Herald endorsement: Vote ‘no’ on one of the city of Miami’s primary ballot questions | Opinion

Besides voting on candidates in various local races, voters who live in the city of Miami will also answer three ballot questions in the Aug. 20 primary elections.

These referendums are open to all city-registered voters regardless of party affiliation. They require a simple majority for approval.

Here are the Herald Editorial Board’s endorsements:

‘Yes’ on Referendums 1 and 2

The first two referendums on the ballot are connected and come on the heels of recent scandals that have shaken Miami, such as the arrest of former Commissioner Alex Diaz de la Portilla and questions about whether Mayor Francis Suarez might be using the power of his elected office to land lucrative employment deals.

Referendum 1 eliminates the city’s Office of the Auditor General, which is a necessary first step to create a more powerful and independent watchdog to investigate potential malfeasance within city government.

Referendum 2 creates such a watchdog under a new name: the Office of the Independent Inspector General.

The new office would have more power to investigate legal and ethical issues, including the ability to subpoena witnesses and initiate investigations on its own without being directed by the city manager or an elected official, both of which the existing auditor general cannot do, the Herald reported.

The current auditor general’s office is only allowed to perform internal audit functions. The new entity would be allowed to review procurement and bidding processes and look into past and future programs and contracts.

The city’s inspector general would be appointed by a panel that doesn’t include city commissioners, which is a must to avoid political influence.

Both referendums were the idea of Commissioner Manolo Reyes.

In a city in dire need of accountability, this is a no-brainer.

Vote YES on Miami’s Referendum 1 and Referendum 2.

‘No’ on Referendum 3

This ballot item may seem like your run-of-the-mill referendum, but it is an underhanded way for a commissioner to get his way against the wishes of the people. As the residents who sued the city to remove Referendum 3 from the Aug. 20 ballot say, it is a “leading question” meant to convince voters, not ask for their input.

Referendum 3 asks whether the city should “keep already installed outdoor gym equipment like in many of our parks at” Maurice A. Ferré Park in downtown “to enhance recreational facilities and promote community health and fitness for all our residents”

In October, the Bayfront Park Management Trust, under Commissioner Joe Carollo’s control, ordered the gym equipment installed at the bayfront park — which, by the way, is not in Carollo’s district. Some downtown residents opposed it, saying they were kept in the dark about the installation, and filed an appeal.

The city’s Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board sided with residents and voted to reverse the equipment installation, saying it didn’t follow proper procedure.

Instead of respecting that process, Carollo proposed — during a commission meeting in which the commissioner representing the park area, District 2’s Damian Pardo, was not present — to put the issue on the ballot. Carollo presented his proposal as a “pocket item,” meaning it wasn’t on the publicly-available meeting agenda and residents could not prepare to appear at the meeting to oppose it. Sneaky.

Two of his colleagues, Reyes and Commissioner Christine King, approved the referendum creation in a 3-1 vote. Ironically, just two weeks later, the commission also voted to essentially uphold the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board ruling ordering the gym equipment removed.

Miamians often cannot count on their elected officials to stop this type of underhanded political move, but voters can.

Vote NO on Miami’s Referendum 3.

This story was originally published August 13, 2024 at 11:10 AM.