Telli v. Broward County
2012 WL 1623041, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 342, 94 So. 3d 504 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under their constitutional home rule authority, Florida charter counties may impose term limits on their own elected officials because the list of offices with term limits in the Florida Constitution is not an exclusive list that implicitly prohibits local governments from enacting their own.
Facts:
- In 2000, voters in Broward County approved an amendment to the Broward County Charter.
- The charter amendment limited county commissioners to serving no more than three consecutive four-year terms.
- The new term limits became effective with the terms of commissioners that began in November 2000.
- The amendment would render certain incumbent commissioners ineligible for re-election in the future.
- William Telli, a resident, challenged the constitutionality of the charter amendment.
Procedural Posture:
- William Telli filed a complaint for declaratory relief against Broward County in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court (the trial court).
- The trial court, bound by the precedent of Cook v. City of Jacksonville, found the term limits unconstitutional.
- Broward County, as the appellant, appealed the judgment to the Fourth District Court of Appeal (an intermediate appellate court).
- The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court, holding that Cook did not apply to county commissioners and that the term limits were constitutional.
- The case then came before the Florida Supreme Court for review of the Fourth District's decision.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a county charter amendment imposing term limits on the office of county commissioner violate the Florida Constitution's provisions on disqualifications for holding office?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No. The Broward County charter amendment imposing term limits on county commissioners does not violate the Florida Constitution. The Court's prior decision in Cook v. City of Jacksonville, which held that Article VI, section 4 of the Florida Constitution provided an exclusive list of disqualifications for office, is overruled. The Court adopts the reasoning of the dissent in Cook, holding that the broad home rule power granted to charter counties by the Florida Constitution allows them to regulate the selection and eligibility requirements of their local officials, including the imposition of term limits. The Court found that the Cook decision was unsound in principle because it implied restrictions on home rule power where none were explicitly stated in the constitution. Furthermore, the precedent was unworkable in practice, creating confusing distinctions about which offices were 'constitutionally authorized.' By receding from Cook, the court allows counties to govern themselves in accordance with their home rule authority unless expressly prohibited by the constitution.
Analysis:
This decision marks a significant shift in Florida law by strengthening the home rule power of charter counties. By expressly overruling Cook v. City of Jacksonville, the Court empowers local governments with greater autonomy to structure their own governance and set eligibility requirements for their officials. It rejects an interpretation of the constitution that found implied limitations on local power, instead holding that such limitations must be explicit. This precedent will make it much more difficult to challenge local term limit ordinances on state constitutional grounds, solidifying the power of local electorates to impose such restrictions.
