Janelle Irwin Taylor
A mailer is hitting voters’ mailboxes this weekend pushing for Amendment 10, which would constitutionally require certain county offices be elected.
The Florida Sheriff’s Association flyer features Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri on the front. Gualtieri is a board member on the statewide group backing Amendment 10.
“The importance of our Sheriffs in protecting Florida’s families is widely acknowledged. But believe it or not, there are some who would take away people’s right to elect your Sheriff. One county has already done that,” Gualtieri says in the mailer.
The measure would mandate five local offices — sheriff, tax collector, supervisor of elections, clerk of court and property appraiser — be elected in all 67 counties. It would also prohibit charter counties from abolishing or modifying those offices.
Charter counties have argued local voters should have the power to decide how constitutional offices are structured and whether they should be elected positions.
“Charters are formal written documents that confer powers, duties, or privileges on the county,” according to the Florida Association of Counties.
The Florida Supreme Court dismissed a challenge against Amendment 10 to have it removed from the ballot.
The Constitution Revision Commission, which meets every 20 years to propose changes to the state’s constitution, decided to put the measure on the Nov. 6 ballot.
The measure seeks to block those offices from having appointed leadership, which would remove potential partisanship from the offices.
“I know there are a lot of amendments on this year’s ballot. Some are confusing, but this amendment is straightforward and supported by all Florida Sheriffs,” Gualtieri wrote.
The flyer highlights benefits that would come from the amendment, including:
— Protecting citizens’ right to vote.
— Protecting families through a counterterrorism office it would create.
— Protecting tax dollars by starting budgeting earlier in the year.
It also contains the exact referendum language that appears on this year’s ballot:
“Requires legislature to retain department of veterans’ affairs. Ensures election of sheriffs, property appraisers, supervisors of elections, tax collectors, and clerks of court in all counties; removes county charters’ ability to abolish, change term, transfer duties, or eliminate election of these offices. Changes annual legislative session commencement date in even-numbered years from March to January; removes legislature’s authorization to fix another date. Creates office of domestic security and counterterrorism within department of law enforcement.”
2 comments
Maggie
October 28, 2018 at 8:03 pm
Janelle, I am surprised you didn’t include the fact that Sheriff Gualtieri was appointed, as well as his wife was appointed to a judgeship in Pasco County. It would be interesting to remind the sheriff of this, as the ability to appoint seems to have worked out well for him. And his wife.
Donald William
November 1, 2018 at 2:59 pm
This is an attempt by the Sheriff’s Association, the Clerks Association and the Tax Collectors Association to protect their fiefdoms. The evidence that amendment 10 is a dog is their attempt to hide their real intentions with unrelated nonsense about veterans’ affairs and counter terrorism. Two agencies that already exist in Florida Government and are in no jeopardy of being disbanded. This amendment was proposed to the Constitution Revision Commission by Carolyn Timmann, the Clerk of Court for Martin County, as an appointed member of the CRC (no conflict of interest there). I urge you to read what real editorial boards from major news outlets in Florida have to say including the Sun-Sentinel, the Ft. Myers News-Press, the Tampa Bay Times and Florida Today. The only editorials favoring amendment 10 are guest editorials written by clerks, tax collector and sheriffs. I am tired of politicians pushing solutions looking for problems down on Florida voters to advance their political agendas. Bottom line; the bundling of these proposals is a ridiculous sham and Amendment 10 infringes on the home rule of counties whose voters have already voted to appoint some of their officials, vote NO on 10!
Comments are closed.