Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 106.355 (2025)
Nonparticipating candidate exceeding limits.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
106.355 Nonparticipating candidate exceeding limits.—Whenever a candidate for the office of Governor or member of the Cabinet who has elected not to participate in election campaign financing under the provisions of ss. 106.30-106.36 exceeds the applicable expenditure limit provided in s. 106.34, all opposing candidates participating in such election campaign financing are, notwithstanding the provisions of s. 106.33 or any other provision requiring adherence to such limit, released from such expenditure limit to the extent the nonparticipating candidate exceeded the limit, are still eligible for matching contributions up to such limit, and shall not be required to reimburse any matching funds provided pursuant thereto. In addition, the Department of State shall, within 7 days after a request by a participating candidate, provide such candidate with funds from the 1Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund equal to the amount by which the nonparticipating candidate exceeded the expenditure limit, not to exceed twice the amount of the maximum expenditure limits specified in s. 106.34(1)(a) and (b), which funds shall not be considered matching funds.
1Note.—The trust fund expired, effective November 4, 1996, by operation of s. 19(f), Art. III of the State Constitution.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1994–2010 · leading case: Scott v. Roberts, 612 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2010).
Scott v. Roberts, 612 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2010). “91-107 § 24 (codified at Fla. Stat. § 106.355 ). Unlike the public funds that a participating candidate receives from the state that match private contributions to that candidate, the excess spending subsidy is tied to the spending of the participating candidate’s opponent;…”
Smith v. Crawford, 645 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). “Similarly, the ruling that Bob Crawford is entitled under section 106.355, Florida Statutes (1993), to immediately obtain public matching funds from the Trust Fund measured by campaign contributions that Jim Smith received in his campaign for Governor is erroneous.”
Cushing v. McKee, 738 F. Supp. 2d 146 (D. Me. 2010). “3d at 1281 (involving a constitutional challenge by millionaire plaintiff prevented from making personal expenditures by Florida’s public funding scheme) (invalidating Fla. Stat. § 106.355 ); McComish, 611 F.3d at 521 ("Davis says nothing about public funding schemes.”
Richard L. Scott v. Dawn K. Roberts (11th Cir. 2010). “91-107 § 24 (codified at Fla. Stat. § 106.355 ). Unlike the public funds that a participating candidate receives from the state that match private contributions to that candidate, the excess spending subsidy is tied to the spending of the participating candidate’s opponent;…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.