Legislature Addressing a Wide Range of Issues

What should the retiree contribution rate be for a public employee? Will Florida pass the “Competitive Workforce Act” and join numerous other states? Should arrest booking photographs be restricted from dissemination on a public media website? Is it necessary to carry a concealed weapon on a college campus in Florida? Will we permit “open carry,” similar to Texas? What should the signage requirements be at a toll facility? Should appellate judges be subject to term limits? Will Florida expand gambling, reauthorize the Seminole Compact or fail to act on those issues?

The Florida Legislature concluded Week 5 of its 9-week session. The questions above represent a small fraction of the thousands of policy issues confronting the 2016 Legislature. While not always headline grabbers, issues such as these represent the day in, day out work of the Legislature. Moreover, they present a glimpse of the broad range of policies that our state confronts, including those important to us as attorneys.

Some policy proposals important to us as attorneys are the joint resolutions regarding judicial term limits. SJR 322 by Sen. Travis Hutson (R-Palm Coast) and HJR 197 by Rep. John Wood (R-Winter Haven) propose a constitutional amendment to create term limits for Supreme Court justices and District Courts of Appeal judges. If passed by voters, the amendment would limit Florida appellate jurists to two full six-year terms on the bench. Currently, the State Constitution does not limit the number of terms that justices or appeals court judges may serve, but it does include a mandatory retirement age of 70. The House legislation was amended to provide that the term limits would only apply prospectively to a justice or judge appointed to office after the effective date of the amendment.

Last week, HJR 197 passed the final House committee of reference, the House Judiciary Committee, by a vote of 11-6, along partisan lines – and at times quite heated. The committee permitted very restricted time for public testimony, but briefly heard from Chris Carlyle, chair of the Appellate Practice Section and Warren Husband on behalf of The Florida Bar, who is also part of the legislative team for Attorneys’ Title Fund Services. Both focused on facts and legitimate concerns raised by lawyers from around the state.

The Senate Joint Resolution has yet to receive a hearing and has been referred to the following committees: Judiciary Committee, Ethics and Elections and Rules.

In addition to the numerous policy issues mentioned above, the Senate and House each voted on their proposed budgets in the respective legislative chambers. Those proposed budgets were presented, discussed, amended and debated before being voted on by all legislators this week. The House proposed a nearly $80 billion 2016/2017 budget while the Senate proposed almost $81 billion. With more than a $1 billion difference it looks like there is still a lot of need for negotiations between the two chambers – mostly concerning tax cuts, economic incentive funding and surplus funding for rainy days.

Best Regards,

Melissa Jay Murphy
Senior Vice President and
General Counsel