State v. State Bd. of Educ. of Florida, 66473
| Decision Date | 29 March 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 66473,66473 |
| Citation | 467 So.2d 294,10 Fla. L. Weekly 323 |
| Parties | 24 Ed. Law Rep. 658, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 323 STATE of Florida, etc., Appellant, v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF FLORIDA, etc., Appellee. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
William N. Meggs, State Atty., Tallahassee, for appellant.
Glenn R. Hosken, Division of Bond Finance, Tallahassee, for appellee.
This cause is before us on appeal from a circuit court judgment validating $100,000,000 State of Florida, Full Faith and Credit, State Board of Education, Public Education Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1985, pursuant to chapter 75, Florida Statutes (1983), and article XII, section 9(a)(2) of the Florida Constitution (the "Public Education Bond Amendment"). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(2), Fla. Const.
On December 18, 1984, the State Board of Education adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance of not exceeding $100,000,000 public education capital outlay bonds pursuant to article XII, section 9(a)(2) of the Florida Constitution, as amended, and sections 215.57-.83 of the Florida Statutes (1983). The following day, the State Board of Education of Florida brought an action in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit of Florida to validate the bonds. On January 22, 1985, the circuit court found for the State Board of Education of Florida and issued a final judgment validating the proposed bonds.
In this appeal, we must first determine whether the failure to publish notice of a proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution in two counties in which newspapers of general circulation are published, in contradiction to article XI, section 5(b) of the Florida Constitution, invalidates said proposed amendment after it has been approved by the voters of the state.
The adoption of amendment 8 at the general election of November 6, 1984, was necessary for the issuance of any additional public education capital outlay bonds pursuant to article XII, section 9(a)(2) of the Florida Constitution. The amendment allowed for changes to the definition of gross receipts taxes found in chapter 203, Florida Statutes. Such taxes are the primary source of revenue for bonds issued in accordance with the amendment.
Notice of the proposed amendment was published in newspapers of general circulation in each of sixty-five Florida counties during the tenth and sixth week prior to the November 6, 1984, general election. Such notice was not printed in a newspaper published in Hamilton County, Florida, and only one such notice was printed in a newspaper published in Madison County, Florida, despite a request for publication by the secretary of state's office pursuant to article XI of the Florida Constitution.
The proposed amendment was approved by the electors of the State of Florida on November 6, 1984, by a vote of 2,553,312 to 778,114. The proposed amendment was approved by the voters of Hamilton County, Florida, by a vote of 1,167 to 613 and was approved by the voters of Madison County, Florida, by a vote of 2,401 to 950. The total number of registered voters certified on October 11, 1984, in Hamilton County was 4,986; the total number of registered voters certified on October 16, 1984, in Madison County was 7,611.
Article XI, section 5(b) provides:
Once in the tenth week, and once in the sixth week immediately preceding the week in which the election is held, the proposed amendment or revision, with notice of the date of election at which it will be submitted to the electors, shall be published in one newspaper of general circulation in each county in which a newspaper is published.
The circuit court addressed the issue of publication of a proposed constitutional amendment and concluded the following in its final judgment:
Publication of proposed amendments being a formality, and not an essential element, of the procedure for amending the Florida Constitution, the publication of Amendment 8 in sixty-five of Florida's sixty-seven counties in the tenth week and the sixth week prior to the General Election of November 6, 1984, constitutes substantial compliance with the provisions of Article XI of the Florida Constitution; the fact that such notice was not published in newspapers of general circulation printed in Hamilton and Madison Counties constitutes...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. Butterworth
...So.2d 808 (Fla.1984). To be defective, the law must be clearly erroneous, arbitrary, and wholly unwarranted. State v. State Bd. of Education of Florida, 467 So.2d 294 (Fla.1985). In determining the validity of a statute, if possible, the courts must give it a construction that will uphold t......
-
State v. Hodges
...validity applies unless the legislative enactments are clearly erroneous, arbitrary, or wholly unwarranted. State v. State Board of Education of Florida, 467 So.2d 294 (Fla.1985). All doubts as to validity must be resolved in favor of constitutionality, Falco v. State, 407 So.2d 203 (Fla.19......
-
Patronis v. United Ins. Co. of Am., No. 1D18-2114
...erroneous, arbitrary, or wholly unwarranted." State v. Hodges , 506 So. 2d 437, 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (citing State v. State Bd. of Educ. of Fla. , 467 So.2d 294 (Fla. 1985). "All doubts as to validity must be resolved in favor of constitutionality, ... and if a constitutional interpretat......
-
Florida Hometown Democracy, Inc. v. Cobb
...publication and the second being a geographical publication requirement in each county of the State. In State v. State Board of Education of Florida, 467 So.2d 294, 296 (Fla.1985), the Florida Supreme Court considered a similar challenge to the Secretary of State's failure to provide suffic......