ADVISORY OP. TO ATTY. GEN. RE ADOPTION

• Decision Date: 17 March 2005
• Docket Number: No. SC04-1479., No. SC04-1134
• Citation: 902 So.2d 763
• Parties: ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RE REFERENDA REQUIRED FOR ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

902 So.2d 763

ADVISORY OPINION TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL RE REFERENDA REQUIRED FOR ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANS.

Nos. SC04-1134, SC04-1479.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 17, 2005.

Rehearing Denied May 10, 2005.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General and Louis F. Hubener, Chief Deputy Solicitor General, Tallahassee, FL, for Petitioner.

Ross Stafford Burnaman, Tallahassee, FL, for Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc., Proponents.

Arthur J. England, Jr. of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Miami, FL, and Lorence, J. Bielby, Robert C. Apgar, and M. Hope Keating of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Tallahassee, FL, on behalf of Florida League of Cities and Florida Association of Counties, Inc.; and Barry S. Richard of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Tallahassee, FL, on behalf of Foundation for Preserving Florida's Future, Inc., for Opponents.

PER CURIAM.

The Attorney General petitions this Court for an advisory opinion regarding the validity of a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution submitted by Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc., and the accompanying Financial Impact Statement submitted by the Financial Impact Estimating Conference. 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 complies with the single-subject requirement of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, but that the ballot summary fails to comply with section 101.161(1), Florida Statutes (2004). Accordingly, the proposed amendment should not be placed on the ballot.

FACTS

A political action committee, Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc., has invoked the petition process of article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution to propose a constitutional amendment through citizen initiative. The amendment would require local governments to put a new comprehensive land-use plan or an amendment to an existing comprehensive land-use plan to a vote by referendum prior to adoption.

The ballot title for the proposed amendment is "Referenda Required for Adoption and Amendment of Local Government Comprehensive Land Use Plans." The summary for the proposed amendment states:

Public participation in local government comprehensive land use planning benefits Florida's natural resources, scenic beauty and citizens. Establishes that before a local government may adopt a new comprehensive land use plan, or amend a comprehensive land use plan, the proposed plan or amendment shall be subject to vote of the electors of the local government by referendum, following preparation by the local planning agency, consideration by the governing body and notice. Provides definitions.

The full text of the proposed amendment states:

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF FLORIDA THAT:

Article II, Section 7. Natural resources and scenic beauty of the Florida Constitution is amended to add the following subsection:

Public participation in local government comprehensive land use planning benefits the conservation and protection of Florida's natural resources and scenic beauty, and the long-term quality of life of Floridians. Therefore, before a local government may adopt a new comprehensive land use plan, or amend a comprehensive land use plan, such proposed plan or plan amendment shall be subject to vote of the electors of the local government by referendum, following preparation by the local planning agency, consideration by the governing body as provided by general law, and notice thereof in a local newspaper of general circulation. Notice and referendum will be as provided by general law. This amendment shall become effective immediately upon approval by the electors of Florida.

For purposes of this subsection:

1. "Local government" means a county or municipality.

2. "Local government comprehensive land use plan" means a plan to guide and control future land development in an area under the jurisdiction of a local government.

3. "Local planning agency" means the agency of a local government that is responsible for the preparation of a comprehensive land use plan and plan amendments after public notice and hearings and for making recommendations to the governing body of the local government regarding the adoption or amendment of a comprehensive land use plan.

4. "Governing body" means the board of county commissioners of a county, the commission or council of a municipality, or the chief elected governing body of a county or municipality, however designated.

Pursuant to section 15.21, Florida Statutes (2004), the Florida Secretary of State submitted the amendment to the Florida Attorney General. In accordance with the provisions of article IV, section 10 of the Florida Constitution, and section 16.061, Florida Statutes (2004), the Attorney General petitioned this Court for an advisory opinion as to whether the text of the proposed amendment complies with article XI, section 3, and whether the proposed ballot title and summary comply with section 101.161(1).¹ The Attorney General also petitioned this Court for an advisory opinion as to whether the Financial Impact Statement complies with section 100.371(6), Florida Statutes (2004).

The sponsor of the proposed amendment, Florida Hometown Democracy, filed a brief in favor of the proposed amendment. The Florida League of Cities, the Florida Association of Counties, Inc., and the Foundation for Preserving Florida's Future, Inc., filed briefs opposing the amendment.

REVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT

We recently summarized our standard and scope of review of proposed constitutional amendments as follows:

When the Court renders an advisory opinion concerning a proposed constitutional amendment arising through the citizen initiative process, no lower court ruling exists for the Court to review. 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). See, e.g., Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Amendment to Bar Gov't From Treating People Differently Based on Race in Pub. Educ., 778 So.2d 888, 890-91 (Fla.2000). In addressing these two issues, our inquiry is governed by several general principles. First, we will not address the merits or wisdom of the proposed amendment. See, e.g., Amendment to Bar Gov't From Treating People Differently Based on Race in Pub. Educ., 778 So.2d at 891. Second, "[t]he Court must act with extreme care, caution, and restraint before it removes a constitutional amendment from the vote of the people." Askew v. Firestone, 421 So.2d 151, 156 (Fla.1982). Specifically, where citizen initiatives are concerned, "the Court has no authority to inject itself in the process, unless the laws governing the process have been `clearly and conclusively' violated." Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Right to Treatment and Rehabilitation for Non-Violent Drug Offenses, 818 So.2d 491, 498-99 (Fla.2002); see also Amendment to Bar Gov't From Treating People Differently Based on Race in Pub. Educ., 778 So.2d at 891 ("In order for the Court to invalidate a proposed amendment, the record must show that the proposal is clearly and conclusively defective.").

Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Repeal of High Speed Rail Amendment, 880 So.2d 624, 625 (Fla.2004) (alteration in original). We address the single-subject requirement and the ballot title and summary requirements separately below.

A. SINGLE-SUBJECT REQUIREMENT

Article XI, section 3 of the Florida Constitution, sets forth the single-subject requirement for a proposed constitutional amendment arising via the citizen initiative process and provides in full:

SECTION 3. Initiative. — The power to propose the revision or amendment of any portion or portions of this constitution by initiative is reserved to the people, provided that, any such revision or amendment, except for those limiting the power of government to raise revenue, shall embrace but one subject and matter directly connected therewith.

(Emphasis supplied.) The single-subject requirement serves two purposes. It prevents an amendment from (1) engaging in logrolling or (2) substantially altering or performing the functions of multiple branches of government.

1. Logrolling

Logrolling is "a practice whereby an amendment is proposed which contains unrelated provisions, some of which electors might wish to support, in order to get an otherwise disfavored provision passed." Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Fla. Transp. Initiative for Statewide High Speed Monorail, Fixed Guideway or Magnetic Levitation Sys., 769 So.2d 367, 369 (Fla.2000) (quoting Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Limited Casinos, 644 So.2d 71, 73 (Fla. 1994)). In addressing this issue the Court determines whether the amendment manifests a "logical and natural oneness of purpose." Advisory Op. to Att'y Gen. re Fla.'s Amendment to Reduce Class Size, 816 So.2d 580, 582 (Fla.2002) (quoting Fine v. Firestone, 448 So.2d 984, 990 (Fla. 1984)). A proposed amendment meets this test when it "may be logically viewed as having a natural relation and connection as component parts or aspects of a single dominant plan or scheme. Unity of object and plan is the universal test." Fine, 448 So.2d at 990 (quoting City of Coral Gables v. Gray, 154 Fla. 881, 19 So.2d 318, 320 (1944)).

In this case, the sponsor asserts that the proposed amendment does not constitute logrolling because it can be logically viewed as a single dominant plan to enhance Florida's environmental policy by increasing public participation in local government comprehensive land-use planning. The opponents, on the other hand, contend that the proposed amendment engages in logrolling because it (1) invites citizens to have the last word on natural resources and scenic beauty in order to get their ballot approval, but then...