Could All 5 Members of the Escambia Board of County Commissioners be Running AGAIN, Together, Next August?

Like the Horror Show Creature that refuses to die--it appears as if the failed language from last year's election bill, the language that would make all single-member district commissioners elected in 2020 statewide run for re-election again two years early in 2022, has been resurrected again for the upcoming legislative session!  Just imagine it:  All 5 Escambia Commissioner's Districts up for election/re-election simultaneously in 2022!  fun times, fun times!

The answer is yes, we might possibly all be running together next year.  Imagine that?  Gomer Pyle might say: "Surprise, surprise, surprise!"  --It's all because the horror show monster we thought we killed last year is stirring and moving.  Just like Jason Voorhees who has died and come back to life to wreak havoc, destruction, chaos, and death in 9 subsequent installments of "Friday the 13th"--it looks like the monster's not dead and we all might be campaigning again two years sooner than we thought.

This is because an onerous new bill is in "drafting" over in Tallahassee.  It appears that it will be filed iminently, as the draft made yesterday's deadline for legislation to be filed.

A bird whispered in my ear yesterday that this could be coming, again.  A similar provision was attached and then subsequently deleted from last year's session's elections train bill.  I've verified that this is all true.  The bill sponsor feels it is entirely appropriate.  "We have to run next year after our redistricting-why shouldn't they [commissioners statewide that serve in single-member districts]..was his response when asked about it yesterday by a third party.

So here we go again!  😁

Essentially--i'm told this bill is being crafted based upon last session's failed provision that requires County Commissioners who serve in single-member districts to run for re-election again in the first election post redistricting even when such a commissioner is only part way through a currently earned/won, constitutionally defined 4-year term.  It slices terms in half if it is passed ---and also if it passes legal muster (more on that thorny issue, below).

Ostensibly--the theory is this:  If a district is re-arranged after an election, a potentially significant number of voters "may" spend several years represented by a commissioner for whom they did not vote.

Seems like a fair enough argument, on its face.

But wait---if you make a commissioner who fairly won a four year election in a district that had to give up population due to growth-------and if such a commissioner loses the subsequent election 2-years into his 4-year term--wouldn't that serve to disenfranchise those who voted to elect this commissioner in the first place?  Wouldn't it be a "taking from the commissioner who won a 4-year term, not a 2-year term?"  Wouldn't  it serve to actually disenfranchise more voters than the smaller number (if any) who may have been "re-districted" into a commissioner's district for whom such voters did not vote?  I know it's confusing.  I know it is a lot to digest.

But examined differently--the talking point about not allowing someone to serve who some or most constituents didn't vote for can be systematically rebuked and decimated quite easily.  Our nation was led by President Bill Clinton from 1993 to 2001--a guy who never won a majority of the nation's popular vote.  Neither 1992 nor 1996.  In both of those cases--he simply won a plurailty of the popular vote and then subsequently the electoral college.  Betcha didn't know that, did you?

And there are other examples.

People move all the time and are represented by folks they didn't vote for.

Close elections leave up to 49.9% of voters under the leadership of those that they didn't support.

Office holders resign and sometimes years of an officeholder's term are filled by a political appointee (hack, potentially) for whom NOBODY voted....

So yeah--that failed argument is a feckless smokescreen.  But bad ideas sometimes come out of agenda pushing and make it to the finish line in state legislatures---even Tallahassee (gasp).  

Ofterntimes the finish line doesn't line up with the legislature's chambers or the governor's mansion --it  winds up at a courthouse chamber where a smart judge looks at it for what it is and strikes it down. (thankfully we do have checks and balances still, after all.  for now.  we hope. )  

This idea is a bad one, and if passed by the legislature (50-50 shot--if it gets traction in the Senate)--it will face an immediate challenge in the court.

Because numerous and ominous are the constitutional ramifications of such a reckless idea.

Simpletons will exclaim "But the State Senators have their terms cut in half and have to re-run in after redistricting--so should county commissioners!!"  But wait--that concept of running after a redistricting is a known fact of reality to every senator already----as it is codified in the constitution, (Article III, Section 15, here)

County Commissioners have no such language stipulating they be re-elected two years early after each decennial redistricting--so such a change, in many peoples' opinions, would necessitate a change to the constitution to enact. here (article VIII, sec. 1 (e)).

So why make this change this year?  That's a question I have heard.

This past year with COVID-19 mandates and lockdowns--several counties and many school boards found themselves at odds with Tallahasse leadership.  

Perhaps this is a way to change the composition of some boards? This is just a guess on my part, but maybe it is true?

Maybe some legislator doesn't like some county official and wants to exert pressure?

Could it be some sort of juvenile "Sabre rattling?" 

Oh, I know, I know!  It's those (XXXXX's) over in Brevard County!!

Maybe some legislator that wants to run for county commissioner in 2022 when he terms out doesn't want to wait until the current commissioner in that district (coincidentally a long-serving incumbent in a single-member district) leaves office in 2024?  Maybe this legislator wants to force the issue in 2022?

Who knows the real reason--right?

But whatever it is-- it ain't a slam dunk.   Not by any stretch. There's no certainty this would pass.  It would create a lot of gnashing of teeth statewide, and would face resistance.

And if it did pass--it would invite chaos, consternation, and a host of litigation and more burdens on Supervisors of Elections around the state---not to mention the check writers who fund campaigns locally--they wouldn't like this I'd venture to guess......

Would it be GOOD if it passed?  Well, I guess that depends upon whom it is you are asking.

If you ask that eccentric tuna fisherman who nets and kills 100 porpoises for every one tuna he harvests-----yeah HE might like this new idea in Tallahassee.

Similarly--if you asked the banana republic commando squad that killed 27 hostages in order to take the one kidnapper "into custody"--yeah, those guys might agree.

But most of us who are watching this scenario unfold see it, know it, and smell it for what it is.

Is There a Better Way for Us to Govern?

The Escambia Board of County Commissioners operate and govern via 5 County Commissioners seated in 5 single-member districts.  Only the citizens of each specific district can vote for their commissioner. 

Formerly, like most counties nationwide and throughout Florida, commissioners were all seated in distinct, apportioned geographic districts and voted upon by electors from the entire county--meaning every citizen got to vote for 5 commissioners.

This made sense as decisions county commissioners make affect every citizen in the county--so it only made sense that every voter should be able to vote for every commissioner.

But this, regrettably,  led to a condition locally where minority (black) candidates could not be and were not being elected--even though the minority population of Escambia County was and has been significant at roughly twice the national percentage of the black population overall (24% locally, 12% nationally).

So litigation in the late 1970s that sought to correct this inequity and allow for appropriate minority representation in county government led to the issue going all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1984.  That Supreme Court decision let stand a lower-court ruling mandating single member districts in Escambia County--with one district being a "minority-majority" district by law, in perpetuity.

Fast forward to today, and about 28 counties (Including Escambia County) of 67 in Florida utilize single-member districts for the election of county commissioners, shcool board members, and utility authority board members.  The majority of counties in Florida, and in the rest of the nation, however, utilize the model where individual commissioners are voted upon by ALL constituents and seated (with a concomitant residency requirment) in specific districts.

District wide elections help to prevent the "ward-politics" effect that we witness locally--where obviously clear-cut decisions, rulings, and votes by the board instead get pushed back in a byzantine method of appeasment to small groups of citizens vocally opposed to initiatives or decisions in "their neighborhoods."  Easy decisions get kicked down the road or denied outright. This occurs simply to appease one geographic block of voters--for the benefit

A Wrench in the Works?

Could all five County Commissioners in Escambia County be up for election together in 2022.... or 2024??

Commissioners were notified late yesterday afternoon about a late add-on to a committee bill in Tallahassee that could have big consequences on next year's elections for county commissioners statewide, to include those of us elected to serve in Escambia County.

Senate Bill 90 is related to elections and election administration.

Some folks are opposed to it, many support it, and still others like some provisions contained in the bill and not other components in the proposed legislation.

The related bill, Proposed committee bill 21-05 expands upon SB 90 in a big way.  

And on the very last page of this house committee bill, a major paragraph was added having to do with  the way County Commissioners elected in single-member districts statewide will be elected going forward:  

"Notwithstanding the terms provided elsewhere in

 law, at the election immediately following redistricting

 directed by s. 1(e), Art. VIII of the State Constitution, each

commissioner elected only by electors who reside in the district

 must be elected and terms thereafter shall be staggered as

 provided in s. 100.041.

Section 26. This act shall take effect July 1, 2021."

In a nutshell, this language appears to stipulate that ALL commissioners representing single member districts (28 counties in Florida will be affected) must stand for election in the first election after the constitutionally-mandated redistricting necessitated by the decennial census every ten years--meaning for some commissioners their 4-year terms will be sliced in half.  In Escambia County, this would mean Districts 1,3, and 5 would have to stand for re-election again in 2022 -two years ahead of time- and once more in 2024-in order to achieve the "staggering" of terms indicated in Florida statutes.  If enacted, this would result in three commissioners locally being made to stand for election three times in the span of 4 years.  This would be required if this bill passes with this language in tact and if we complete the redistricting this year.  

Page 6 of the House Committee's analysis of the impacts of this provision of the legislation sums up the issue very succinctly:

"Effect of Proposed Change:  The bill provides that in the next election following each constitutionally required, decennial redistricting, a commissioner for each district must be elected again and terms will be staggered as provided in s. 100.041. This will divide in half the four-year terms of 2 or 3 single-district commissioners in each county, with even or odd numbered districts affected depending on the redistricting year. The change will not affect at-large commissioners or district commissioners elected county-wide."

County Commissioners from 28 Counties in Florida may be tremendously, negatively  impacted by a one-paragraph "add-on" to a House Committee Bill if that language, the final paragraph language in PCB 21-05, stands and becomes law.  Timing of the re-districting plans will become the new thing to watch...

Then it would all come down the the redistricting timeline.  

Under Chapter 124.01 (3) Florida Statutes, redistricting for County Commission districts "shall be made only in an odd-numbered years."  It is supposed to happen this year.  If it could not be completed this year, it appears it would have to move to 2023 to comport with Chapter 124--meaning the onerous provisions of SB 90's House bill 21-05-- would fall on districts 2 and 4 locally in the election the following year, 2024.

But wait just a minute, hold on.......Could redistricting really take that long though?

Uh, yes, it could......  

Because of the COVID-19 Pandemic--the US Census Bureau is way, way behind schedule in delivering us the data we will need locally in order to draw new district boundaries.  It looks as though we may not even get this data until late September or early October!  Taking into account the lost week in November to Thanksgiving, and the two weeks lost in December to Christmas and New Years--that would only give us about 9 weeks to do the research, have hearings, take input, hold joint meetings, meet and workshop with the Supervisor of Elections' staff,  advertise, and vote on the new boundaries.  

That is a really, really aggressive and compact timeframe that may not be achievable.

10 years ago when I was on the school board--the county, school board, and ECUA took about 7 months in total to redraw the commissioner, school board member, and ECUA districts in Escambia County that were ultimately adopted in September of that year.  It was a time-consuming, citizen involved, drawn-out process--but we did it right and it did not get challenged in court.  

If we rush it to meet a deadline--to complete this task in 2021 (the "odd" year stipulated in the state constitution) there is no telling what the ramifications could be if the new districts draw challenges or lawsuits.

So it will be interesting to watch, going forward, whether that language in SB 90 and it's related committe bill in the house 21-05-- survives the session.

If it does, the next thing to watch is this:  

When will counties statewide complete the redistricting process?   A rush-job in COVID-19 wracked 2021, or deliberatively with all data and plenty of time in  2023?