TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – The Florida Senate on Wednesday passed a bill that directly addresses a recent question that was posed by members of Jacksonville’s City Council: Can a son seek a council leadership position while working alongside his father?
The state senate’s answer was a resounding yes, as it unanimously passed an amendment introduced by Clay Yarborough, a state senator whose district includes Jacksonville, that specifies that serving on the same elected body and running for a leadership position in that same body is not a conflict.
The bill now heads to the Florida House for approval.
The question of whether it’s ethical for a son to run for a council leadership position was brought to the Florida Commission on Ethics by Joe Carlucci, a Jacksonville City Council member representing District 5, who works alongside his father, Matt Carlucci.
“I asked for ethics guidance so that, if I ever decide to pursue a Council leadership role, I’m doing it transparently and ethically,” Joe Carlucci said to News4JAX via statement.
“The whole way that he’s going about it is the best way to steer clear of any hazards,” Matt Carlucci said.
The core debate centers on Florida’s anti-nepotism laws and how they apply to internal leadership elections within government bodies. The commission’s legal team believes such a move would violate state anti-nepotism statutes.
According to their draft opinion, even if council members abstain from voting for their family members, it would still constitute a violation.
However, attorneys representing the council present a different interpretation.
“What we are saying is the advancement to council leadership is not an advancement to a different employment position,” Jason Teal, Council Secretary/Director, said in the meeting with the Florida Commission on Ethics.
The city’s legal team contends these are internal peer-elected positions where all council members maintain equal status. They also assert that the leadership roles are temporary, making them different from traditional superior-subordinate relationships covered by nepotism rules.
The Florida Commission on Ethics was split evenly in its initial vote on the matter. The question will return to the commission in March for further consideration.