Fairness Initiative Requiring Leg.
Determination That Sales Tax Exemptions and Exclusions Serve a Pub. Purpose,
880 So. 2d 630, 635-36 (Fla. 2004) (detailing this Court’s review of the validity of
a ballot title and summary under section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes)....
...e treated by
the use of medical marijuana. When determining the validity of initiative petitions
such as this, the Court’s inquiry is limited to whether the petition satisfies the
constitutional single-subject requirement and the requirement of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2013). See Advisory Op. to Att’y Gen. re Amend. to
Bar Gov’t from Treating People Differently Based on Race in Pub. Educ.,
778 So.
2d 888, 890-91 (Fla. 2000). Section
101.161(1) requires that that ballot title and
summary state “in clear and unambiguous language the chief purpose of the
measure.” Advisory Op....
...Although the Court is reluctant to remove proposed
amendments from a vote of the public, this Court has not been reluctant to strike a
summary that fails to clearly and fully inform the voter of the significant effects of
the amendment. As we held in Smith, “we are required by section 101.161
[Florida Statutes] to ensure that the ballot summary clearly communicates what the
electorate is being asked to vote upon....
...from revealing all the details or ramifications of the proposed amendment.” Smith,
606 So. 2d at 621. Even so, the summary must clearly state the amendment’s chief
purpose. 2 In this case, the chief purpose of the proposed amendment is
2. Section
101.161(1), Fla....
...provide the clarity necessary for placement on the ballot. The Legislature provided
a similar corrective mechanism for legislatively proposed constitutional
amendments where the ballot statement proposed by legislative joint resolution is
found to be defective. Section 101.161, Florida Statutes, was amended in 2011 to
provide in subsection (3) that if the court finds the Legislature’s ballot statement to
be defective, the Attorney General may prepare and submit a revised ballot
statement, unless otherwise provided in the joint resolution. See § 101.161(3)(b)2.,
Fla....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 40, 1998 Fla. LEXIS 10, 1998 WL 19243
Florida Constitution and the requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes (1995), that the ballot title
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
amendment comply with the clarity requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2019). We invited briefing
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
summary for Ballot Question No. 2 violated section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2009). He asked the trial
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
substantive and technical requirements in section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2019). After we invited
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
...IV, § 10, art. V, § 3(b)(10), Fla. Const. For the reasons that
follow, we conclude that the proposed amendment embraces a single subject and
therefore complies with article XI, section 3. We also conclude that the ballot title
and summary comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2015)....
...s its inquiry to two issues: (1)
whether the amendment itself satisfies the single-subject requirement
of article XI, section 3, Florida Constitution; and (2) whether the
ballot title and summary satisfy the clarity requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes.
Advisory Op....
...represented on the ballot.” Armstrong v. Harris,
773 So. 2d 7, 12 (Fla. 2000)
(emphasis omitted). We conclude that the ballot title and summary meet the
statutory requirements and accurately represent the proposed amendment on the
ballot.
Section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2015) provides the following clarity
requirements for the ballot title and summary:
The ballot summary of the amendment or other public measure shall
be an explanatory statement, not exceeding 75 words in length, of the
chief purpose of the measure....
...- 11 -
cast an intelligent and informed ballot.” Advisory Op. to Att’y Gen. re Term
Limits Pledge,
718 So. 2d 798, 803 (Fla. 1998).
This Court’s review of the validity of a ballot title and summary under
section
101.161(1) involves two inquiries:
First, the Court asks whether “the ballot title and summary ....
...marijuana for patients with debilitating medical conditions. The language is clear
and does not mislead voters regarding the actual content of the proposed
amendment. Accordingly, we conclude that the ballot title and summary comply
with the clarity requirements of section 101.161.
- 12 -
FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENTS
We have an independent obligation to review the financial impact statement
to ensure that it is clear and unambiguous and in compliance with Florida law....
...uous.”).
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the initiative petition and ballot
title and summary satisfy the legal requirements of article XI, section 3, of the
Florida Constitution, and section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
Conference in accordance with s.
100.371(13).” §
101.161(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2023).1 The Estimating Conference
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 2003).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
District, was misleading to voters and violated section
101.161(1), especially in light of simultaneously conducted
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
summary comply with the clarity requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2020). After we directed
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
summary comply with the clarity requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2020). After we directed
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
title and summary satisfy the requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes (201[6]).” Advisory Op
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
summary satisfy the clarity requirements of section
101.161, Florida Statutes. Advisory Op. to Att’y
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
compliance with article X, section 3 and section
101.161 is governed by the following principles:
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida
summary satisfy the [clarity] requirements of section
101.161(1), Florida Statutes.” Advisory Op. to Att’y
