## Facts

- The Attorney General sought an advisory opinion on the validity of a proposed citizen initiative constitutional amendment titled “Voter Control of Gambling in Florida” and its Financial Impact Statement (FIS).
- The initiative proposed adding article X, section 29 to the Florida Constitution to require that any authorization of “casino gambling” occur only through a statewide citizens’ initiative vote.
- The amendment defined “casino gambling” broadly by reference to Class III gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and implementing regulations, including future expansions of that definition.
- The text listed examples of casino-style games and devices (e.g., slot machines and house-banked card games) and excluded pari-mutuel wagering on horse racing, dog racing, and jai alai.
- Opponents argued the measure combined multiple subjects, misled voters—especially regarding potential interaction with tribal gaming under federal law—and that the FIS inadequately described fiscal effects.

## Issues

1. Whether the proposed constitutional amendment satisfied Florida’s single-subject requirement for citizen initiatives.
2. Whether the ballot title and summary complied with statutory requirements by clearly stating the chief purpose and not misleading voters.
3. Whether the Financial Impact Statement complied with statutory requirements for clarity and accuracy given fiscal uncertainty.

## Decision

- The court approved the proposed amendment for placement on the ballot.
- The court held the initiative satisfied the single-subject requirement because it had a logical and natural oneness of purpose: assigning voters the exclusive authority to authorize casino gambling through the initiative process.
- The court held the ballot title and summary were not affirmatively misleading and sufficiently stated the chief purpose: requiring citizen-initiative approval to authorize casino gambling.
- The court held the FIS complied with statutory requirements because it adequately conveyed that fiscal effects were indeterminate or contingent.

## Legal Principles

- In advisory review of a citizen initiative, the court’s inquiry is limited to single-subject compliance and whether the ballot title and summary satisfy statutory voter-information requirements, plus review of the FIS under the governing statute.
- A citizen initiative satisfies the single-subject rule when it maintains a logical and natural oneness of purpose and avoids logrolling or improper alteration of multiple branches’ functions.
- A ballot title and summary must clearly and unambiguously state the chief purpose and must not be affirmatively misleading, including by “flying under false colors” or “hiding the ball.”
- A financial impact statement is sufficient when it provides a clear, accurate estimate to the extent possible, and may describe impacts as indeterminate where future fiscal effects are uncertain.

## Conclusion

The Florida Supreme Court authorized the proposed “Voter Control of Gambling in Florida” initiative and its financial impact statement to appear on the ballot, concluding the measure addressed a single subject, the ballot language fairly informed voters of its chief purpose, and the fiscal statement adequately described uncertain financial effects.


Advisory Op. to the Att’y Gen. re Voter Control of Gambling in Fla., 215 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 2017)