It shouldn’t be surprising that Miami Beach Mayor David Dermer filed a suit challenging recent county laws that govern how future petition initiatives are circulated.

Prior to being elected commissioner in 1997, Dermer was recruited by residents interested in challenging the city’s eagerness to appease developers — namely Thomas Kramer, a commodities broker who wanted a massive zoning increase for a waterfront piece of land next to South Pointe Park known as the Alaska Parcel. Those residents would form Save Miami Beach and circulate a petition to place on the ballot a proposed charter amendment requiring voter approval for zoning increases along the waterfront. That petition would be certified and, in spite of Kramer funneling at least $1 million to defeat the measure, that charter amendment would become law — encouraging future legislation in Miami Beach to control development in the densest built-out city in Florida.

With the meager budget Save Miami Beach had at its disposal, that petition would have never been certified if county ordinances approved in 2006 were in place back in November 1996. This is particularly true of Ordinance 06-167, which makes it illegal for anyone to “lie” when circulating petitions for a referendum on a proposed charter amendment or recalling a public official.

What’s wrong with a lying prohibition? Well, what’s a lie? Suppose a petition gatherer told someone that the Save Miami Beach charter amendment would help stop high-rise development. Technically that would be more a statement of opinion of what the charter amendment could lead to. However, someone wanting to stop the petition drive could argue that the petition gatherer lied, call the police and subject the petition gatherer to a $500 fine or 60 days’ imprisonment in the county jail.

Used in conjunction with other laws enacted by the County Commission, including a code that allows petition signers to recant their signature, the lying prohibition ordinance can be used to stop citizen petitions through intimidation. Simply put: Petition circulators can be threatened with jail for statements they may or may not have made while gathering signatures. And petition campaigns for recalling an official or a referendum can be stopped before they even reach the Elections Department for certification with a few vague charges that some signatures were obtained by lying. The end result will be that no special election will be possible without the approval of an elected body.

In the opinion of the SunPost, the intent of many county commissioners was not to stop lying but to provide them a means of preventing laws from being enacted that they did not agree with. At the time Ordinance 06-167 was first proposed, county voters were about to decide on a referendum that would grant the county mayor the power to hire and fire department heads and relegate the county manager as his assistant. The move was fiercely opposed by all 13 members of the County Commission. There was also an initiative to recall Commissioner Natacha Seijas from office. In both cases, county commissioners insisted that petition signers were lied to. Now, under the new ordinance, county commissioners can call the police and haul their political opponents to jail. That power also rests with political leaders in Miami-Dade’s cities, including Miami and Miami Beach.

But in preventing so-called lies, the County Commission violated the United States Constitution’s First, Fifth and 14th Amendments because the ordinance’s definition of a “false statement” is vague. The lawsuit states: “The term ‘false statement’ which guides enforcement of the ordinance has neither a legal standard, nor a specific definition. Rather than incorporating an objective test into its regulatory language, the ordinance depends only upon subjective interpretation of the term ‘false statement’; the decision of whether a person has violated the ordinance and should be arrested rests entirely on the discretion of each individual Miami-Dade police officers [sic].”

Moreover, the suit argues that the county ordinance infringes on the right of free speech, stating: “The free expression of views on any affair may not be conditioned upon the Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners’ agreement with what a speaker may intend to say.”

Right now Dermer is asking the courts to eliminate an undemocratic law. But must it come to that? There is nothing wrong with elected officials admitting they made a mistake. County commissioners should repeal Ordinance 06-167 before the government is dragged into court. It’s just the right thing to do.

Comments? E-mail letters@miamisunpost.com.