In 2022, the ballot initiative received historic support from nearly 83% of the town’s voters, leading to the passage of a groundbreaking amendment known as the "Right to Clean Water." This initiative aimed to ensure that residents could drink, swim, and fish without the constant threat of pollution.
In a surprising turn, the city opted not to certify the November 2022 election, raising significant concerns among its residents. This controversial decision disregarded the votes of the citizens who participated in the electoral process.
Rather than acknowledging the election's outcome, the city filed a lawsuit against Speak Up Titusville, citing state preemption as the basis for their action. This move ignited a prolonged conflict between the city and its constituents, many furious at its apparent disregard for their democratic choices. The refusal to certify the election prompted widespread concern about the integrity of the democratic process in their community.
Did the City of Titusville Neglect Its Duty?
Many community members felt the council underestimated their ability to gather enough signatures to place the Right to Clean Water measure on the ballot. Ultimately, the residents achieved this goal; however, once the measure was on the ballot, the city neglected its duty to ensure that the language complied with constitutional requirements.
The city was responsible for amending the ballot language if any issues were identified, but they failed to take action. Additionally, the city made no effort to educate voters about the ballot initiative. Instead, they waited until after citizens had cast their votes to spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars pursuing actions against the citizens who had done their due diligence. This approach contradicted the principles of home rule. The city justified its actions by relying on state preemption as a reason to disregard the will of the voters.
Mayfield's introduction of this provision allowed her to take charge of the situation, effectively stripping residents of their ability to choose how to protect the environment and hold polluters responsible. Rather than empowering the community, she utilized preemption to weaken a burgeoning movement that was beginning to gain momentum.
Then, in 2023, Mayfield stood out as one of the forty lawmakers in Tallahassee who endorsed Senate Bill 102, known as the Live Local Act. This legislation seeks to bypass local zoning regulations to promote high-density housing initiatives. While the bill is designed to tackle the urgent challenge of affordable housing, it also reduces the power of local governments. Officials from various cities and counties across Florida have expressed significant opposition to the Live Local Act, arguing that it unfairly shifts the responsibility of managing aging infrastructure and protecting natural resources onto them while excluding them from the decision-making process regarding developments within their jurisdictions. Residents contend that this legislation promotes unchecked growth and undermines residents' rights to hold accountable those who pollute the state's distinctive aquifer and waterways.
A crucial element of the ruling from the Daytona Beach court was its focus on the financial consequences to polluters. Officials were also concerned that citizens would take legal action against those accountable for water pollution, including developers, industries, and even state agencies tasked with environmental protection. The appellate court's decision suggests that elected representatives might believe they can disregard the interests of citizens without facing any consequences, thus undermining constitutional rights intended to facilitate changes to government charters.
Elizabeth Baker, a Titusville resident actively involved in the signature collection for the Right to Clean Water initiative, voiced her apprehensions about the local government's current focus. She remarked, "In today's world, it appears that financial motives often take precedence over the collective desires of the community. When the judicial system leans towards corporate interests due to concerns about financial fallout, it indicates that monetary value is being placed above the sanctity of human life."
Tallahassee Paves the Path for Taking Away Citizens' Rights
State legislator Debbie Mayfield discreetly incorporated a preemption clause into the "Clean Waterways Act," Senate Bill 712, which sought to invalidate a 2020 initiative by residents of Orange County. Consequently, Mayfield's legislation effectively dismantled a grassroots movement. The group, known as "Speak Up Wekiva," positioned Orange County as one of the largest municipalities in the U.S. to enact a ‘rights of nature’ law. This law, which garnered an impressive 89% majority vote, aimed to grant legal rights to rivers and streams, allowing citizens to pursue legal action against polluters, including developers, who threaten water quality.Mayfield's introduction of this provision allowed her to take charge of the situation, effectively stripping residents of their ability to choose how to protect the environment and hold polluters responsible. Rather than empowering the community, she utilized preemption to weaken a burgeoning movement that was beginning to gain momentum.
Then, in 2023, Mayfield stood out as one of the forty lawmakers in Tallahassee who endorsed Senate Bill 102, known as the Live Local Act. This legislation seeks to bypass local zoning regulations to promote high-density housing initiatives. While the bill is designed to tackle the urgent challenge of affordable housing, it also reduces the power of local governments. Officials from various cities and counties across Florida have expressed significant opposition to the Live Local Act, arguing that it unfairly shifts the responsibility of managing aging infrastructure and protecting natural resources onto them while excluding them from the decision-making process regarding developments within their jurisdictions. Residents contend that this legislation promotes unchecked growth and undermines residents' rights to hold accountable those who pollute the state's distinctive aquifer and waterways.
Is the Deck Stacked Against the Citizens?
Money's influence on state politics is well-documented, with campaign financing, political committees, and lobbyists playing significant roles in shaping decisions at the capital. Among the notable contributors to Debbie Mayfield is "GrayRobinson, P.A., Florida Political Action Committee." This is the same law firm from Tallahassee that the city of Titusville hired to represent it in the lawsuit against its residents for not certifying the 2022 Right to Clean Water votes. The city has spent over $140,000 for GrayRobinson’s legal services; this doesn’t include the City Attorney Richard Broome's fees. The city utilized tax dollars to hire lawyers to oppose the community's votes.A crucial element of the ruling from the Daytona Beach court was its focus on the financial consequences to polluters. Officials were also concerned that citizens would take legal action against those accountable for water pollution, including developers, industries, and even state agencies tasked with environmental protection. The appellate court's decision suggests that elected representatives might believe they can disregard the interests of citizens without facing any consequences, thus undermining constitutional rights intended to facilitate changes to government charters.
Elizabeth Baker, a Titusville resident actively involved in the signature collection for the Right to Clean Water initiative, voiced her apprehensions about the local government's current focus. She remarked, "In today's world, it appears that financial motives often take precedence over the collective desires of the community. When the judicial system leans towards corporate interests due to concerns about financial fallout, it indicates that monetary value is being placed above the sanctity of human life."
The County Turned Down Right to Clean Water in 2022
On June 23, 2022, the Brevard County Charter Review Commission was introduced to a proposal advocating for implementing the Right to Clean Water throughout the county. This presentation involved various commission members, including notable figures like Robin Fisher, Kendall Moore, Blaise Trettis, and Mike Haridopolos. The public hearing focused on whether the proposal conflicted with the state law enacted by Debbie Mayfield in 2020.At the charter meeting, Robin Fisher, a prominent lobbyist in Brevard County with extensive political ties, expressed his confusion regarding the proposed law. He admitted to not fully grasping the roles of the plaintiff and defendant and the various functions of attorneys involved in such cases. To illustrate his point, he posed a specific scenario: "In the case of a sewage spill in Titusville, where a pipe busted and went into the river, what does this law allow you to do?" A resident expressed that they believe citizens should have the right to take legal action against the City of Titusville to address the issue and cover the costs associated with the pollution remediation. They emphasized that this action would not be for personal financial gain. Then Fisher asked, “Wouldn’t the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) make Titusville clean it up anyway?
Is the EPA Negligent for the State of the Indian River Lagoon?
Residents of Titusville, who take pride in their city being "the gateway to nature," are increasingly frustrated by sewage spills that have repeatedly harmed the Indian River Lagoon ecosystem. This issue has forced taxpayers to shoulder the financial burden of fines for environmental violations. For over a decade, residents have questioned the city's financial decisions, especially why infrastructure maintenance and sewage plant upkeep have not been prioritized. Meanwhile, the city continues to allow high-density development, which puts additional strain on the existing systems.
The Indian River Lagoon was designated as a National Estuary of Significance by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1990, which allowed it to receive federal funding through the National Estuary Program (NEP). This initiative aimed to “protect and restore the estuary’s water quality and ecological integrity.” This program spans five counties and was intended to enhance the protection and funding for this vital waterway. Despite these efforts, the need for Brevard County to implement a self-imposed tax raises concerns regarding the effectiveness of the original protective measures.
In 2016, after 26 years of persistent environmental issues, Brevard residents approved a half-cent tax called the Save Our Indian River Lagoon initiative to secure additional funding for the lagoon's restoration. This situation prompts critical inquiries: What led to the lagoon's decline over the years? Did the EPA adequately fulfill its role in safeguarding and restoring the estuary, and were those responsible for pollution held accountable for the lagoon's current condition?
The recent Daytona Beach Appellate court ruling on the Right to Clean Water highlights the involvement of various agencies, yet questions remain. If the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection were effectively executing their duties, why would residents feel compelled to impose a tax on themselves? The current state of waterways is alarming, showing a decline compared to the 1990s. Seagrass has been severely depleted, fish populations have dwindled, and numerous species have vanished. Additionally, there have been troubling incidents of unusual mortality rates among marine life.
The government’s investment of millions of dollars into lagoon restoration efforts suggests an acknowledgment of the existing pollution issues, underscoring the urgency for effective intervention and accountability.
The recent Daytona Beach appellate court ruling stated, “We recognize the overwhelming support of this charter amendment by the residents of the City of Titusville and the admirable policies of the amendment. However, the Environmental Protection Act has not authorized the types of rights provided for in the charger amendment.”
The recent Daytona Beach Appellate court ruling on the Right to Clean Water highlights the involvement of various agencies, yet questions remain. If the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection were effectively executing their duties, why would residents feel compelled to impose a tax on themselves? The current state of waterways is alarming, showing a decline compared to the 1990s. Seagrass has been severely depleted, fish populations have dwindled, and numerous species have vanished. Additionally, there have been troubling incidents of unusual mortality rates among marine life.
The government’s investment of millions of dollars into lagoon restoration efforts suggests an acknowledgment of the existing pollution issues, underscoring the urgency for effective intervention and accountability.
The recent Daytona Beach appellate court ruling stated, “We recognize the overwhelming support of this charter amendment by the residents of the City of Titusville and the admirable policies of the amendment. However, the Environmental Protection Act has not authorized the types of rights provided for in the charger amendment.”
Like the plight of the struggling manatees in the Indian River Lagoon, the ability of citizens to make decisions for their communities has been reduced to its bare bones due to the representatives in Tallahassee preventing them from doing so.
Florida Environmental Protection Agency Issues Pollution Permits
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) functions under the direction of representatives from Tallahassee. When legislators introduce insufficient regulations, the agency's ability to hold polluters accountable is weakened. During a county charter hearing, Bill Debusk highlighted a concerning example: it is legal to dispose of biosolids near water bodies like Lake Washington, which serves as the primary water source for the City of Melbourne. He pointed out that while such actions are allowed, they can lead to harmful algae blooms, posing significant health risks to residents. Despite these risks, the state agency requires the backing of state legislators and the Governor to assess, fund, and address these critical concerns."It is obvious that the state agencies' pollution regulations are not adequate to protect our water. And, we’re powerless to do anything,” Laurilee Thompson, hailing from a fishing family with deep roots in north Brevard and is an advocate for the conservation of local fisheries, expresses concern over the state agencies' inadequate pollution regulations, stating at a Right to Clean Water charter hearing held in Brevard County in 2022,
The legislature is often shaped by the significant influence of industry lobbyists on these regulations. Polluters typically seek to minimize regulatory requirements that serve their financial interests.
.jpg)
Addressing Concerns About Drinking Water Quality
In Titusville, citizens face some of the highest water bills in the city. The situation became critical in the late 1990s when the community began experiencing significant water shortages, prompting the need for a wellfield and considering purchasing water from Cocoa. Beyond the financial burden of water bills, many residents distrust the quality of their drinking water sourced from groundwater across the city. The city frequently experiences chlorine burnouts, leading to concerns echoed by environmental activist Erin Brockovich, who has publicly criticized Titusville's water situation on social media, labeling it a “shit show.”
Given these circumstances, many feel compelled to buy bottled water as a substitute and invest in filtration systems, further increasing their expenses. With residents purchasing water every month, it raises the question of why they should take such measures to ensure their water is safe for consumption. If it falls upon the citizens to purify their water before it enters their homes, what role does the city play in this scenario? Additionally, the city’s authorization of new developments threatens to deplete local wells, highlighting the need for better water supply protection. Recently, Mayor Connors was seen in a released video admitting he voted for the Right to Clean Water because of drinking water, ultimately acknowledging he believes there are issues with the water supply.
State officials increasingly exert control over local governance, as evidenced by recent preemption measures restricting local governments from implementing their own regulations. The application of this provision has led to unintended consequences, as demonstrated in the recent case concerning the Right to Clean Water in Titusville.
The ruling also indicates that residents of Florida should depend on state and protective agencies to safeguard their natural resources. However, critics contend that this message is undermined by ongoing initiatives to transform parks into golf courses and pickleball courts, which favor unregulated development. Furthermore, recent legislation restricts citizens from prohibiting plastic bags, and the application of harmful chemicals poses a significant risk to the health of these essential natural resources.
Legal experts note that the law is open to interpretation, and the City of Titusville's recent victory does not signify a definitive resolution.
"We are declaring the right to clean water, just as we'd declare the right of free speech or right to carry guns or any other rights in the Bill of Rights," said Michael Myjak during a Brevard County charter review meeting as he elaborated that Mayfield's legislation did not preempt the proposal.
Residents are adamant that this struggle is only in its early stages, indicating their fight to protect natural resources will continue regardless of the looming judicial decisions.
Given these circumstances, many feel compelled to buy bottled water as a substitute and invest in filtration systems, further increasing their expenses. With residents purchasing water every month, it raises the question of why they should take such measures to ensure their water is safe for consumption. If it falls upon the citizens to purify their water before it enters their homes, what role does the city play in this scenario? Additionally, the city’s authorization of new developments threatens to deplete local wells, highlighting the need for better water supply protection. Recently, Mayor Connors was seen in a released video admitting he voted for the Right to Clean Water because of drinking water, ultimately acknowledging he believes there are issues with the water supply.
The Unforeseen Outcomes of Establishing This Precedent
Courts generally uphold citizen initiatives, similar to the recent case in Titusville, as constitutional. The judges of the fifth district recognize that the state's intention was to restrict citizen-led initiatives. While the Titusville charter granted rights specifically to residents and not to bodies of water, the court did not draw this important distinction. The ruling highlights a particularly sweeping statute that critics argue effectively undermines local efforts to safeguard the environment. Many legal experts contend that the breadth of this law raises constitutional concerns.State officials increasingly exert control over local governance, as evidenced by recent preemption measures restricting local governments from implementing their own regulations. The application of this provision has led to unintended consequences, as demonstrated in the recent case concerning the Right to Clean Water in Titusville.
The ruling also indicates that residents of Florida should depend on state and protective agencies to safeguard their natural resources. However, critics contend that this message is undermined by ongoing initiatives to transform parks into golf courses and pickleball courts, which favor unregulated development. Furthermore, recent legislation restricts citizens from prohibiting plastic bags, and the application of harmful chemicals poses a significant risk to the health of these essential natural resources.
“It comes down to power, money, politics, and restricting citizens right to sue corporations for pollution,” said a resident.
Legal experts note that the law is open to interpretation, and the City of Titusville's recent victory does not signify a definitive resolution.
"We are declaring the right to clean water, just as we'd declare the right of free speech or right to carry guns or any other rights in the Bill of Rights," said Michael Myjak during a Brevard County charter review meeting as he elaborated that Mayfield's legislation did not preempt the proposal.
Residents are adamant that this struggle is only in its early stages, indicating their fight to protect natural resources will continue regardless of the looming judicial decisions.
Demonstrated History of Citizens Exercising These Rights
In 2006, Tamaqua Borough, Pennsylvania, became the first city in the United States to recognize the rights of Nature.” The groundbreaking ordinance revoked the legal privileges previously granted to corporations, instead empowering ecosystems and the communities that depend on them. Once a thriving mining town, Tamaqua had large pits left from mining activities. Companies outside the state sought to use the pits to dispose of toxic sludge containing a dangerous mix of human waste and industrial chemicals. In response, the city enacted a ban in 2006 on dumping this hazardous sewage sludge, asserting the community's right to clean air, water, soil, and a healthy environment.
In 2019, Exeter, New Hampshire, adopted an ordinance recognizing the rights of nature, including the right to “be free from chemical trespass,” banning corporate activities from releasing toxic waste.
In November 2010, the City of Pittsburgh became the first major city in the United States to recognize the rights of nature, and the ordinance rejected state preemption of local regulations and bans on fossil fuel industry projects by instituting a ban on the extraction of combustible (“natural”) gas within the city.
A 2024 Supreme Court decision in Montana affirmed the "fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment." The court ruled in favor of 16 young plaintiffs who claimed that the state had infringed upon their constitutional rights by supporting the fossil fuel industry. This landmark ruling emphasized that the Constitution mandates Montana to lower its greenhouse gas emissions, which rank among the highest in the country, and to shift towards clean, renewable energy sources.
These ordinances have also included the natural ecosystem in planning decisions when reviewing development and infrastructure project applications.
Numerous cities throughout the United States have enacted comparable citizen-driven resolutions that acknowledge the rights to natural resources. These measures shift the focus of environmental legislation from serving human interests to prioritizing the protection of nature itself.
Sources:
In 2019, Exeter, New Hampshire, adopted an ordinance recognizing the rights of nature, including the right to “be free from chemical trespass,” banning corporate activities from releasing toxic waste.
In November 2010, the City of Pittsburgh became the first major city in the United States to recognize the rights of nature, and the ordinance rejected state preemption of local regulations and bans on fossil fuel industry projects by instituting a ban on the extraction of combustible (“natural”) gas within the city.
A 2024 Supreme Court decision in Montana affirmed the "fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment." The court ruled in favor of 16 young plaintiffs who claimed that the state had infringed upon their constitutional rights by supporting the fossil fuel industry. This landmark ruling emphasized that the Constitution mandates Montana to lower its greenhouse gas emissions, which rank among the highest in the country, and to shift towards clean, renewable energy sources.
These ordinances have also included the natural ecosystem in planning decisions when reviewing development and infrastructure project applications.
Numerous cities throughout the United States have enacted comparable citizen-driven resolutions that acknowledge the rights to natural resources. These measures shift the focus of environmental legislation from serving human interests to prioritizing the protection of nature itself.
Sources:
- Brevard County Charter Review Commission Members: https://www.brevardfl.gov/CountyCommission/CountyCharter/ReviewCommission2021-2022
- Brevard County Charter Review Commission Right to Clean Water Minutes: https://www.brevardfl.gov/docs/default-source/commissioners/review-commission-2021-2022/review-commission-2022-not-508/2022-06-23-charter-review-commission-agenda-package.pdf?sfvrsn=fbee01b6_2
- Debbie Mayfield Contributions Transparency USA: https://www.transparencyusa.org/fl/candidate/debbie-mayfield-can/contributors
- EPA National Estuary Program: https://www.epa.gov/nep
- Florida Constitution: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?submenu=3
- HB 1405 Biosolids: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/1405/Analyses/h1405z1.WST.PDF
- Home Rule: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0163/Sections/0163.410.html
- Home Rule Award 2020: https://spacecoastdaily.com/2020/05/titusville-city-council-member-sarah-stoeckel-honored-with-2020-home-rule-hero-award/
- Home Rule Award 2024: https://www.facebook.com/cityoftitusville/posts/congratulations-to-dr-sarah-stoeckel-who-was-recognized-by-the-florida-league-of/848484637383794/
- In wake of toxic dumping, Tamaqua Borough passes Rights of Nature ordinance: https://ejatlas.org/conflict/tamaqua-borough-passes-ordinance-on-rights-of-nature
- SB 102 Live Local Act: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/102
- SB 712 Clean Waterways Act: https://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2020/712
- Speak Up Titusville on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/speakuptitusville/
- Rights of Nature Timeline: https://www.centerforenvironmentalrights.org/timeline#:~:text=Lafayette%2C%20Colorado%2C%20in%20the%20U.S.,filed%20in%20U.S.%20federal%20court.