A Florida judge ruled on Tuesday that the Alachua County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) referendum placed on the November ballot is unlawful and that the result would be legally nullified.
But the BOCC decided later on Tuesday to appeal the decision, noting that the judge has allowed the referendum to remain on the ballot.
Both sides view the judge’s order as a victory. For the plaintiffs, the judge has stopped the BOCC from enforcing the referendum. For Alachua County, the emergency injunction failed and the referendum remains on the ballot and will be counted. With a successful appeal, the BOCC could then enforce the referendum.
The BOCC referendum asks Alachua County voters if they want to return to an at-large voting structure for selecting county commissioners, moving away from the single-member voting structure currently in place and approved by voters in 2022.
Senior Judge Olin Shinholser with the 10th Circuit Court said the BOCC has the right to place the question before voters. But he said the BOCC’s ballot language fails to mirror the language required by Florida Statutes.
“Because the language in the current proposed referendum does not comply with Florida law, any resulting vote will be a legal nullity and not the basis for changing the voting method, if the result is a vote for at large voting,” Shinholser said. “Hypothetically the vote, if the No vote prevails, would render the question moot.”
Ballot language comparison
- Language approved by BOCC: “Shall the five members of the board of county commissioners of Alachua County, Florida, be elected by all electors within the county at large?”
- Florida Statute language referenced by Shinholser: “Shall the five members of the board of county commissioner of Alachua County, Florida, be elected to office from single-member districts by electors residing in each of those districts only?”
However, Shinholser also denied the request for a temporary injunction, which was brought by state Sen. Keith Perry, Kimberly Hord, Jose Lopez and Sharla Head.
To receive a temporary injunction—“an extraordinary remedy that should be granted sparingly,” according to a previous Florida case—the plaintiffs needed to show four facts.
Shinholser highlighted only one fact that he said the plaintiffs failed to prove: that there is an inadequate remedy at law.
He wrote that the court order agrees that the referendum is illegal, so if the BOCC tries to enforce the referendum and switch back to at-large districts, assuming a vote in that direction, future plaintiffs could point to the motion and the Florida Statute it’s based on to prevent the change.
Therefore, Shinholser concluded the law provides for a way to prevent the referendum from having any impact.
He also denied the plaintiffs’ other requests that the referendum not be included on the November ballot, that the supervisor of elections inform voters that the referendum is illegal and that the results not be counted.
Shinholser said the ballots have already been printed, the plaintiffs failed to show where the court has authority to direct the supervisor of elections, and the ballots should be counted.
Shinholser said the BOCC might appeal his decision and seek a different opinion from a higher court. If that happens and the higher court agrees with the BOCC, he said the referendum would be legal at that point and the results would matter.
Attorney Jeff Childers, representing the plaintiffs, said his clients were excited about the order. He said the plaintiffs were frustrated that the hard work to place and pass the 2022 referendum could be eliminated before the county had even used the new system.
He said it’s hard to sue government entities and win. He said the judge denied the temporary injunction because it’s not needed to invalidate the referendum.
Childers added that, reading between the lines of the order, Shinholser seems unhappy with Alachua County’s actions.
“Immediately following this voter-approved change in December 2022, the county
commission asked its county attorney to prepare a memorandum describing the process for amending the County Charter to reverse the 2022 vote,” Shinholser wrote. “It is clear that some or all of the commissioners were dissatisfied with the results of the 2022 referendum.”
Whether the BOCC “acted in good faith” by placing the 2024 referendum on the ballot so soon after the 2022 vote, Shinholser said that’s a political and not legal question.
Still, Childers told Mainstreet that he hopes the BOCC takes to heart the judge’s seeming “rare indication of judicial frustration” with the county’s political games.
Alachua County has a regular meeting on Tuesday. County Spokesperson Mark Sexton said the BOCC would talk about the referendum toward the end of the meeting. Mainstreet will update the story will any comments from the county.
Alachua County had a regular meeting on Tuesday and, after hearing an update from their attorney, the BOCC voted to appeal the decision.
County spokesperson Mark Sexton said the appeal seeks to make valid any vote cast by citizens in November, whether for at-large or single-member districts. If successful, the appeal would allow the citizens’ decision in November to decide the structure for the 2026 elections.
“Nothing has changed for the voters on this issue,” Sexton said. “The injunction was denied. The question remains on the November 2024 ballot. The votes will be counted and certified, and the voters will decide on this issue.”
Editor’s note: This story has been updated.
Missing from the back and forth is substantive discussion on the vital question of how districts would or should be drawn. We have an extensive history of voting districts being drawn to primarily accomplish highly partisan political purposes rather than to ensure fair representation. Cracking, packing and gerrymandering are very familiar tools to favor or exclude groups by party, demographic, rural vs urban, etc.
Drawing lines often divides communities. Show us the good-faith process to be used and how it is protected from cynical, self-interested politicians.
The At Large Districts referendum is not about how districts are drawn. Reapportionment/redistricting is a separate process that the BOCC takes up after the 10 yr census. You’re correct though, that whomever is in office will be who decides how districts are drawn, so we need those elected officials to be focused on what’s best for the residents of the county, not what’s best for anyone’s political career. Your voice in who ends up in office is directly related to passing the ALD referendum: when you get to vote for all five seats, you have a better chance of your voice and your values being reflected as a majority on the BOCC. Those trying to halt ALD from being re-implemented want to reduce your voice to only one (at best) county commissioner. Why do you suppose they want you to have a minority voice? Why do they think less representation is better than more representation?
Bottom line: You can still vote on this referendum and your vote WILL be counted. The entire reason for this referendum is to restore your voice on the county commission: a YES on ALD means you will again be empowered to vote for all five county commission seats. Sen. Perry and his group trying to block the YES on ALD vote want to restrict your voice and representation to only ONE county commissioner. More representation is better than less.
I see you’ve chosen your side. What you fail to see or acknowledge is that many districts aren’t represented fairly by their commissioner chosen by others. Their voices aren’t being heard. They don’t want or need someone on the other side of the county deciding who represents their more local community.
Under ALD every county resident IS represented by someone from their community – that’s why there is a requirement that a candidate must reside w/in the boundaries of the district they are running to represent. They DO get fair local representation from “their side” of the county.
If you recall how the single member district was promoted in 2022, you know that there was a strategic, well funded campaign of disinformation that misrepresented local Black leaders and organizations. The very close passage of the referendum was likely swayed by that campaign. In contrast, the current referendum is a true effort to honestly allow voters to decide. Five votes for all commissioners is more than one vote for a single commissioner. It’s easy math. Vote YES on the at-large district referendum.
Another example of a blind statement that couldn’t be anymore incorrect.
No, its actually clear-eyed and demonstrably accurate. A well orchestrated dark money funded disinformation campaign was what swayed 2,557 people to vote for SMD in 2022. Neither Commissioners Chestnut, Long nor the NAACP gave their endorsement of the 2022 SMD referendum. Their images and words were used without their prior knowledge or permission and a very public press conference was held in Oct 2022 where that was clearly stated. At least now with ALD an honest campaign is being waged that explains that, as well as provides contrast of what SMD does now and what a return to ALD will do to providing residents of Alachua County broader representation.