This is a link to Florida Tax Watch’s Voter Guide:
I am glad that they recommend YES on # 4 and # 11.
They recommend a yes on #2. I have run into a few people with rental property that want us to vote yes on #2. The LWV thinks this is better done via legislation so the LWV recommends a no on #2.
I agree with the Florida Tax Watch on their explanation for a no on #3. I voted no on #3. Quote from the Florida Tax Watch link:
Gambling has always been a contentious issue in Florida, as evidenced by the Legislature not being able to pass a gambling bill for several sessions. While the amendment would likely rule out casinos for the near future, public sentiment could change. And while the amendment would make the citizens’ initiative the exclusive method to bring casino gambling to the ballot, it must be remembered that the initiative process is the least transparent method to publicly vet proposed constitutional amendments. It is easy to envision a well-funded, pro-casino group getting enough signatures to bring a casino proposal to the ballot. This would still allow the special interests supporters want to keep out of the process to craft a proposal, but there would be no input or deliberation by the Legislature.
I agree with their explanation of what a NO vote would mean BUT I wish they had suggested a yes on #9. Quote from article:
A NO VOTE on #9 MEANS
Piece 1: There would be no constitutional safeguard against offshore drilling for oil and natural gas on lands beneath all state waters. Any legislative prohibition could easily be lifted.
Piece 2: Floridians will continue to be subjected to second-hand vapor when they attend movies or restaurants and other public places.
It seems nefarious to me that they are recommending a yes on #10. Why can’t a county decide if they want these positions elected or appointed? The voters in the county should decide. Vote NO on #10. Quote from article:
Eight charter counties (Brevard, Broward, Clay, Duval, Miami-Dade, Orange, Osceola, and Volusia) have changed the manner of selection of at least one of the five constitutional officers or restructured or abolished at least one of the five constitutional offices and transferred their duties to another county office. The ballot measure, if approved, would require these eight charter counties to amend their charters to: (1) reflect that sheriff, tax collector, property appraiser,
supervisor of elections, and clerk of circuit court be elected by the voters of that county,
Here is a link to another comprehensive description of the amendments:
I voted yes on 4,9,11,12 and 13. I voted no on the rest. IF you’re still on the fence, please let me try to convince you that I’m right.