1
1 STATE OF FLORIDA
CONSTITUTION REVISION COMMISSION
2
3
4
5
COMMISSION MEETING
6
7
8
9
DATE: February 23, 1998
10
TIME: Commenced at 1:00 p.m.
11 Concluded at 5:00 p.m.
12 PLACE: The Senate Chamber
The Capitol
13 Tallahassee, Florida
14 REPORTED BY: KRISTEN L. BENTLEY
JULIE L. DOHERTY, RPR
15 MONA L. WHIDDON
Court Reporters
16 Division of Administrative Hearings
The DeSoto Building
17 1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
2
1 APPEARANCES
2 W. DEXTER DOUGLASS, CHAIRMAN
3 CARLOS ALFONSO (EXCUSED)
CLARENCE E. ANTHONY (EXCUSED)
4 ANTONIO L. ARGIZ (ABSENT)
JUDGE THOMAS H. BARKDULL, JR.
5 MARTHA WALTERS BARNETT (EXCUSED UNTIL 4:09 P.M.)
PAT BARTON
6 ROBERT M. BROCHIN
THE HONORABLE ROBERT A. BUTTERWORTH
7 KEN CONNOR
CHRIS CORR (ABSENT)
8 SENATOR ANDER CRENSHAW
VALERIE EVANS
9 MARILYN EVANS-JONES
BARBARA WILLIAMS FORD-COATES
10 ELLEN CATSMAN FREIDIN
PAUL HAWKES
11 WILLIAM CLAY HENDERSON
THE HONORABLE TONI JENNINGS
12 THE HONORABLE GERALD KOGAN
DICK LANGLEY
13 JOHN F. LOWNDES
STANLEY MARSHALL (EXCUSED)
14 JACINTA MATHIS
JON LESTER MILLS
15 FRANK MORSANI
ROBERT LOWRY NABORS
16 CARLOS PLANAS
JUDITH BYRNE RILEY
17 KATHERINE FERNANDEZ RUNDLE
SENATOR JIM SCOTT
18 H. T. SMITH
ALAN C. SUNDBERG
19 JAMES HAROLD THOMPSON
PAUL WEST (EXCUSED)
20 JUDGE GERALD T. WETHERINGTON
STEPHEN NEAL ZACK
21
IRA H. LEESFIELD (ABSENT)
22 LYRA BLIZZARD LOGAN (ABSENT)
23
24
25
3
1 PROCEEDINGS
2 SECRETARY BLANTON: Quorum call. Quorum call. All
3 commissioners indicate your presence. All commissioners
4 indicate your presence.
5 Quorum present, Mr. Chairman.
6 (Quorum taken and recorded electronically.)
7 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Would all
8 unauthorized persons please leave the chamber. Will the
9 commissioners and the guests in the gallery please rise
10 for the opening prayer given this afternoon by Fred Harris
11 of Tallahassee.
12 MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and
13 gentlemen, let us prey.
14 Dear God, we stand on the threshold of a grand and
15 glorious future. We have the opportunity to participate
16 in a spiritual awakening for which this world has long
17 awaited. A time when we will recognize that we are all
18 children of one God and therefore brothers and sisters. A
19 time when we will embrace selfless service toward those in
20 need. A time when the predominant attitude will be one of
21 hope and expectation for better times to come. A time
22 when families will flourish and all endeavor to take the
23 highest path in their every decision. This future will be
24 when time and truth, beauty and goodness will be manifest
25 in all of our lives. But this effort will not appear
4
1 magically by divine fiat. It requires our daily
2 participation and contribution to make it a reality. It
3 requires a society which is built on a foundation of
4 equality, justice, and opportunity for all. That
5 foundation of love begins with our Constitution which
6 recognizes the fundamental rights and obligations shared
7 by all.
8 God, please bless the people who comprise this
9 Constitution Revision Commission and grant them the
10 wisdom, strength, and vision necessary to discern the
11 divine pattern and incorporate it into the amendments that
12 they propose. Help them fashion a Constitution which will
13 secure our freedom, protect our rights, and promote the
14 highest good for the people of Florida, and in so doing,
15 set an example for the world. We ask, dear Lord, that you
16 daily grant us tolerance to honor each person's path to
17 you. That you encourage us to count our blessings and
18 remind us not to neglect our time with you for it is in
19 our personal relationship with you that we are able to
20 become centered in your love. Having become so centered,
21 help us become a conduit for your love, spreading it to
22 all those we encounter. Amen.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Please remain standing for the
24 pledge of allegiance led this afternoon by Commissioner
25 Clay Henderson and his son Craig. Commissioner Henderson
5
1 and Craig.
2 (Pledge of Allegiance.)
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I think there are some other
4 family members present. Commissioner Mills, would you
5 like to introduce us to your family if they are around
6 where we can see them.
7 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. My wife
8 Beth; my mother, Marguerite; and my daughter, Marguerite,
9 the three-year-old who is going to be a member of the
10 commission some day. And by the way she's going, it could
11 be ten years.
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We're glad to have
13 you. Commissioner Henderson.
14 COMMISSIONER HENDERSON: At our last gathering Frank
15 Morsani leaned over to me and said, You know, I've spent
16 more time with you in the last six months than my family.
17 And I thought that would be a good idea for Frank to meet
18 the rest of my family. So Judge Mary Jane Henderson, my
19 wife, and our daughter, Ardis, on the front row there.
20 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right, is there anyone else?
21 I do see, Commissioner Lowndes, you're bashful and timid.
22 Our other Commissioner Lowndes, Rita is up here. Rita,
23 we'd like to recognize you.
24 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: She's been here so often, I
25 thought she was kind of a permanent member.
6
1 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: Mr. Chairman, as long as
2 we are doing this, since I've never done this before, I'd
3 like to introduce my husband, Brian Ford-Coates, who is
4 the official observer.
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: He's been a commissioner without
6 vote because he's made every proceeding I think we've had
7 along with Commissioner Ford-Coates who's been one of the
8 most diligent attendees and people we've had.
9 Commissioner Barkdull, you're recognized.
10 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Mr. Chairman, Members of the
11 Commission, you have received in the mail last week the
12 proposed calendar for this week and you have on your desk
13 the calendar of the date. Be sure you have the one that
14 says under the date, Monday, February 23rd, corrected.
15 And then the pink packet that you have on your desk will
16 correspond to that calendar.
17 If you have one that does not have "corrected" on it,
18 please raise your hand and the staff will substitute it
19 because there was a correction made in it. At this time,
20 Mr. Chairman, I'd like to defer to Chairman Mills of the
21 Style and Drafting Committee for his report of that
22 committee which lays out the groundwork rules for this
23 week.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Mills, you're
25 recognized.
7
1 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Mr. Chairman, members, you have
2 a very brief two paragraph description of an overview of
3 the way we're going to handle the 58 remaining proposals
4 before you this week. Let me just give you the
5 background, thinking of the Chairman and thinking of the
6 committee when doing this. We have over the course of the
7 last months traveled several thousands miles and
8 considered hundreds of proposals and we have now dwindled
9 those down to some 58 proposals.
10 This would be our first opportunity to actually look
11 at all of those at one time, a bit of a forest through the
12 trees issue. We can begin to see what the forest looks
13 like. And the way that these have been organized are by
14 topics that we believe, as the Style and Drafting
15 Committee, and we solicit your advice will be logical for
16 public consideration. That is, there are a series of
17 issues that would pass that relate to the environment.
18 There's a series of issues that you would pass that relate
19 to education, series that you would pass that relate to
20 the judiciary, to criminal justice, et cetera.
21 What you have before you in the long list is an
22 attempt to classify those by those various categories.
23 Ultimately, it will be our task as a commission to group
24 those for ballot and to draft ballot language again with
25 the goal that the public will be able to understand to the
8
1 maximum what we are doing. What you have before you
2 today, when you begin to consider these set of issues,
3 we've titled them, for example, the environment is one of
4 the first issues you'll consider. There are five or six
5 individual proposals that you've passed over this period
6 of months that relate topically to environment.
7 The method we would proceed with is, I've suggested
8 that we might limit debate on each of these topics since
9 we are relatively familiar at this point and that we would
10 consider each of these during that period of time. So we
11 will spend a couple of hours or an hour on the
12 environment, a couple of hours or an hour on elections.
13 And after that period of time, we will have -- some of
14 those proposals will have received 22 votes. Some of
15 those proposals will have received a majority of those
16 present and voting. And perhaps some of those will not
17 receive a majority.
18 The procedure from here is, because we are going back
19 to the public with three more hearings, just because
20 something does not receive 22 votes, but still receives a
21 majority, it was the thinking of our committee that they
22 should not at this point die. However, it was the
23 thinking of the committee that if at this point this --
24 and the wisdom of this commission in looking at all of the
25 proposals before us, if, in fact, a proposal is unable to
9
1 get even a majority, it probably will never pass ultimate
2 muster and it will probably be diverting to the public to
3 consider those proposals.
4 So anything that gets a majority or 22 votes
5 continues to public hearings. Now the language that you
6 saw, you see in here relating to reconsideration was
7 simply a method to allow those voters -- to allow the
8 input of the public again. For example, if you get a
9 majority vote but not 22 and you're persuaded during
10 public hearings that this is a better idea than you
11 thought, this reconsideration will allow you to bump that
12 up to 22 votes.
13 Conversely, if during the public hearings you're
14 persuaded what you previously voted for 22 votes is not a
15 good idea, you're entitled to move to reconsider, if you
16 get a majority and take that up again and that can be
17 ultimately then killed.
18 At that point, we then go on to Style and Drafting to
19 group these and ultimately come back for final passage.
20 Now I suspect there are a couple of questions and I'll be
21 glad to address them. Commissioner Connor.
22 COMMISSIONER CONNOR: Commissioner Mills, I have a
23 question about the procedure. And let me tell you frankly
24 one concern I have is that -- and several instances when
25 members of the public have contacted me about proposals
10
1 and lobbying the commission about those proposals on
2 matters that have already passed by a majority vote. I've
3 suggested to them that they keep their powder dry, wait
4 until the public hearing process to have input and be
5 heard at that time rather than burden the commission in
6 the interim by more paper, phone calls, E-mails, et
7 cetera.
8 And I'm concerned, frankly, that we, at least I have
9 been operating, perhaps mistakenly, under the premise that
10 for those matters that passed by majority vote they would
11 come to the public arena where the public would be heard
12 from. We could then take that information into account in
13 voting on proposals and we would have one last cut at
14 this.
15 So I'm -- I can appreciate the problem associated
16 with a rather large number of proposals that we have and
17 the desire to dwindle them down. But frankly, that's my
18 concern is that we would be asking members to pass again
19 without having had the benefit of public input which I, at
20 least, and members of the public understood they would
21 have before these matters were potentially eliminated for
22 lack of adequate consideration or lack of an adequate
23 vote.
24 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Well, that's a reasonable
25 question. That is the issue. If you want to, during this
11
1 week of consideration dwindle down at all. We have a
2 week, and it's probably the most focused time we have
3 because we have focused it down to a number of issues.
4 And, of course, there has been considerable public input.
5 If you look at the breadth of the proposals, I think
6 you'll see that -- it's hard to foretell what this
7 commission will do. There are not that many that are
8 likely to be killed by a majority vote, but there are
9 some. And so the question that you have as a commission,
10 as to whether you want to adopt this report, is whether
11 you want to do that. There are, I think, Mr. Chairman, 56
12 proposals. And the issue is, is this the time? Do we
13 know enough after having, I guess, several months of
14 public and committee input make a determination.
15 That was, I believe, the thinking of the committee
16 and chairman that if at this point it was unable to get
17 even a majority, that it was unlikely in the future that
18 it would get the requisite 22 votes.
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Hawkes is next.
20 You're next, Commissioner Smith.
21 COMMISSIONER HAWKES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
22 Commissioner Mills, I can appreciate with 56 proposals
23 that it would be desirable to cut them down so that Style
24 and Drafting could have an easier time performing their
25 job but also so the public could have an easier time in
12
1 offering their input to the commission. And instead of
2 maybe voting some up and some down, maybe if the
3 committee, the Style and Drafting Committee, came forward
4 and said, These are the proposals that have less than
5 maybe 18 votes when they passed.
6 And these proposals, we're not going to have a vote
7 on whether or not you support it or don't support it;
8 we're going to have a vote on whether or not you think it
9 ought to go forward or not go forward, change the question
10 so that if I vote no, I'm not voting against the proposal,
11 I'm voting against it going forward. And all we're doing
12 then is tying to narrow down the 56 to 40 or 50 or 20 or
13 whatever that number happens to be. But we start with
14 those that might have some question as to whether or not
15 they could receive 22 votes anyway if that would be
16 something the commission would support.
17 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Well, you also have that
18 information available before you in terms of how many got
19 more than 22 votes. But again, I think it was the feeling
20 of the committee at this point that this group is pretty
21 sensitive to public input. This group has had a lot of
22 time to think about these and that we may be coming to a
23 point at which it's time to make some final decision.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Smith?
25 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First
13
1 of all, I really appreciate the difficulty that Style and
2 Drafting has with regard to trying to decide how we're
3 going to get from where we are right now to the final
4 product. My input is as follows. One, I would hope that
5 with regard to those proposals that have already gotten 22
6 votes that we not vote again on those proposals at all at
7 this juncture.
8 We have some proposals, and I've discussed at least
9 one of them with a colleague that had won by one vote or
10 two votes, 14-13, 15-14. And a lot has to do sometimes,
11 as the Chair has indicated, with who is present. So with
12 a lot of those votes that are under 22, and I don't know
13 whether we want to just say under 22 or under 18 votes or
14 whatever. Obviously, I think that we should look at
15 readdressing those issues because I think that although
16 Commissioner Connor has a very good point about input of
17 the public, if, in fact, these are issues that I think
18 can't get the requisite number of votes eventually, at
19 least a majority vote, they are not going to get on the
20 ballot anyway.
21 So I really believe that there is a compromise in the
22 Style and Drafting recommendations and I would hope that
23 with regard to those that have 22 votes already that we
24 definitely move forward with having those issues, issues
25 that will be discussed at public hearing. And the other
14
1 issues, 14-13 votes, 15-12 votes, things like that, I have
2 no objection in taking another crack at those.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Nabors?
4 COMMISSIONER NABORS: The only comment I would add to
5 what Commissioner Smith said is, I understand the
6 procedure that we're going through, that even those who
7 got 20, 22 votes or even greater, that we would have the
8 opportunity to amend those by majority vote. If we just
9 wipe those off and take them up at the end, it would
10 probably take 22 votes to amend them. So there may be
11 some housekeeping we might need to do during this week,
12 even those who got more than 22.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Mills, do you want
14 to address that?
15 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Well, Mr. Chairman, that was
16 part of the sense of the committee and the Chairman in
17 doing this has a fair opportunity to readdress some of
18 these issues before we get to ultimate pairing in a higher
19 extraordinary way. There are some amendments to some of
20 the various proposals that are still pending that are
21 probably wise, some that are technical, and others that
22 just may simply make sense to the body. So I think
23 Commissioner Nabors' point is probably well taken.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Lowndes?
25 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Yes, I'm on the Style and
15
1 Drafting Committee and I think the Style and Drafting
2 Committee has come up with a good plan. I'd like to point
3 out a couple of things about it. And one of them is that
4 when something gets 22 votes under the Style and Drafting
5 Committee's proposed plan, that's a final vote on it
6 unless it is put up for reconsideration. The -- and we
7 don't have to deal with it again unless a majority of the
8 people want to deal with it again.
9 The second point I would make is, I think we have to
10 come to a time when we would begin to prioritize things.
11 There are a lot of things we've talked about that are good
12 ideas. And if you deal with them separately and
13 individually and in a vacuum, you would say, That's a good
14 idea. But we've got to come to the proposition and decide
15 which one of these good ideas are the ones we want to put
16 in the Constitution because I don't think we can put all
17 56 or 58 or whatever on the ballot because I think if we
18 do, we are going to create a self-defeating circumstance.
19 So I think when we vote on these as in the style --
20 proposed for the Style and Drafting Committee, I think
21 that we need to prioritize. I think we need to decide
22 which one of our good ideas we want on the ballot. And I
23 think this gives us the opportunity to do that. Thank
24 you.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Smith?
16
1 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Question of Commissioner
2 Lowndes. Commissioner Lowndes, let's just take an issue.
3 Judge Barkdull, Proposal 153 corrects the schedule which
4 deals with JQC. It had 22 votes, 22 to 0.
5 Now does that mean that that will not be voted on
6 again this week?
7 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Yes, it will be voted on this
8 week.
9 COMMISSIONER SMITH: It will be voted on this week?
10 COMMISSIONER LOWNDES: Yes, sir. And if it's voted
11 on this week and if it gets 22 votes, that is a final vote
12 with respect to that unless it's reconsidered. But in the
13 final vote -- the final, final vote is going to be when
14 that is grouped in a series of technical amendments.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Somebody that hasn't
16 spoken. Y'all have both spoken. Somebody else that
17 hasn't spoken wants to speak? Now Commissioner
18 Wetherington I think is trying to go.
19 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: I'm just trying to get
20 clear what we're going to be doing this week. We voted on
21 these things, how many times are we going to vote on them?
22 I mean, at some point or later, you know, we have to make
23 a decision on some of these things. And I think we can't
24 keep postponing and deferring. We've had 12 days of
25 public hearings, 5,000 letters and stuff like that. We've
17
1 had a lot of input already and we've discussed these
2 things in committee and here a great deal. There's some
3 we have to keep working on that are very complicated and
4 are going to require maybe further analysis.
5 But it seems like we should be at the point where we
6 should be taking some votes this week and things that
7 clearly aren't going to make it, we should get rid of.
8 And in that spirit, I've got one that's a proposal I have
9 and I know it has a very slight majority and I'm probably
10 going to withdraw it because it isn't going anywhere.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: What's the number? We'll do it
12 right now.
13 (Laughter.)
14 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: I'll do it right now if
15 you want me to.
16 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I didn't want to ask you -- to
17 see if I understand what you're talking about, today and
18 this week the items that will be on the agenda, no matter
19 what the vote was, except those that have died by not
20 getting a majority vote, anything that got over a majority
21 vote we'll run through them and vote. Those that get 22
22 votes, that will be a final vote on that proposal unless
23 somebody moves to reconsider; is that correct?
24 COMMISSIONER MILLS: That's correct.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: So if there is no motion like on
18
1 these 28 to nothings, if there is no motion to reconsider,
2 that's a final vote, it's over. Then those that get a
3 majority vote will go forward for public hearing along
4 with those that received the 22 votes and then when we
5 come back to our next meeting, we'll have nothing but
6 final votes; is that right? And reconsideration of those
7 that got 22 votes?
8 COMMISSIONER MILLS: That's correct. And as you
9 evaluate this proposal, think about the constraints we're
10 dealing with. We -- to take any final votes, final, final
11 votes this week before we go back to public hearings
12 doesn't make sense. I mean, in other words, 22 votes that
13 we say we made our final decision without potential for
14 reconsideration before going back to the public.
15 However, we have learned enough in the last four
16 months to know that there are some issues which need to be
17 changed. And furthermore, when you sit down and look at
18 the relationship of these issues to each other, and that
19 is when you look at all of the issues we've dealt with
20 that dealt with the judiciary, all the issues we've dealt
21 with that deal with elections, I think it helps your
22 perspective as to see which things that you wish to go
23 forward.
24 In other words, it is a useful process to discuss
25 these things in context on this day knowing that you have
19
1 a chance to correct these, a chance to move some forward
2 and to face the public hearings and final decision, but
3 this is the first time you have had a chance -- it is the
4 first time you have had a chance to see the entire
5 spectrum of what you passed.
6 And so I think, Mr. Chairman, that it was the intent
7 of the committee to try to provide a fair process
8 considering the upcoming public hearings and to be fair to
9 the commission in terms of maximizing the commission's
10 input. Of course we're willing to accept all
11 reasonable --
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: And I'm going to recognize
13 Commissioner Henderson who has not been recognized. I'll
14 get back to you fellows that have been speaking before.
15 COMMISSIONER HENDERSON: I'm just trying -- thank
16 you, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Mills, helping me
17 understand this. First of all, I think you've all done an
18 outstanding job of trying to bring this back together for
19 us to attempt to winnow (sic) this a little bit before we
20 go to public hearing. But I'm not sure about the
21 statements that are being made here about this might be
22 the last time we vote on something because the reality of
23 it is that if it gets 22 votes and it goes to public
24 hearing, then the next thing the committee is going to do
25 is to vote to group these things. And what will be back
20
1 before us will be either -- would be something that --
2 we're getting close to ballot language at that point.
3 So you're going to look at a grouped question or
4 whether or not an individual matter is worthy of standing
5 on its own. So even though we might not be -- I think you
6 all said we voted on this last time this week. We're
7 still coming back for the grouping, are we not, and for a
8 final vote on the actual language of the proposition as it
9 goes to the voters; is that not correct?
10 COMMISSIONER MILLS: That's correct. And really if
11 you -- there are a couple of different policy issues.
12 This would be the last time with some exceptions you see
13 these things as individual proposals.
14 (Off-the-record comment.)
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Thompson?
16 COMMISSIONER MILLS: Next time we can come back we
17 will have to start grouping these things.
18 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Thompson?
19 COMMISSION THOMPSON: Mr. Chairman, a lot of good
20 questions have been raised. I had one or two myself on
21 how we're going to respond to the public when they come up
22 and want something to be killed dead, dead, dead. Or if
23 there is something that nobody has filed and they want us
24 to talk about. I wonder though, Mr. Chairman, if it
25 wouldn't be wise for us just to go ahead with what we know
21
1 we have before us. We have some reconsiderations and we
2 have some issues, I think, like some of the sovereign
3 immunity issues and so forth that we haven't dealt with,
4 get on with our business. We can talk about this as we go
5 today and maybe come up with some kind of a unanimity.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Yeah, I think that would be a
7 good proposal to save time. We can debate this a long
8 time but I think it would be more appropriate to move
9 forward. We have a page or so here of items that have to
10 be reconsidered and a couple that have not been considered
11 that are on today. When we conclude that, we can come
12 back to this motion and that will give everybody time to
13 think about it.
14 If that's agreeable, the Chair will rule we will
15 temporarily pass this motion until such time as we
16 complete the current special order which includes the
17 matters on reconsideration and the two or three items that
18 are up for special order today.
19 All right. With that being the case, Commissioner
20 Barkdull, I'd call on you to direct us to the calendar,
21 please.
22 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Well, you've got the calendar
23 in front of you and the ruling of the Chair, then let's
24 revert to the order of business as established in the
25 calendar. The first matter that's up on reconsideration
22
1 is Proposal No. 13 by the Committee on Declaration of
2 Rights. It's pending on a motion to reconsider by
3 Commissioner Riley.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. This was on the
5 committee substitute for Proposal 13 by the Committee on
6 Declaration of Rights and Commissioner Brochin. Read it,
7 please.
8 READING CLERK: Committee substitute for Proposal
9 No. 13, a proposal to revise Article 1, Section 22,
10 Florida Constitution; providing that a defendant charged
11 with a capital offense may not be sentenced to death
12 unless such sentence is recommended by 9 members of a jury
13 of 12 persons.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: For those of you that weren't
15 here and haven't been paying too much close attention
16 today, this is the capital offense proposal. It was
17 originally the proposal by Commissioner Brochin which was
18 a 9-3 vote to impose the death penalty.
19 He changed it to a unanimous vote by amendment, or
20 sought to. It was then amended to provide for three
21 alternative sentences including the death penalty, life
22 imprisonment, solitary confinement, or life imprisonment
23 without parole in both instances. And I think that was
24 what was adopted, was it not, Commissioner Brochin?
25 And then it was on a motion to reconsider. It is now
23
1 a motion to reconsider that vote made by Commissioner
2 Riley. We will debate the motion to reconsider only. Is
3 there anything to be -- anybody wants to say on the motion
4 whether or not we reconsider. Commissioner Scott?
5 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner
6 Mills, I have an inquiry of the Chair. This matter will
7 today be then voted on reconsideration or not voted or
8 whatever. Now are we going to take that up again and vote
9 on it again this week?
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: No. I rule we don't. It would
11 be superfluous to do it again this week. We're having the
12 same vote on this we're going to have on the others,
13 Commissioner Scott. It either does or doesn't. Now I'm
14 perfectly amenable if the committee -- the Rules Committee
15 wants to bring it up again during the week, that's fine
16 with me. But my own thought is if we have the debate on
17 it today, if it's defeated on reconsideration, then we
18 must then go back to it. If it's granted on
19 reconsideration we have to address it. So we're on
20 reconsideration at the moment only. The question may be
21 premature.
22 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, it may be
23 premature because we've got these other items on
24 reconsideration. And my question is, are we going to
25 debate and vote on them on reconsideration today and then
24
1 redebate them later this week again and when it would
2 require 22 votes I assume to do something.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: What I perceive is right now
4 we're on the issue of whether or not we're going to vote
5 to reconsider. If that fails, then the -- it will stand
6 as it passed, as an issue. It would then go on the
7 calendar the same as the other items that received
8 majority vote and probably be placed at the end of the
9 special order. That's up to you-all on the committee.
10 Rather than take it up the second time today, if it
11 votes to reconsider it, and then we go back and debate it,
12 I think we could consider whether or not we wanted to
13 consider that the final vote on it. It might not get the
14 majority vote on reconsideration either, Commissioner
15 Scott, we haven't reached that point yet.
16 I'm saying, you have a valid question but it may be
17 premature. We're on the motion to reconsider regardless
18 where we wind up. Commissioner Brochin, Commissioner
19 Riley's motion, but you want to address it, correct?
20 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: I'd like to, yes.
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Okay.
22 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: I'm not sure I understand
23 procedurally where we're going.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Right now we're on the motion to
25 reconsider. If it fails, then we'll deal with that next.
25
1 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: Let me argue then in favor of
2 the motion to reconsider with the idea that we should not
3 pass out the proposal that was passed out last time we
4 were here. And by way of reminder, and this could go back
5 to what Commissioner Mills was addressing as a close vote,
6 the proposal that passed that is supposedly going forward,
7 I believe passed by 16 to 13 and it was therefore
8 relatively close.
9 I will tell you there are two components to this, the
10 proposal that we passed by 16 to 13 which I'd ask you to
11 reconsider because I consider it to be a very poor idea,
12 both in terms of practicality but even more so a poor idea
13 for our Constitution. By way of reminder, what that
14 proposal did was to mandate the jury and the jury only to
15 make a decision on the sentencing in capital offenses.
16 And it would now give juries three options under that
17 scheme that would be a mandate.
18 It would not only be a jury mandate, what it does do,
19 it reverted it back to a 7-5 or simple majority vote of
20 that jury and that jury would have the option of, as I
21 understand it, the penalty of death, the penalty of life
22 imprisonment without parole, the penalty of life
23 imprisonment in solitary confinement, and I suppose the
24 fourth provision would be life imprisonment.
25 This is not, in my view, appropriate language for the
26
1 Constitution.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Now we're on the
3 motion to reconsider, not arguing the proposal.
4 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: Okay. Well, I thought that's
5 why we ought to reconsider --
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's why you want to reconsider
7 it. You feel that what's now there should not be what we
8 do.
9 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: I believe that we ought to
10 defeat this proposal and this proposal should not go
11 forward as a constitutional amendment on the death
12 penalty, and that's why I ask that it be reconsidered and
13 you vote in favor of it. And beyond that, I suppose there
14 are more articulate reasons as to why.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: If the motion to reconsider
16 passes, obviously you'll have an opportunity to debate
17 anything you want to debate. Anybody on the motion to
18 reconsider? Commissioner Smith, excuse me -- Commissioner
19 Evans?
20 COMMISSIONER EVANS: I have a question.
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Yes, Commissioner Evans.
22 COMMISSIONER EVANS: If we vote to reconsider and
23 then -- well, I don't know at what point, but is there
24 ever a possibility that the original language would get a
25 chance to get substituted back in?
27
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Well, you can offer an amendment
2 if it's voted to -- if we vote to reconsider, it is open
3 for amendment. You can offer any kind of amendment.
4 COMMISSIONER EVANS: And that would be when we are on
5 reconsideration, not on the vote for reconsideration?
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's right. It would be after
7 this vote. If it is successful that it be reconsidered,
8 you can offer any amendment you want.
9 COMMISSIONER EVANS: Okay. Thank you.
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Smith?
11 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am
12 asking that we vote to reconsider it for the reason raised
13 by Senator Scott with his question because if we vote to
14 reconsider it, the vote we then take is this week's vote,
15 we have got to take this week's vote anyway. In other
16 words, it's 16-13, correct, and with it being 16-13, at
17 some point we have got to vote on it.
18 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Well, let's vote on
19 the reconsider -- I told him I'd wait and rule to see if
20 we reconsidered it and then I'm going to ask the Rules
21 Committee to meet and caucus and tell me how to rule on
22 that point. But at this point, we are on the motion to
23 reconsider. Commissioner Morsani?
24 COMMISSIONER MORSANI: If we vote not to reconsider
25 it, can we kill this devil?
28
1 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: No, you would have to kill it
2 when it comes back up for --
3 COMMISSIONER MORSANI: But it's not going to be
4 reconsidered.
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: No, no, it passed. So you'll
6 reconsider --
7 COMMISSIONER MORSANI: I don't want anything to do
8 with it. How do we do that?
9 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: You have to wait. You have to
10 wait. Commissioner Barkdull? You can pass the
11 reconsideration and then vote against it. Commissioner
12 Barkdull?
13 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Mr. Chairman, that's a point
14 I just wanted to make to Commissioner Morsani. I'm in the
15 same boat he is. I'm going to vote to reconsider but that
16 doesn't mean I'm going to vote for it on the merits
17 because I'm going to vote to defeat it.
18 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Very well. Does everybody
19 understand? Once it is on reconsideration you get to vote
20 all over again. If you don't like it, you can vote no,
21 you can vote for amendments, you can vote to pass it, you
22 can vote whatever you want to.
23 COMMISSIONER MORSANI: Let me ask Commissioner
24 Thompson, is that okay?
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Let's get his view, the minority
29
1 view.
2 COMMISSIONER THOMPSON: Glad you asked that because I
3 want everybody to understand what we're talking about.
4 This thing has passed. Do you understand that? I mean,
5 it has passed like so many things have passed and somebody
6 has filed a motion to reconsider. So if you want it to
7 stay passed, you vote against the motion to reconsider.
8 If you want to bring it up, change it, or if you want to
9 defeat it, you vote for the motion to reconsider.
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Let's get on to the motion to
11 reconsider. All those in favor of the motion to
12 reconsider, say aye. Opposed.
13 (Verbal vote taken.)
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Motion to reconsider carries.
15 We're now on the proposal as amended. And I recognize --
16 do you have an amendment on the table? Does somebody have
17 an amendment on the table? No amendments on the table.
18 All right. Commissioner Brochin?
19 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: Actually, I'd like to seek at
20 this point a clarification. If I understand it correctly,
21 now that we have, are reconsidering it and we are going to
22 vote on this, if we defeat the proposal that we once
23 passed, then I am assuming it would revert back to the
24 amendment that I initially filed?
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: No, if you defeat this, it is a
30
1 dead subject only to a motion to reconsider to be heard
2 tomorrow. Or to be made by tomorrow and heard the next
3 day.
4 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: But the motion that passed,
5 the amendment that passed --
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: It won't even do that unless it
7 is amended.
8 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: But the amendment that passed
9 that we are reconsidering was a substituted amendment for
10 the amendment that I offered on the unanimous --
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The Chair rules if you vote to
12 kill this, you vote no on the pending proposal, which is
13 the way it was amended and the way it was passed; if you
14 vote against that, it's dead. But if you vote for it,
15 just like it is now, and it gets a majority vote, it would
16 go forward. Commissioner Barkdull?
17 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Mr. Chair, if there is a vote
18 for it, now as amended, and it should pass, it would be
19 subject to a reconsideration. Or if it fails, it would be
20 subject to a reconsideration.
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: It is okay with me. I'll
22 reconsider it forever. All I want to do is just get a
23 vote on it. Commissioner Scott?
24 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, I still think it
25 is important to clarify that this matter is now back on
31
1 its first vote and so whatever happens to it happens. But
2 if it goes forward, it is still going to -- if it is voted
3 positively, it would still have to be revoted later this
4 week if that's the procedure --
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's correct.
6 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: -- the commission follows. But
7 if it fails, it's dead.
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's correct too. All right,
9 debate on the proposal. Commissioner Wetherington?
10 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: With all due respect, the
11 suggestion of an option which includes life imprisonment
12 with solitary confinement, I have never heard of anything
13 like that, it's as unrealistic as anything in the world I
14 can think about. Talking about taking somebody and
15 sticking them by themselves for life, I mean, it is almost
16 unthinkable.
17 What does this advance anything? You are keeping the
18 same ability to kill somebody, you are keeping the same
19 ability to put them in life, and you are putting a couple
20 of other things in. To me it seems like, with all
21 deference, it seems like a terrible proposal. I'd rather
22 have absolutely nothing than to have this.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Wetherington, do you
24 realize that's a federal law and the person that was
25 convicted in Denver was sentenced to that sentence?
32
1 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: I think it is ridiculous.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's fine, but you said you
3 never heard about it.
4 COMMISSIONER WETHERINGTON: No, I didn't hear about
5 that, but I think it is ridiculous.
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: We get your point. All right.
7 Any further debate on the proposal? All right. Are you
8 ready to vote? Are you ready to vote? I am told somebody
9 has an amendment. Now, it is not on the table. If you
10 have an amendment, it has to be on the table.
11 Commissioner Brochin, do you have one on the table?
12 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: Because of the ruling, which
13 I'm not sure I understand nor agree with, I wanted to get
14 a vote, and I still do, that if this proposal is defeated,
15 that we consider, which we never have, and never voted on,
16 the amendment that I offered for unanimous jury
17 consideration. So I still have to believe, if you think
18 this through logically, if you are defeating this
19 amendment, which was the substitute amendment for my
20 original amendment on reconsideration, then if you defeat
21 it, then my amendment for unanimous consideration has to
22 be considered at that time.
23 If that's not the case, which seems to make sense to
24 me, then I need to get an amendment to put back the
25 amendment that I originally filed to the committee
33
1 substitute.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Is it your understanding that if
3 somebody -- now that we are on reconsideration, we voted
4 to reconsider it, if somebody moved to reconsider the
5 amendment we could proceed on that?
6 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Yes, exactly, Mr. Chairman, how
7 did you know?
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I finally figured out that's what
9 he wants to do. So what he wants is a motion -- but it
10 has to be somebody that voted with the prevailing side on
11 the amendment. I think it passed. We voted on the
12 amendment. The amendment he wants to get out of the way
13 is the one that replaced his.
14 Commissioners, what he wants to do is remove the
15 amendment that passed to replace the one that he had which
16 was to provide for a unanimous jury verdict for death.
17 That's what he is trying to get to.
18 (Off-the-record comment.)
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's correct. So if he moves
20 to reconsider that, it won't work. It goes then back to
21 the 9-3 vote; is that correct? Why doesn't somebody just
22 offer an amendment to accomplish what you want to
23 accomplish? There is now an amendment on the table.
24 Please read the amendment.
25 READING CLERK: By Commissioner Brochin on Page 1,
34
1 Line 23 through 31, delete and insert all of said lines
2 and insert, Death by unanimous vote of the jury.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. There is an amendment
4 to strike everything except death by unanimous vote of the
5 jury will now be the requirement for death penalty; is
6 that right, Commissioner Brochin, is that your amendment?
7 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: If I can just get a second to
8 look at it. (Pause.) It is closer. I hesitate. If you
9 will pass this, I will write the amendment so I can get it
10 in the proper procedural posture.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We are going to take
12 a five-minute recess for Commissioner Brochin to write his
13 amendment. We are not going to do it except by the rules.
14 And we will take a five-minute recess. Now you get your
15 stuff together there and get us an amendment, please, sir.
16 (Brief recess.)
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Come to order, please. Everybody
18 take their seat.
19 SECRETARY BLANTON: All commissioners indicate your
20 presence. Quorum call. Quorum call. All commissioners
21 indicate your presence.
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Do we have a quorum?
23 SECRETARY BLANTON: Quorum present, Mr. Chairman.
24 (Quorum taken and recorded electronically.)
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Everybody be seated. All right.
35
1 Commissioner Brochin has the floor and he's offering an
2 amendment which is on the table. Would you read the
3 amendment, please? All right. Everybody pay attention
4 here, it's the Brochin amendment we have been waiting for
5 with bated breath. Read the amendment, please.
6 READING CLERK: By Commissioner Brochin on Page 1,
7 Lines 20 through 31, delete all of said lines and insert,
8 No person shall be sentenced to death unless unanimously
9 recommended by a 12-person jury. This subsection shall
10 not retroactively affect any death sentence imposed before
11 its effective date.
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Brochin,
13 you are recognized on your amendment.
14 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: This is the proposal that I
15 brought forward very early in the process, in fact, that's
16 why it got its original number so low at 13. Let me just
17 take one minute to explain the mechanics of it before I
18 tell you why we ought to and why we need to do this.
19 The way this works is actually not only fundamentally
20 fair but it is fundamentally simple. And it works this
21 way, the 12-persons who try and listen to the evidence as
22 to whether the defendant is guilty would then again go
23 into a sentencing hearing phase which is done today, they
24 would hear evidence regarding whether or not the death
25 penalty should be imposed for this particular defendant.
36
1 After that same 12-person jury that heard the
2 evidence as to whether or not he was guilty, and after
3 that same 12 person jury hears the evidence on whether or
4 not the death penalty shall be imposed, they would then
5 make a recommendation to the judge as to whether the death
6 sentence should be imposed.
7 This would be a constitutional protection or
8 threshold that would say unless all 12, just like they did
9 when they voted to convict them, voted to invoke the death
10 penalty, then the court would not have the option, when
11 sentencing, of sentencing him to death but could use all
12 other options available under the criminal laws for
13 sentencing.
14 If, on the other hand, the 12-person jury unanimously
15 recommends that sentence be imposed, then the judge takes
16 that recommendation and has the clear constitutional
17 authority to go ahead and impose the death sentence.
18 This is the way 28 states out of 38 states in our
19 country do it. They require as a minimum threshold
20 requirement that they unanimously say that we have heard
21 the evidence on this case and we, the same jury, believe
22 that we should also invoke the death penalty for this
23 case, because it is of such heinous and atrocity that
24 penalty is deserving in this state.
25 It does not eliminate the death penalty, it does not
37
1 increase the death penalty. It simply places in our
2 Constitution a protection to say that with all of the
3 other arbitrary and capricious factors, with all the other
4 human elements that go into this, the state of Florida
5 uniformly, whether you are in Pensacola, Jacksonville,
6 Miami or Orlando, we all know that 12 persons will have
7 unanimously said that the penalty is appropriate in these
8 circumstances.
9 Now a lot has been written about the death penalty.
10 And even when I got home to Miami there is a special
11 edition saying more than ever, the courts labor in the
12 shadow of the death penalty. It is frustrating, divisive
13 and so time consuming that it threatens the quality of
14 justice in the rest of the courts case loads; asking, is
15 "Old Sparky" worth it.
16 As we struggle, and we will struggle in the next 20
17 years to implement this penalty, there are going to be a
18 lot of factors that are going to be out of the citizenry's
19 control. This is a protection to know that 12 people
20 unanimously believe it is appropriate. It takes 12 people
21 to convict, it takes 12 people to take our property
22 unanimously in this state, it takes 12 people to take
23 15 -- or six people unanimously to take $15,000 out of our
24 pocket.
25 Certainly we ought to have the constitutional
38
1 protection in that before the Governor of this state, the
2 Chief Justice of this state, the Attorney General of this
3 state move forward under their due constitutional
4 authority, that they know that 12 people who heard that
5 evidence believe that this is appropriate.
6 It will take out some of the arbitrary results that
7 we have seen. And if that doesn't convince you, if that
8 doesn't convince you, this statistic should: In the last
9 20 years, 70 people in death rows in this country, 70,
10 have been released because of indicia of innocence.
11 Seventy. With DNA evidence developing the way it is, with
12 scientific evidence developing the way it is, human beings
13 make mistakes. That's why our entire criminal justice
14 system is built on the premise that you have to show not
15 that they are guilty, but that they are guilty beyond a
16 reasonable doubt.
17 And I suggest to you, most humbly, that when it comes
18 to the ultimate sentence of death, that we should not have
19 not only no reasonable doubt, we should have no doubt.
20 And therefore the time for this proposal has come.
21 Florida needs to step up to where the rest of the country
22 is in terms of trying to implement this penalty.
23 Now I know, and I know this from talking to many of
24 you, you are concerned about putting this on the ballot.
25 That it is not going to pass, that it is not a popular
39
1 cause. And, indeed, it is not a popular cause. But
2 constitutions by their very essence are not supposed to be
3 about just popular issues. They are supposed to be about
4 protections of our liberties and our democracy. And we do
5 turn guilty people free and we do make sure before we
6 execute people that they are guilty, even at the expense
7 of not executing people because that's what democracy
8 demands.
9 And our state is behind on this. Our state needs to
10 be where it is all 12 say yes. So I ask that you think
11 about this. I think that -- I don't want to say, keep it
12 alive because that's becoming already pass‚ here, but
13 let's hear what the people have to say about this. I
14 think we are underestimating greatly by saying this is a
15 bad issue, it is going to pull all the issues down, there
16 are no constituents out there because I don't think you
17 are going to present it as whether it is for the death
18 penalty or against the death penalty.
19 I think I'm going to ask them this question, and that
20 question is: Should we have 12 jurors telling us which
21 cases are appropriate for the death penalty?
22 So for all those reasons I ask that you think, think
23 hard and pass this amendment.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Barkdull.
25 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Will the gentleman yield for
40
1 questions?
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: He yields.
3 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Commissioner Brochin, what
4 public hearing did we have any testimony that requested
5 this?
6 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: We had no public hearing of
7 anybody that requested it. I will tell you I had no
8 letters of anybody writing me to ask me to put this on the
9 ballot. I don't think there is any public ground swell as
10 a popular issue. This is not a popular issue.
11 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Mr. Brochin, this is
12 something that can be done by statute; can it not?
13 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: Yes.
14 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Thank you.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Any further debate on the
16 amendment? Everybody understand the amendment? All in
17 favor of the amendment say aye. All opposed.
18 (Verbal vote taken.)
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Let's vote. Open the machine.
20 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Lock the machine and record the
22 vote.
23 READING CLERK: Twelve yeas, 16 nays, Mr. Chairman.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The amendment fails.
25 We now are on the proposal which was a committee
41
1 substitute, proposal as amended. I guess -- can you read
2 -- I presume what we need to read is the amendment in
3 order to read what we are voting on. The proposal was
4 amended.
5 (Off-the-record comment.)
6 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. What we are on now is
7 the amendment which, proposal rather, which passed which
8 was that the jury would set, in death cases, a penalty of
9 death by a seven to five vote, life imprisonment, solitary
10 confinement as an alternative by a seven to five vote, or
11 life imprisonment without parole. That's what's before
12 the body. Commissioner Kogan.
13 COMMISSIONER KOGAN: Mr. Chairman, can I ask a
14 question? Am I to understand that this will require on
15 the verdict form that goes to the jury during the
16 bifurcated section dealing with penalty, three different
17 categories; one death, the other life imprisonment and
18 solitary confinement and the other life imprisonment
19 without possibility of parole?
20 And the second question is: Is the jury's vote
21 mandatory upon the judge? Can anybody answer that
22 question? I don't know.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I think Commissioner Langley
24 offered an amendment which said the judge, it would
25 recommend to the judge, didn't you, Commissioner Langley,
42
1 when it was on the floor?
2 COMMISSIONER LANGLEY: No, sir, Mr. Chairman. This
3 was your idea and you wanted it binding on the judge,
4 whatever -- the jury actually became the sentencing body,
5 but the sentence was announced and actually adjudicated by
6 the judge.
7 COMMISSIONER KOGAN: The reason I raise that point --
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: There would be no override.
9 COMMISSIONER KOGAN: -- is under the terms and
10 conditions of the U. S. Supreme Court's decision in Furman
11 vs. Georgia, and subsequent decisions, you cannot have a
12 jury death penalty vote that's binding on the judge.
13 That's the reason I raise that particular point, just a
14 point of information.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. So you rise in
16 opposition to the proposal, sir?
17 COMMISSIONER KOGAN: Well I wouldn't like us to go
18 ahead and adopt a proposal that on its face violates the
19 U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Furman vs. Georgia.
20 That's the problem that I am having here unless somebody
21 can show me that this doesn't violate it.
22 Because very simply, as a result of Furman vs.
23 Georgia, Florida had to reinstitute the death penalty with
24 a new death penalty law in the Legislature setting up
25 aggravating and mitigating circumstances and certain
43
1 requirements to conform to that particular opinion before
2 a valid death sentence can be imposed. That's the reason
3 I raise this.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I understand, I think everybody
5 else does. Does anybody else want to speak in favor or
6 against the proposal? Commissioner Brochin.
7 COMMISSIONER BROCHIN: I'd like to speak against it.
8 I think this is a bad idea. Not only do I think it is
9 unconstitutional because it takes out, as Judge or
10 Commissioner Kogan mentioned, the discretion of the judge
11 to sentence, I think writing into your Constitution a
12 lock-down of votes as to how a jury should sentence people
13 is improper for a constitutional amendment. Could be
14 proper for a statutory process, but it is wholly
15 inappropriate Constitutionally.
16 I also think that we have not thought through this
17 third alternative, if you will, of solitary confinement --
18 life imprisonment, solitary confinement, for whatever that
19 means, I'm not really sure. But certainly before we go
20 forward and lock it down in the Constitution, which would
21 be very difficult to change at some subsequent time, we
22 ought to know what we are saying when we say life
23 imprisonment and solitary confinement.
24 It is not an amendment that I think will do us proud
25 to take to the public to tell them that this is an option
44
1 that we have conceived of and are asking to be put in the
2 Constitution.
3 So therefore in light of this commission's will not
4 to require unanimous verdicts, it seems to me that this
5 idea ought to be defeated and we will simply have the
6 status quo.
7 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Anybody else? Anybody want to be
8 heard? If not, we will vote on the proposal. Does
9 everybody understand what we are voting on? Unlock the
10 machine.
11 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Has everybody voted? Lock the
13 machine and announce the vote.
14 READING CLERK: Zero yeas, 29 nays, Mr. Chairman.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: By your vote you have defeated
16 this. It is no longer with us for future reference. It
17 is finis, under any interpretations, Commissioner Smith.
18 All right. The next item on the special order,
19 Proposal No. 130. Would you read it, please?
20 READING CLERK: Proposal 130, a proposal to revise
21 Article XI, Section 3, of the Florida Constitution;
22 requiring an initiative petition to be signed by a
23 specified percentage of the electors from each
24 congressional district.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: A motion by Commissioner Freidin
45
1 to reconsider.
2 (Off-the-record comment by Commissioner Freidin.)
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Freidin, your mic
4 isn't on.
5 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: Then turn it on.
6 (Laughter.)
7 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: Thank you, Madam Secretary.
8 Actually this is Commissioner Zack's motion to reconsider,
9 but I guess, Commissioner Zack, you want me to talk for
10 it, talk to it.
11 The reason that I believe that Commissioner Zack
12 moved to reconsider, which would be my thinking as well,
13 was this was -- this matter came before you on the report
14 of the Select Committee on Initiatives. And we suggested,
15 you will recall, a program that was perhaps overly
16 ambitious. And the idea behind the motion to reconsider
17 is to discuss with you and to hope that perhaps you would
18 vote to reconsider this matter so that it could be amended
19 and make the program a little bit less ambitious.
20 Let me be a little more specific. The proposal that
21 came from the special or the Select Committee on
22 Initiatives was, really had two aspects to it. One was to
23 increase the number of congressional districts to all,
24 where you had to collect signatures. And the second part
25 of it was the idea of having public hearings and a
46
1 timetable that would slow down the initiative or the
2 process to get on the ballot a little bit. So there were
3 really two discrete aspects.
4 The debate seemed to center, at least in my
5 recollection, the debate seemed to center more on the
6 concern about increasing the requirements that signatures
7 be gathered from all congressional districts than on the
8 question of the public hearings.
9 And the purpose of the motion to reconsider is simply
10 to bring this back up so that we could amend the proposal
11 in order to take out the congressional districts and leave
12 that as it is, and simply add in the public hearings and
13 the timetable that would go with the public hearings.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We're on the motion
15 to reconsider. We read this; didn't we? Okay. Any
16 further discussion on the motion to reconsider?
17 Commissioner Henderson.
18 COMMISSIONER HENDERSON: Mr. Chairman, in opposition
19 to the motion to reconsider. The whole amendment went
20 through all those issues regarding the initiative process.
21 And I guess as Ms. Freidin, Commissioner Freidin was
22 on behalf of Commissioner Zack, I'll be on behalf of
23 Commissioner Anthony, who we all know is on his honeymoon
24 this week, I presume he is on his honeymoon this week. We
25 presume that, we don't know. You know, every way you try
47
1 to tinker with the initiative process caused some kind of
2 unintended consequences, which is why I think so many of
3 us felt that we didn't need to tinker with it at all.
4 So I guess we can spend a lot of time continuing to
5 rehash this issue, but I really don't think we're going to
6 get anywhere with it.
7 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Zack, in whose name
8 Commissioner Freidin spoke and in whose name Commissioner
9 Henderson asked the question, you're recognized.
10 COMMISSIONER ZACK: Speaking on behalf of
11 Ms. Freidin, who I moved to reconsider because she
12 couldn't, that was the whole basis for the motion to
13 reconsider. I was opposed to it before, I plan to vote
14 against it again. The fact of the matter is that it is
15 time that this matter be put to bed and we get on to some
16 important matters that we do have before us.
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Rundle.
18 COMMISSIONER RUNDLE: Question for Commissioner
19 Freidin. Does this include each, a percent of each of the
20 congressional districts or is it the remaining language of
21 half?
22 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: The proposal that we are
23 seeking to have reconsidered deals with the congressional
24 districts. The purpose of the motion to reconsider is to
25 take that completely out of the mix, put back into the
48
1 proposal, make an amendment to put back into the proposal
2 the issue of the public hearings, but leave the
3 congressional districts exactly as it is.
4 COMMISSIONER RUNDLE: So --
5 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: I'm sorry.
6 COMMISSIONER RUNDLE: -- you remain with the
7 8 percent in one-half of all the congressional districts.
8 And really all you're adding are the public hearings.
9 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: And the schedule that goes
10 along with the public hearings.
11 COMMISSIONER RUNDLE: And the schedule.
12 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: Now, I would have to say that
13 I very carefully followed the rules and didn't debate the
14 merits, tried not to debate the merits of this proposal
15 and I was really only talking to you about why we ought to
16 reconsider.
17 But since there have been some issues with regard to
18 the merits of the proposal that have been raised about
19 tinkering and unintended consequences and that sort of
20 thing, as long as I have the floor, Mr. Chairman, I would
21 like to respond at least, if this is an appropriate time,
22 to that.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: We're on reconsideration so the
24 only thing that's really here is whether or not we should
25 reconsider the vote.
49
1 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: It seems to me that it is
2 germane to the question of whether to reconsider because
3 we -- the issue really is, is this something that we want
4 to do because we won't reconsider it if it's not something
5 we want to do.
6 The real issue here is informing the public and
7 trying to find ways that the public can be more informed.
8 You know, when we started this process and we started
9 going through public hearings in North Florida, and I'm
10 not going to mention any names, but there are actually
11 people who I remember walking to lunch with at one of
12 those first public hearings who said to me, Was this net
13 ban thing on the amendment?
14 Now these are people who are Constitution Revision
15 Commissioners, who are presumably well-informed citizens
16 who take a lot of time and trouble and they didn't
17 remember ever having voted on it. And that's the point of
18 all this. The point of all this is this is our
19 Constitution, this is something that shouldn't be amended
20 without people really understanding what they are doing.
21 And the whole idea behind the public hearing process and
22 slowing down the process just a little is to give the
23 public the opportunity or a greater opportunity to become
24 well-informed and to learn about the issues that they are
25 being asked to vote on to change the organic law of our
50
1 state.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. On the motion to
3 reconsider, Commissioner Riley.
4 COMMISSIONER RILEY: I have a question for
5 Commissioner Freidin. Commissioner Freidin, if it is
6 reconsidered, as I understand what you want to do, to
7 change back to the way it is, the district, the number of
8 districts, then the only substantive change in it at that
9 point would be the public hearings.
10 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: Well it would be to provide
11 for public hearings. And what goes along with the public
12 hearings by virtue of necessity would be a timetable that
13 would require that certain things be done. And it would
14 end up requiring that all petitions be filed in order to
15 qualify for the ballot six months in advance of the
16 election rather than three months in advance. I don't
17 want to mislead you, but that's the effect of it.
18 COMMISSIONER RILEY: And because of that change then
19 it can't be done by the Legislature but it must be done by
20 the Constitution? I mean, can the public hearings, which
21 I think is a very important part, be done by legislative
22 decision?
23 COMMISSIONER FREIDIN: I don't know if it could be
24 done by the Legislature because this is something that is
25 a requirement, a prerequisite to getting on the ballot. I
51
1 don't know that that actually could be done by the
2 Legislature.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: On the commission -- on the
4 motion to reconsider Proposal No. 130, any further
5 discussion? If not, all those in favor of
6 reconsideration, say aye. Opposed.
7 (Verbal vote taken.)
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: It fails. No reconsideration
9 will be held. We now go to Committee Substitute for
10 Proposals 138 and 89 by the Committee on Education and
11 Commissioners Nabors and Riley. Would you read it,
12 please?
13 READING CLERK: Committee Substitute for Proposal
14 Nos. 138 and 89, a proposal to revise Article X, Section
15 15, of the Florida Constitution; limiting the use of state
16 lottery net proceeds to financing certain educational
17 facilities or funding early childhood care and education
18 programs.
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: There is an amendment on the
20 desk.
21 (Off-the-record comment.)
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. This is on the motion
23 to reconsider the Lottery proposal which passed on
24 February 9th and it was deferred until today. So we're
25 now on a motion to reconsider.
52
1 (Off-the-record comment by Commissioner Crenshaw.)
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Excuse me, it was killed. It was
3 killed by a vote of 15 to 17. You're right, Commissioner
4 Crenshaw. And we're now on a motion to reconsider the
5 vote by which this proposal failed. And, Commissioner
6 Nabors, you're recognized.
7 COMMISSIONER NABORS: Members of the Commission, let
8 me -- this proposal, the original proposal that failed
9 passed once, failed once. And one of the -- and in our
10 view, those of you that worked on this, feel this is a
11 very important and popular concept.
12 The difficulty was, is in both the passage and the
13 failure, those of us who believe in this were trying to be
14 very severe in terms of the dedication of money. And we
15 had great debate about creating a hole in the budget,
16 potentially of 500 -- $450 million and how to phase that
17 over four years. We listened to the commission and we
18 realized that for that severe a position, you're not going
19 to have a majority vote. But it still doesn't obviate the
20 wisdom of having some instructions by the people to future
21 legislators on the use of Lottery money.
22 So what we hope to do if we can reconsider is to come
23 back with a proposal that's a short proposal, which
24 enumerates an enhancement in educational ideas. It
25 doesn't bind the Legislature, it allows legislative debate
53
1 to occur, does not create any hole in the budget, but we
2 think it would be a popular meeting of the citizens, and
3 would give some instructions from the citizens to the
4 Legislature as to how to use the Lottery money.
5 So I would urge you to let us reconsider so we can
6 look at the language that we want to place before you.
7 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Riley.
8 COMMISSIONER RILEY: Commissioners, I would ask that
9 we do reconsider this issue. I think we have heard from
10 the public and we heard what they said. They said the
11 Lottery fund was a very important, very specifically
12 important issue.
13 I think we tried to make it right. And obviously we
14 didn't get it quite right. Commissioner Nabors and I have
15 two different suggestions that if we get the opportunity
16 we can present to you today that get it just about as
17 simple as you can get. But if you read the Constitution
18 as it is right now, there is no, no guarantee, no
19 requirement in the Constitution that these funds be used
20 for education, much less enhancement.
21 I would ask that we vote to reconsider this and let's
22 do get it right. The public knows that this is important.
23 And if you're not sure, look at the newspaper articles
24 because when we left here, every time we brought this up,
25 that was the first thing that people wrote about. I would
54
1 ask that we do reconsider it, let's get it right, let's
2 put it before the public and go from there.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner
4 Sundberg. Commissioner Rundle, you're next; Commissioner
5 Smith, you're next.
6 COMMISSIONER SUNDBERG: I urge you to vote in favor
7 of reconsidering this issue. As Commissioner Riley said,
8 there may be some disagreement over the precise way in
9 which we address it, but I suggest to you that the people
10 of the state of Florida will think it passing odd if we do
11 not do something about the Lottery.
12 There has been -- any issue has, I don't think, had
13 any more ground swell of public concern than the issue of
14 the use of Lottery funds. So I suggest to you we need to
15 keep this alive so we can get it right. And I also
16 suggest to you that I think it will be a very positive
17 issue on the ballot. I think it will attract voters to
18 favorably consider all of the propositions that we put
19 before them.
20 So I urge you to vote in favor of reconsideration.
21 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Rundle.
22 COMMISSIONER RUNDLE: Commissioner Riley, am I to
23 understand that if we vote in favor of reconsideration,
24 which I'm leaning towards, because I think a lot of this
25 is very good, that you might be changing the language
55
1 to -- more simply to say that these Lottery monies should
2 be used only for enhancement, educational enhancement
3 programs? Are you going in that direction?
4 COMMISSIONER RILEY: Without arguing the merits of
5 the proposal itself, I will tell you that Commissioner
6 Nabors has one that lists very succinctly about four
7 different areas, not deciding any -- no limitations and
8 starts out with the dollars must be used to enhance
9 education, and then lists a few options, not requirements.
10 The one that I have, if that doesn't meet the
11 approval of the group, is basically that the dollars would
12 be used for the enhancement of education, not deciding at
13 all what that is. And the second part of that
14 specifically says the bonding part because by law they
15 have already done that. So that would need --
16 COMMISSIONER RUNDLE: Then I would support your
17 motion. I think we should keep this alive and see if we
18 can't work it to a position where the voters will want it
19 and will approve it.
20 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Smith.
21 COMMISSIONER SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I rise for a
22 question. And I'm not trying to muddy the waters. I'm
23 not sure whether or not the question I'm asking now was
24 the question that you said that you will take later. But
25 let me ask it, and if that's the question you are going to
56
1 take later, just advise me because I'm a little unclear.
2 Three things can happen right now that I see: One,
3 we can vote not to reconsider and as Commissioner Thompson
4 said, it is dead, dead, dead. Secondly, we can vote to
5 reconsider it, vote favorably by a simple majority, not
6 22, or we can vote unfavorably, or we can vote and it
7 could come out with 22. I want to know what would be the
8 difference, if any, if it's reconsidered and it's a
9 majority voting in favor of it as opposed to 22 or if
10 there is no difference at this point.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: My understanding is there really
12 is no difference. It would go forward for consideration,
13 the public hearing, and we would come back and vote on it.
14 Am I right on that, Commissioner Barkdull? I am right.
15 All right. You rise on the motion to reconsider.
16 Somebody else -- Commissioner Morsani, you're on the
17 motion to reconsider? You have the floor.
18 COMMISSIONER MORSANI: Thank you. I recommend that
19 we do not reconsider this motion. I think that we've been
20 around this enough times. I don't think it's -- first of
21 all, as you all know, the legislative body never said it
22 was going for education. The media and the teachers union
23 of this state told the people and the media picked up on
24 it and they told them and they never have retracted and
25 said, No, we told you it's going for education, but nobody
57
1 ever told us that.
2 So I don't think that this body in these chambers has
3 the responsibility. I think that we -- there is not any
4 way we're going to go in these areas that are delineated.
5 I strongly think that we should defeat it, let's go on,
6 let's quit hashing these things. This is the third or
7 fourth time now this has come up. It's been defeated
8 every time. Let's put this thing to bed once and for all.
9 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. On the motion to
10 reconsider, any further discussion on the motion to
11 reconsider? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
12 Opposed.
13 (Verbal vote taken.)
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Well, we're going to have to
15 vote. Open the machine.
16 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Has everybody voted? Except the
18 Chairman. Well that solved that. It wouldn't matter
19 whether I voted or not, would it? Lock the machine and
20 announce the vote.
21 READING CLERK: Thirteen yeas, 15 nays, Mr. Chairman.
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. By your motion, you
23 fail to reconsider Proposals 138 and 89.
24 We now move to Proposal No. 144 by Commissioner
25 Barnett who is not here. She asked that this be deferred
58
1 until at least 4:00. She won't be here until then. She
2 had to take her son to Shands, I think was the message I
3 got. She asked to be excused until 4:00. Without
4 objection, we'll pass that until later, indefinitely at
5 least until later this afternoon or tomorrow.
6 The next proposal is No. 168 by Commissioner Corr.
7 Would you read it, please?
8 READING CLERK: Proposal 168, a proposal to revise
9 Article IV, Section 6 of the Florida Constitution;
10 providing that an entity purportedly within an executive
11 department which is not subject to the direct supervision
12 of the agency head is a department; providing that the
13 amendment does not affect the status of such entities to
14 issue revenue bonds before a specified date; creating
15 Article IV, Section 14, Florida Constitution; creating a
16 State Board of Agriculture; providing for the board to
17 appoint the Commissioner of Agriculture; creating Article
18 XII, Section 23 of the Florida Constitution; providing
19 that the amendment does not affect the status of such
20 entities in existence on the effective date of the
21 adoption of the amendment.
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. This was adopted as
23 amended by 18 to 5 vote on February 10th with a pending
24 motion to reconsider by Commissioner Barkdull and deferred
25 until today. Commissioner Barkdull, you have the floor on
59
1 the motion to reconsider.
2 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman.
3 There's an amendment that's offered. The amendment is in
4 your pink packet and is also being passed out.
5 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Beg your pardon? Just a minute,
6 we'd like to get a little order. We're on a motion to
7 reconsider. No amendments at this point.
8 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Well, I wanted to state the
9 purpose of the reconsideration.
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right, sir, you have the
11 floor.
12 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: This motion to reconsider was
13 with the concurrence of Commissioner Corr and also with
14 the concurrence of the chairman of the Executive
15 Committee, Commissioner Alfonso. The purpose of it is to
16 cure a glitch in the original proposal. So I urge a
17 motion to reconsider.
18 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. All those ready to
19 vote on the motion to reconsider. All those in favor of
20 the motion to reconsider say aye. Opposed.
21 (Verbal vote taken.)
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Motion carries. Now it's moved
23 to reconsider and there's an amendment on the table.
24 READING CLERK: On the desk, Mr. Chairman.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Would you read the
60
1 amendment, please? Is this just one amendment?
2 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: I have one amendment. I
3 understand there is a second amendment.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Read Amendment No. 1
5 by Commissioner Barkdull that's moved. Read it, please.
6 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: It's in the pink packet.
7 READING CLERK: By Commissioner Barkdull, on Page 2,
8 between Lines 29 and 30, insert Section 3, Section 15 of
9 Article IV, the Florida Constitution is created to read,
10 Custodian of state records and office of custodian of
11 state records and the duties of that office shall be
12 established by law.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Now, I'm going to ask
14 again if everybody could please keep order. And if
15 everybody could stay in their seats for a little while, I
16 think it would speed up our program a little bit and quit
17 going around talking to everybody and we'll try to get
18 this over today. Now, Commissioner Barkdull, your
19 amendment.
20 COMMISSIONER BARKDULL: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman and
21 members of the commission. In the proposal that has been
22 adopted, we reduced the cabinet from its present
23 components to two. One of those positions that was
24 eliminated was secretary of state.
25 In the proposal that was adopted there is a reference
61
1 to custodian of the public records and there is no
2 provision in the Constitution that creates such an office.
3 What this amendment does is to create that office. It
4 would be a statutory office with statutory terms as far as
5 election selection and what the duties are.
6 What it primarily involves is who is going to be the
7 keeper of the seal and the state records and where
8 something would be filed in the event of the infirmative
9 of the chief executive. Because that's referenced --
10 we've already referenced in the proposal that we passed
11 this custodian and all this does is create the position.
12 And I move the adoption of the amendment.
13 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Does everybody
14 understand the amendment? Any debate on the amendment?
15 All in favor of the amendment say aye. Opposed.
16 (Verbal vote taken.)
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Amendment carries. All right.
18 Is there another amendment on the table? Read the
19 amendment. Who is it by?
20 READING CLERK: By Commissioner Zack on Page 2, Lines
21 19-22, strike all of said lines and insert: Section 2,
22 Section 12, Article IV, the Florida Constitution, as
23 amended in Section XIV, of said article is created to
24 read: Department of Elder Affairs. The Legislature may
25 create a Department of Elder Affairs and prescribe its
62
1 duties. The provisions governing the administration of
2 the department must comply with Section 6 of Article IV of
3 the State Constitution.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Commissioner Zack?
5 COMMISSIONER ZACK: Again, this just allows the
6 Legislature to do it if it chooses to do it in its wisdom.
7 And based on the aging of our society and the demographics
8 of Florida, we felt it was very important to allow the
9 Legislature to form this department if in their wisdom
10 they think it's appropriate.
11 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Any discussion on the
12 amendment? All in favor of the amendment say aye.
13 Opposed.
14 (Verbal vote taken.)
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Amendment carries. We're now on
16 the proposal as amended which we previously passed. The
17 two amendments have now been passed and we're on
18 consideration for voting again on reconsideration. Does
19 anybody want to debate this again? I think we had a full
20 debate on it before. Commissioner Butterworth?
21 COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH: I just have a question.
22 Don't we already have a Department of Elder Affairs? Or
23 Elder to Elderly, is that the difference?
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The change is to change it from
25 Elderly to Elder. This should really be a glitch.
63
1 COMMISSIONER BUTTERWORTH: This is really a very
2 important amendment.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: That's correct. I have been, I
4 don't know about Commissioner Zack, but the people that
5 run Elderly Affairs, it was transcribed wrong when it was
6 adopted and put in the Constitution. It should have been
7 Elder Affairs and there are a lot of people that want it
8 changed to be just Elder Affairs.
9 Now the only two that are in here at the moment that
10 might qualify in this regard are Commissioner Barkdull
11 and -- I don't qualify, I'm too young, but Commissioner
12 Marshall isn't here. So this is not one that creates a
13 great deal of concern. Are you ready to vote on the
14 proposal? Open the machine. Everybody voted? Lock the
15 machine.
16 (Vote taken and recorded electronically.)
17 READING CLERK: Twenty-eight yeas, zero nays,
18 Mr. Chairman.
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. We move on to
20 committee substitute for Proposals 172 and 162 by the
21 Committee on Legislative and Commissioners Thompson and
22 Evans-Jones. It's on a motion to reconsider by
23 Commissioner Evans-Jones. You have the floor.
24 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Oh, wait a minute. I guess I
64
1 better have it read, hadn't I.
2 READING CLERK: Committee substitute for Proposals
3 Nos. 172 and 162, a proposal to repeal Article III,
4 Section 16, Florida Constitution; relating to legislative
5 apportionment and create Article 2, Section X of the
6 Florida Constitution; providing for a commission to
7 establish legislative and congressional districts;
8 providing for the appointment of members to the
9 commission; requiring that the Chief Justice of the
10 Supreme Court fill certain vacancies on the commission;
11 requiring meetings and records of the commission to be
12 open to the public; providing certain exceptions;
13 requiring that the commission file its final report with
14 the Secretary of State within a specified period;
15 requiring that the Supreme Court determine the validity of
16 the plans; providing for the Supreme Court to establish
17 the districts under specified circumstances; providing for
18 the assignment of senatorial terms that are shortened as a
19 result of apportionment; deleting requirements that the
20 Legislature apportion the state into legislative
21 districts.
22 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Evans-Jones?
23 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Thank you. You-all voted
24 favorably for this before and we wanted to move to
25 reconsider it because some of you were concerned that the
65
1 size of the reapportionment commission was not large
2 enough and some of you felt that with the larger
3 commission it would be more diverse and, therefore, more
4 to your liking. I think it was Commissioner Alfonso who
5 suggested that we enlarge it. And I certainly have no
6 objections.
7 So what we're doing here, if we move to reconsider,
8 would be taking that amendment to enlarge it,
9 Mr. Chairman. So I urge you to vote for reconsideration.
10 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Any discussion on the amendment?
11 (Off-the-record comment.)
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Beg your pardon? Oh, excuse me.
13 I got ahead of you, Commissioner Evans-Jones. All in
14 favor of reconsideration, if there is no further
15 discussion, say aye. Opposed.
16 (Verbal vote taken.)
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: It carries. Now you may offer
18 your amendment.
19 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
20 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: I'll have her read it. It's on
21 the table?
22 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Yes.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Read the amendment, please.
24 READING CLERK: By Commissioner Evans-Jones, on Page
25 2, Line 10 through Page 3, Line 12, delete those lines and
66
1 insert lengthy amendment.
2 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Evans-Jones?
3 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
4 What we're doing, as I indicated a few minutes before, we
5 had previously had the Speaker of the House and the
6 minority leader to appoint two members and the President
7 of the Senate and the minority leader of the Senate to do
8 the same thing. In this amendment we're increasing the
9 number that they may appoint to four. So we're increasing
10 the size from 9 to 17 and that is the major part of this
11 amendment.
12 We also have said in here that, if you'll look at
13 your amendment here, this was passed. Each says, Each
14 district shall be composed of contiguous territory and may
15 not include territory of any other district of the same
16 house. Districts shall be established in accordance with
17 the Constitution of the state and of the United States,
18 shall be as nearly equal in population as practical and
19 may not be drawn in a matter that dilutes that voting
20 strength of any racial or language minority group.
21 And then we have said here, Except to meet the
22 foregoing requirements, the commission shall consider
23 creating districts that consist of compact territory and
24 division of county shall be avoided whenever possible.
25 That part of the amendment was adopted before. But we
67
1 moved the compact down because there was some concern that
2 it dilutes the minority voting strength, Mr. Chairman.
3 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Any discussion on the
4 amendment? Commissioner Scott?
5 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, and
6 Commissioner Evans-Jones, I just want to make a point on
7 this amendment. This amendment does not in any way cure
8 the basic objections that have been raised and that
9 continue to be raised by a lot of people in this state,
10 minorities and otherwise. So I just want to make the
11 point. The amendment, if that's what the proponent wants,
12 but it doesn't really address them. I request to be heard
13 if this is adopted when it comes back for a final vote.
14 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Well, we're on the amendment at
15 the moment. And you don't oppose the amendment; is that
16 what I understood you to say? You just want to reserve
17 the right to oppose it later?
18 COMMISSIONER SCOTT: This doesn't fix the basic
19 objection, so just by adding, you know, doubling the
20 number to 16 -- I just want to make that point so that
21 people don't really think they are voting that this cures
22 all ills.
23 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Commissioner Zack, you had your
24 hand up or microphone up, do you want to be recognized on
25 the amendment?
68
1 COMMISSIONER ZACK: Yes, I would. Would you yield to
2 a question, Commissioner? As I understand, there's two
3 parts of the amendment. Part I is increasing the size so
4 you get more diversity and you get more input from more
5 people.
6 Part II is so that there is no question that minority
7 districts are drawn first and that compactness is not
8 considered in drawing the minority districts. And then
9 after those districts are drawn, then compactness is
10 considered in drawing the remaining districts; is that
11 what it's intended to do? Is that what it does?
12 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: That's what it does,
13 Commissioner Zack, and that's what it's intended to do to
14 solve anybody's problem there.
15 COMMISSIONER ZACK: And the belief was that
16 compactness was always to be subservient in creation of
17 minority districts. However, the intent of the amendment
18 was to move that language after the creation of the
19 minority districts so it's clear that minority districts
20 will be drawn before other districts and compactness will
21 not affect the number of minority districts or the shape
22 of minority districts.
23 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: That's exactly true,
24 Commissioner Zack, thank you.
25 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Any further
69
1 discussion on the amendment? All right. All in favor of
2 the amendment say aye. Opposed.
3 (Verbal vote taken.)
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: The amendment carries. Now we're
5 on the proposal as amended. Commissioner Evans-Jones, is
6 there another amendment?
7 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Mr. Chairman, I had
8 substituted that amendment that I've been telling you-all
9 about but apparently it did not make it. They're using
10 the amendment. They read the amendment that was in the
11 pink book.
12 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. So what we have acted
13 on is the substitute amendment that you offered; is that
14 correct?
15 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Yes. Actually the other
16 amendment had not even been offered so we had put that --
17 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: And what it was is the amendment
18 as it now stands that we passed includes the two items.
19 One is it expanded the commission as you explained. And,
20 two, it changed the compact provision as explained by
21 Commissioner Zack. Is that what we just passed?
22 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: That's right,
23 Mr. Chairman.
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: So now we have the proposal as
25 amended which creates the commission, as you described,
70
1 with the provisions which now read differently than the
2 original proposal; is that right?
3 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: Yes, Commissioner.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Now you're recognized to discuss
5 the proposal at this time as amended.
6 COMMISSIONER FORD-COATES: Thank you.
7 Commissioners --
8 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Just a minute. They are doing
9 to -- just offer the -- what happened here is we discussed
10 two amendments that they had on the table that you had
11 combined into one which they didn't have; is that right?
12 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: Actually, we were trying
13 to withdraw the two that were in the book. Neither one of
14 those in the book are what we wanted.
15 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Withdraw the two
16 amendments that were on the table and place on the table
17 the substitute amendment.
18 (Off-the-record comment.)
19 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Let's do this. The
20 first amendment was described by you which increases the
21 size of the commission. All in favor of that as an
22 amendment say aye. All opposed, no.
23 (Verbal vote taken.)
24 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: It passes. The next amendment
25 was Commissioner Zack's amendment, was it not?
71
1 COMMISSIONER EVANS-JONES: It really was not -- it
2 was not in there but it's really one amendment which has
3 both of those issues in it.
4 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: We'll take a three-minute recess
5 until we get the right amendment.
6 (Brief recess.)
7 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: Come to order. The first two
8 amendments that were on the table have been withdrawn and
9 the present amendment has been explained but we will
10 explain it again. Please take your seat. We'll come to
11 order.
12 All right. Read the present amendment. I think
13 we've had it explained, but we'll read it again.
14 READING CLERK: By Commissioners Barton and
15 Evans-Jones.
16 CHAIRMAN DOUGLASS: All right. Pay attention,
17 please.
18 READING CLERK: By Commissioners Barton and
19 Evans-Jones. On Page 2, Line 10 through Page 3, Line 17,
20 delete those lines and insert lengthy amendment.
21 CHAIR |
