Weekly comments from Dale Martin

Dale Martin
City Manager
Fernandina Beach
September 28, 2018 12:00 a.m.

This week’s summary (Part 3) of November’s proposed constitutional ballot proposals is satirically sponsored by the Citizens for Truth, who provided to me one of the many mailers related to one of the many amendments. Interestingly enough, none of those mailers included the actual language or summary of the ballot proposals! Let me continue to offer information related to the proposed amendments (the first six amendments have been shared over the past two weeks).

Question No. 7 is titled First Responder and Military Member Survivor Benefits; Public Colleges and Universities. This question continues the streak of proposals offered by the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) as a “bundle” of completely unrelated issues. The CRC placed this Question on the ballot with a 30-7 vote. This proposal has several components.

First, if passed, this amendment would require the employers of first responders and members of the military to provide death benefits to surviving spouses if the first responder died in the course of official duties. “First responders” are defined, in amended Article X, as “a firefighter, a paramedic, an emergency medical technician, a law enforcement officer, a correctional or correctional probation officer, or a member of the Florida National Guard.” In addition to death benefits, certain educational expenses would be waived for surviving spouses and children pursuing a career certificate or an undergraduate or postgraduate education.

Second, the proposed amendment makes it more difficult to raise college fees by requiring a two-thirds vote by both the university’s board of trustees and the state board of governors. Please be aware that the proposed amendments definition of “fees” specifically EXCLUDES tuition.

Finally, the current structure of the State’s system of higher education would be codified in the Constitution. Through my preliminary research, I have not found any instance of public opposition or support (other than the original CRC vote) for this Question. In general, if you vote “yes,” you support death benefits for first responders and military members, make it more difficult to increase college fees, and enshrine the college system structure in the Constitution. If you vote “no,” you don’t support those changes.

Question No. 8 also has several parts, and, although again somewhat specifically distinct, the parts are, in general, related to education (but still complex). The title of this Question is School Board Term Limits and Duties; Public Schools. This proposal was included on the ballot following a 27-10 CRC vote.

First, the proposed amendment would institute term limits (two four-year terms) for school board members. Second, the proposed amendment would restrict local school board control to only those free public schools established by the school board. The control of non-board established schools, such as charter schools, lab schools, collegiate high schools, and others, would fall under the jurisdiction and authority of a different state institution.

Finally, the proposal, if passed, would require the State Legislature to pass laws to ensure public school students “understand and are prepared to exercise their rights and responsibilities as citizens of a constitutional republic.”

The primary division regarding this proposal appears to coalesce around the local control of non-public schools component of the Question. In summary, should local boards of education maintain their current oversight of non-public schools? The supporters and opponents of this proposal will likely focus on this component.

Question No. 9 is the most egregious example of this year’s CRC bundling: Prohibits Offshore Oil and Gas Drilling; Prohibits Vaping in Enclosed Indoor Workplaces. If anyone on the CRC (would supported the inclusion of this measure 33-3 [one non-voting]) could explain the rationale of tie-barring these issues, I’d love to hear it.

The measure would ban offshore oil and gas drilling within the seas of Florida’s territorial waters (although those products could still be transported through those areas). The proposal would also ban the use of vapor-generating electronic devices in indoor workplaces. Some allowances are made for private residences not being used for commercial childcare, adult daycare, or health care; for retail tobacco and vapor-generating device shops; for designed smoking guest rooms in hotels; and in stand-alone bars.

It appears, obviously, that most support or opposition to this proposal is related to the offshore ban rather than the vaping component.

According to the Nassau County Supervisor of Elections, mail-in ballots will begin to be distributed next week. If you can be a little patient, I’ll conclude my summary of the Constitutional ballot proposals next Friday. You still have time to register to vote, to request a mail-in ballot, and, most importantly, study the ballot. Election Day is still over a month away on November 6.