The opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D2024-2604
_____________________________
ALACHUA COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS and
ALACHUA COUNTY SUPERVISOR
OF ELECTIONS,
Appellants,
v.
KEITH PERRY, KIMBERLY HORD,
JOSE LOPEZ, and SHARLA HEAD,
Appellees.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County.
Olin Shinholser, Judge.
October 15, 2025
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, the Alachua County Board of County
Commissioners and the Alachua County Supervisor of Elections,
appeal a final order in an action where Appellees, four residents of
Alachua County (“County”), asked the trial court to declare
unlawful a referendum proposing to amend the Alachua County
Charter to return to an at-large voting system for county
commissioners from a single-member voting system because the
ballot language did not comply with section 124.011, Florida
Statutes. Appellants raise two issues on appeal, only one of which
merits discussion. They argue, and we agree, that the trial court
erred in declaring that the referendum violated section 124.011.
For the reasons that follow, we reverse the order.
Factual Background
In 2022, Alachua County voters approved a change from an
at-large voting system for county commissioners to voting for
members using a single-member district system. According to
testimony presented below, at-large means that “everybody in the
entire county votes for every county commissioner,” whereas in a
single-member system, “only the people in your district can vote
for you.” * This case involves an ordinance of the Alachua County
Board of County Commissioners (Ordinance 2024-12), which
included a proposed amendment to the Alachua County Charter
pertaining to members of the Board being elected on a countywide
basis and which provided in part:
SECTION 3. Referendum.
a. The proposed amendment to the Alachua County
Charter in Section 2 of this ordinance shall be presented
to the County electorate on the ballot at the general
election to be held on November 5, 2024.
b. The Supervisor of Elections of Alachua County
shall cause the following question to be placed on the
ballot at the general election to be held on November 5,
2024.
* The impetus for the change was House Bill 1493, which
called for a referendum election on November 8, 2022, with the
following referendum question: “Shall the five members of the
board of county commissioners of Alachua County, Florida, be
elected to office from single-member districts by electors residing
in each of those districts only?” If the question was answered
affirmatively by a majority of the qualified electors, which it was,
then the charter amendment was to take effect, which it did.
2
AMENDING THE COUNTY CHARTER TO
PROVIDE FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONER
ELECTIONS ON AN AT LARGE BASIS
Shall the five members of the board of county
commissioners of Alachua County, Florida, be elected by
all electors within the county at large?
____ YES
____ NO
SECTION 4. Effective Date of Charter
Amendment. This amendment to the Alachua County
Charter adopted . . . shall be effective on January 1, 2025,
only if approved by a majority of the electors voting in the
general election to be held on November 5, 2024.
The amendment, if approved, was to change section 2.2 of the
Alachua County Home Rule Charter from providing that “[t]here
shall be one (1) commissioner for each of five (5) county commission
districts established pursuant to general law and they shall be
elected by the qualified electors of that district” to the
commissioners being elected “on a countywide basis by the electors
of the county.”
In September 2024, Appellees filed an Emergency Petition for
Temporary Injunction to Enjoin Ballot Measure Slated for
November 6, 2024, General Election. Appellees sought in part an
immediate temporary injunction enjoining Appellants from
placing the proposed measure on the ballot as well as a declaration
that the proposed ballot language did not comply with section
124.011(9)(a), Florida Statutes.
In the order under review, the trial court set forth in part:
Florida Statute 124.011(10) allows:
“Any county adopting one of the propositions set forth in
this section may thereafter return to the procedures
otherwise provided by law by following the same
procedure outlined in subsection (3).”
3
Thus, the commission could again place an issue before
the voters regarding voting by single member districts
versus at large districts. Whether the commissioners
have acted in good faith by placing the issue before the
voters again in such a short period of time is a political
question, not a legal one upon which the court can act.
However, the commissioners have violated the procedure
outlined in Florida Statute 124.011. If the commissioners
want the voters to again lawfully consider the issue, they
must use the language used in 2022 and specifically
found [in] Florida Statute 124.011(9)(a):
[]Shall the five members of the board of county
commissioners of Alachua County, Florida, be elected to
office from single-member districts by electors residing in
each of those districts only?
_____ Yes
_____ No
Because the language in the current proposed
referendum does not comply with Florida law, any
resulting vote will be a legal nullity and not the basis for
changing the voting method, if the result is a vote for at
large voting. Hypothetically the vote, if the No Vote
prevails, would render the question moot.
The trial court denied Appellees’ request for a temporary
injunction, but it ruled that the amendment “addressing at large
elections that is on the November 5, 2024 ballot is declared to be
unlawful in violation of Florida Statute 124.011 in that its ballot
language fails to comply with the statute.” Alachua County voters
subsequently approved the referendum. This appeal followed.
Analysis
Statutory construction is a question of law. State v. Rogers,
391 So. 3d 661, 666 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024). To ascertain legislative
intent, a court must first look to the plain and obvious meaning of
the statute’s text. Id. at 666–67. If the language is clear and
4
unambiguous and conveys a clear and definite meaning, a court
should apply the unequivocal meaning and not resort to the rules
of statutory construction. Id. at 667; see also Ham v. Portfolio
Recovery Assocs., LLC, 308 So. 3d 942, 946 (Fla. 2020) (following
the “supremacy-of-text” principle, which provides that the words
of a governing text are of paramount concern and what the words
convey is what the text means). Courts are not at liberty to extend,
modify, or limit a statute’s express terms. Univ. of Fla. Bd. of Trs.
v. Browning, 387 So. 3d 371, 376–77 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).
Section 124.01, Florida Statutes (2024), entitled “Division of
counties into districts; county commissioners,” provides in part:
(1) There shall be five county commissioners’
districts in each county, which shall be numbered one to
five, inclusive, and shall be as nearly equal in proportion
to population as possible.
(2) There shall be one county commissioner for each
of such county commissioners’ districts, who shall be
elected by the qualified electors of the county, as provided
by s. 1(e), Art. VIII of the State Constitution.
As the parties acknowledge, section 124.01 makes clear that the
default method of voting for county commissioners in Florida is an
at-large system.
Section 124.011, Florida Statutes (2024), entitled “Alternative
procedure for the election of county commissioners to provide for
single-member representation; applicability,” provides in part as
follows:
(1) County commissioners shall be nominated and
elected to office in accordance with the provisions of s.
124.01, or as otherwise provided by law, unless a
proposition calling for single-member representation
within the county commission districts is submitted to
and approved by a majority of the qualified electors
voting on such proposition in the manner provided in this
section. Such proposition shall provide that:
5
(a) Five county commissioners shall reside one
in each of five county commission districts, the
districts together covering the entire county and
as nearly equal in population as practicable; and
each commissioner shall be nominated and elected
only by the qualified electors who reside in the
same county commission district as the
commissioner; or
(b) The board of county commissioners shall be
increased from five commissioners to seven
commissioners, with five of the seven commissioners
residing one in each of five county commission districts,
the districts together covering the entire county and as
nearly equal in population as practicable, and each
commissioner being nominated and elected only by the
qualified electors who reside in the same county
commission district as the commissioner, and with two of
the seven commissioners being nominated and elected at
large.
(2)(a) All commissioners shall be elected for 4-year
terms . . . .
(3) A proposition calling for single-member
representation within the county commission
districts of the county shall be submitted to the
electors of the county at any primary, general, or
otherwise-called special election, in either manner
following:
(a) The board of county commissioners may
adopt a formal resolution directing an election to
be held to place the proposition on the ballot.
(b) The electors of the county may petition to
have the proposition placed on the ballot by
presenting to the board of county commissioners
petitions signed by not less than 10 percent of the
duly qualified electors of the county. The number
of signatures required shall be determined by the
6
supervisor of elections according to the number of
registered electors in the county as of the date the
petitioning electors register as a political
committee pursuant to subsection (4).
(4) The electors petitioning to have the proposition
placed on the ballot shall register as a political committee
pursuant to s. 106.03, and a specific person shall be
designated therein as chair of the committee to act for the
committee.
(5) Each petition form circulated for single-member
county commissioner representation within the county
shall include space for the printed name, signature, and
address of the elector and shall include the wording set
forth in paragraph (a) or paragraph (b):
(a) “As a registered elector of ____________ County,
Florida, I am petitioning for a referendum election to
determine whether the five county commissioners of said
county shall be elected from single-member districts by
electors residing in each of those districts only.”
....
(6) Upon the filing of the petitions with the board of
county commissioners by the chair of the committee, the
board of county commissioners shall submit the petitions
to the supervisor of elections for verification of the
signatures. . . .
(7) If it is determined that the petitions have the
required signatures, the supervisor of elections shall
certify the petitions to the board of county commissioners,
which shall adopt a resolution requesting that an election
date be set to conform to the earliest primary, general, or
otherwise-called special election that occurs not less than
30 days after certification of the petitions. . . .
7
(8) No special election may be called for the sole
purpose of presenting the proposition to the vote of the
electors.
(9)(a) In a county in which the board of county
commissioners is composed of five members, each
to be elected from single-member districts, the
wording of the proposition on the ballot shall be as
follows:
Shall the five members of the board of county
commissioners of ____________ County, Florida, be
elected to office from single-member districts by
electors residing in each of those districts only?
____ Yes
____ No
(b) In a county in which the board of county
commissioners is to be increased from five to seven
members, with two of the seven members to be elected at
large, the wording on the ballot shall be as follows:
Shall the board of county commissioners of
____________ County, Florida, be increased from five to
seven members, with five of the seven members to be
elected to office from single-member districts by electors
residing in each of those districts only, and with the two
remaining members being elected by all electors within
the county at large?
____ Yes
____ No
(10) Any county adopting one of the
propositions set forth in this section may
thereafter return to the procedures otherwise
provided by law by following the same procedure
outlined in subsection (3).
8
(11) No county commissioner elected prior to or at
the election which approves any revision as permitted in
this section shall be affected in his or her term of office.
The resolution adopted by the board of county
commissioners under paragraph (3)(a) or subsection (7)
which presents the proposed revision to the electorate for
approval shall specify an orderly method and procedure
for implementing the revision contemplated in the
resolution.
(Emphasis added).
The trial court determined that the County violated the
procedure outlined in section 124.011 and that “[i]f the
commissioners want the voters to again lawfully consider the
issue, they must use the language used in 2022 and specifically
found [in] Florida Statute 124.011(9)(a).” This interpretation of
the statute was erroneous. Section 124.011 allows for the
alternative of single-member districts and includes the procedures
and parameters of implementing that alternative system. The
referendum at issue in this case addressed the potential return to
at-large voting from a single-member system. Given such, section
124.011(10), which is the only provision in the statute that
contemplates a reversion back to an at-large system of voting, was
applicable here. Because subsection (3) is the only provision that
subsection (10) references, the procedure outlined in subsection (3)
must be followed in order to return to that system. Subsection (3)
says nothing about how the proposal to return to at-large voting
must be worded. It certainly does not say that the language
contained in subsection (9) must be included. Subsection (9)
clearly applies when a referendum is proposing a switch from at-
large voting to single-member districts, not the other way around.
Had the Legislature wished to include specific language that must
be included on the ballot for a return to at-large voting in section
124.011 or elsewhere, it could have done so. Because it did not, the
trial court erred in declaring that the 2024 ballot language violated
section 124.011(9).
Accordingly, we REVERSE the order on appeal.
9
LEWIS and RAY, JJ., concur; and TANENBAUM, J., concurs in result
only.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Peter D. Webster of Carlton Fields, Tallahassee; Sylvia E. Torres,
County Attorney, Robert C. Swain, Deputy County Attorney,
Alachua County Board of County Commissioners, Gainesville;
Corbin Hanson, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Alachua
County Supervisor of Elections, Gainesville, for Appellants.
Seldon J. Childers of Childers Law, LLC, Gainesville; William D.
Palmer and Shannon McLin of Florida Appeals, Orlando;
Benjamin J. Gibson, Amber S. Nunnally, and Kassandra S.
Reardon of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Tallahassee, for Amicus Curiae
Leading For Our Future Political Committee, for Appellees.
10