Sun 'n Lakes, county work on voting compromise

In future elections, will eligible Sun 'n Lake voters cast ballots equal to the amount they pay in assessments to the district instead of the number of lots they own?

That remains to be seen and could become a possibility if Highlands County Commissioners and Sun 'n Lake supervisors approve a new proposed ordinance.

The public got a glimpse of the proposal as part of settlement talks Wednesday between the county and Sun 'n Lake officials, seeking to come up with a compromise to ward off a lawsuit Sun 'n Lake has filed against the county.

In June, county commissioners decided to reduce the voting rights of large landowners to elect supervisors in landowner elections.

The one-lot-equals-one-vote rule has been the source of longstanding discontent between the district and some property owners who have maintained that large out-of-town landowners like National Recreational Properties Inc. have swayed elections in their favor based solely on the number of lots they own.

In April, county commissioners decided that landowners who own sub-divided lots of an acre or more would receive one vote for every acre.

In June, Sun 'n Lake sued the county, claiming that by changing the district's Enabling Act, the county has violated Sun 'n Lake's Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment in the Constitution.

Wednesday, the two sides met to hash out an agreement before heading to possible litigation in case the issue is not resolved.

The new ordinance proposes that the number of votes eligible property owners get equals how much they pay in assessments.

If, for instance, a property owner pays $650 in assessments, then that would be the number of votes he or she is entitled to, County Attorney Ross Macbeth explained.

To be considered eligible, property owners could not be delinquent on assessments due at election time.

For instance, for the upcoming January 2010 election, only those who had paid their 2008 assessments by Election Day would get to vote. The number of votes they would get would be based on their 2009 assessments, Macbeth said.

Sun 'n Lake resident Joe Eck did not like the proposal.

"It's still for the big landowners," he maintained, referring to how those who pay more in assessments typically own more land.

Under the new proposal, Florida Hospital Heartland (Adventist Health), for instance, would get 1.873 percent of the votes compared to the current 1.036 percent; Tanglewood would get 2.935 percent of votes compared to the current 2.85 percent; and single-family votes also would go up from 18.65 percent to 22.532 percent.

Eck was in favor of amending the charter to have one acre equal one vote, which he maintained, had been in Sun 'n Lake's original charter before it was amended to swap an acre for a lot in deciding the voting power.

Macbeth explained that Sun 'n Lake's was an unusual position.

The courts have addressed voting issues of special districts, mainly irrigation districts in Florida, but the votes were not land based, and the assessments they were based on were uniform through the district, unlike Sun 'n Lake where property owners pay varying amounts depending on the services they receive.

The courts have directed that these issues be resolved in a "fair and reasonable" way, which is what they were attempting to do, he said.

The one thing common among all Sun 'n Lake property owners is that they all pay assessments, Macbeth said, which is why he based the new voting rights on that principle.

He reasoned that it was "fair and reasonable" to give property owners with developed lands, who typically pay more in assessments, more voting power than someone with vacant lots.

"Developed properties, some of them commercial, some residential...under this new voting system, they would have more votes," he said. "The developed property owner would control the election if everyone voted and everyone paid their assessments."

Resident Tom Kosty felt that Florida State Statute's Chapter 189, which governs special districts, gives governing bodies latitude in deciding and changing assessments, not voting rights, which was what the new proposal was doing. He favored changing the way assessments are levied.

"We have a broken system," he said. "We are just prolonging the agony."

County Administrator Michael Wright said there was no completely fair way of deciding the issue but they could all agree upon a system that was fairer than the one in existence.

Sun 'n Lake General Manager Al Grieshaber said after the meeting that he thought this suggestion was "fair and reasonable" and the best one he's heard so far.

County commissioners and Sun 'n Lake Board of Supervisors will meet today at 9 a.m. at the Bert J. Harris Agri-Civic Center to discuss the proposal as part of a joint meeting.