New Rules
Lying to Get Petition Signatures Now Illegal, County Commission Decides

“Do we have anything in our code that authorizes us to regulate political speech?”

A recall petition on County Commissioner Natacha Seijas, and subsequent investigation by the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office on the organizers’ methods, is the inspiration for the new law.

By Angie Hargot

In a fiery constitutional back-and-forth argument on the dais, the Miami-Dade County Commission amended and passed an ordinance Tuesday designed to prevent petition circulators from misleading voters.

Part of the ordinance’s inspiration: a recall petition against Miami-Dade County Commissioner Natacha Seijas that is now being investigated.

Also passed was a code that would allow someone signing a petition for a special election to change his or her mind and a requirement that only one signature per page will be accepted in the future.

Beating the new law: a petition drive seeking to create a strong mayor post — filled by an elected official who can hire and fire department heads. That measure, which was placed on the ballot for Jan. 23, is opposed by all 13 commissioners.

In a Nov. 13 letter to county officials, Miami-Dade State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle said 34 citizens, whose names appeared in a petition circulated by Miami Lakes Councilman Michael Pizzi to remove Seijas from office, had never signed the recall document.

As a result of the petition certification, a special election to decide Seijas’ political fate will be held in District 13, which includes parts of Hialeah and Miami Lakes, on Dec. 19.

The new ordinance prohibits “any person or entity from intentionally making false statements concerning the contents or effect of any petition for initiative, referendum, or recall to any person who is requested to sign any such petition or who makes an inquiry regarding any such petition,” and means up to 60 days in jail and fines up to $500 for offenders. It effectively criminalizes a petitioner who “intentionally” deceives those signing their petitions.

Some citizens who signed the petition recalling Seijas were allegedly told it was a petition to bring childcare to their neighborhoods or to keep Seijas in office, said Commissioner Jose “Pepe” Diaz, who read Rundle’s letter to the county during the meeting.

Elected officials debated over the burden of proof and how to determine intentional deception.

Local Miami activist Mary Williams spoke out against the petition law, on the grounds it contradicted the democratic process. “And I have no axe to grind,” Williams said. “[This is] from someone who has circulated many petitions.”    

The issue struck a particular chord with Sorenson, who was concerned with the ordinance’s potential limitations on free speech and questioned if the commission even had legal standing to address the issue.

“Do we have anything in our code that authorizes us to regulate political speech?” Sorenson asked County Manager George M. Burgess.

“The answer is no,” he said, but maintained that the item wouldn’t be before the commission if staff didn’t think the wording of the ordinance was broad enough to avoid a potential First Amendment conflict.

Sorenson, often glancing at her notes, likened the law to the abuse of civil liberties in the Deep South in the ‘50s and ‘60s, Fidel Castro’s régime and the rule of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

The Castro connection was not well received. “I don’t want to bring something so painful into talking about law,” Commissioner Rebeca Sosa said.

Sorenson also was concerned about the limitations on petitioning the fear of prosecution could bring, citing that the aim is to be more inclusive to the process, “not disenfranchising.” The measure is “well-intentioned but has very frightening applications. We don’t want to be associated with that,” Sorenson argued.

“I kind of like being associated with the truth,” Chairman Joe A. Martinez replied.

Commissioner Carlos A. Gimenez wondered how the law will be enforced. “People are getting paid by the signature; it says ‘knowingly makes a false statement.’ We’re going to have to prove [it] one way or another,” Gimenez said.

“It will come down to a ‘he-said, she-said,’” Williams said.

Commissioner Sally Heyman agreed that much of the disagreement was “specific to enforcement,” adding that the county already has “language on our books criminalizing fraud.” However, Heyman supported the law. “If a person believes that the information [conveyed while petitioning] is correct, this doesn’t hurt them.”

Commissioner Javier D. Souto was also unappreciative of Sorenson’s argument. “Miami-Dade County is not Mississippi,” he said, as his comments became increasingly impassioned.

Vice Chairman Dennis C. Moss followed him on the list of commissioners wishing to weigh in, adding, “This isn’t about free speech, this is about false speech. Petition gatherers need to be better regulated … this is a way for us to make a statement.”

Commissioner Audrey Edmonson said those hired to collect signatures are often not well paid or well trained. “They don’t care what it’s about, just what they’ve been told to say,” she said. The measure, Edmonson asserted, will force petition organizers to be responsible for their workers.

Seeing that the vote was winding to a close, Williams again leapt to the podium, and although chastised by Martinez for speaking out of turn, called out her question: “Am I going to jail?”  

The item passed 11-2 with Sorenson and Gimenez voting no. Seijas, who (early in the discussion) left briefly to attend a doctor appointment, reprimanded the code’s dissenters. “For those who voted ‘no,’ I hope you never have to go through what I went through,” she said, her tone of voice a commentary on their loyalty. “There’s something called empathy,” she said during discussion of the next, related item, an ordinance that provides for a 15-day period during which a person signing a petition may withdraw their signature. The law also stipulates that all print on all petitions must appear in 12-point font, and the county fall in line with the state requirements that only one signature is permitted per page.

Sorenson saw the measure as, at the very least, wasteful and an unnecessary burden on petitioners to transport that amount of paperwork, and at worst, as opening the process to the possibility of “coercion” during the 15-day opportunity to withdraw a signature. Sorenson suggested that during particularly bitter political battles, petitioners could be sought out and coerced to withdraw their signatures. The names of those who sign petitions are public record in the state of Florida. Sorenson was the lone nay vote on that item. Gimenez saw the measure as a viable solution.

Another controversial item related to petitions set a date for the county to vote via special election on the “strong mayor” initiative pushed by County Mayor Carlos Alvarez and his allies. Voters will get to weigh in themselves on Jan. 23 with early voting commencing on Jan. 8. Both commissioners Moss and Seijas asked Supervisor of Elections Lester Sola whether there was time to get “additional items” and “resolutions” on the ballot.

“I’m seriously considering coming back with some straw ballot issues,” Commissioner Moss said. With the hint of paper-tiger issues on the ballot, Chairman Martinez warned his colleagues against such a move.

“I’d like to keep it simple,” Martinez said. “You may get more people voting.”   Comments? E-mail angie@miamisunpost.com.