Herald endorsement: Miami referendums on charter review, land sales | Opinion
READ MORE
Editorial Board November 2025 election recommendations
Ahead of the upcoming local elections, the Editorial Board sits down with political candidates to gain insight into their positions on key issues and the potential impact of their policies on the community. Our aim is to help voters make informed decisions about who is best suited for each race. See our November 2025 endorsements below:
Expand All
Miami voters will be deciding four ballot issues on Nov. 4. Here are our recommendations:
REFERENDUM 1: Should Miami establish a Charter Review Commission? YES.
Commissioner Ralph Rosado sponsored this proposal, which the city commission put on the ballot with a unanimous vote. The proposal would create a seven-member commission after each U.S. Census, conducted every 10 years, to review the city’s charter, hold public hearings and recommend changes.
This kind of review is a good idea to help keep the charter — the city’s foundational document — up-to-date and to allow for citizen input. Many governments, including Miami-Dade County, have charter review commissions.
In Miami’s case, the review would be done by residents appointed the mayor, commissioners and the city manager. The group would have a maximum of a year to do its work.
This is basic good governance, and voters should approve it.
REFERENDUM 2: Should the city ease restrictions on how it can sell or lease non-waterfront public land? NO
This referendum would allow the city commission to decide, with a four-fifths vote, to sell or lease non-waterfront, city-owned land for fair market value when there are fewer than three bids on it.
Under the current rules, the city must get voter approval to sell or lease land valued over $500,000 if it doesn’t get a minimum of three bids after publicly advertising the property. This charter amendment would change that process.
No doubt it would be more convenient for the city. A city spokeswoman said the city recently wanted to sell two lots in The Roads but couldn’t because there was only one bid on each, rather than the required three or more.
City-owned waterfront property would continue to need voter approval to be sold or leased.
Making this change would bypass the current check on power that a public vote ensures. The proposal originated with City Manager Art Noriega.
Miami is about to elect a new mayor and two commissioners. This issue should wait until after the election. If it’s really a good idea, it will come back for a fuller discussion.
REFERENDUM 3: Should the city protect the redrawing of district maps; establish a Citizens’ Redistricting Committee? YES
This city charter change would “prohibit gerrymandering, establish a citizens’ redistricting committee and define the redistricting process” for city commission seats.
This is needed, and it’s required. Miami faced litigation and public outcry over 2022 maps that split neighborhoods along racial lines, sparking community outrage. In July 2024, a federal court approved a settlement in a racial gerrymandering lawsuit filed by residents and community groups against the city. This referendum stems from the court settlement in that case.
The settlement required the adoption of a new district map through 2030 for city commission elections, making minor adjustments to undo racially discriminatory gerrymandering, and a ballot measure to create the redistricting committee. The committee would prepare new maps after each Census — every 10 years — and whenever required by law.
A citizen-driven process helps prevent special-interest drawing. By voting “Yes,” Miami voters will be making sure that the community is represented, not just those drawing the maps.
REFERENDUM 4: Should the city establish lifetime term limits for elected officials, retroactive? YES
This proposal would limit how long a person can serve as commissioner and mayor to two, four-year terms for each position during their lifetime. The term limits would be measured retroactively, meaning they apply to people who were previously in office.
There is an exception: Term limits would exclude the times when someone was elected to fill a vacancy. This is fair, but, as the Herald reported, it would allow Commissioner Joe Carollo to take office if he wins the mayoral race in November. That’s unfortunate because Carollo is one of the reasons this ballot proposal was created. He has been in and out of office since 1979 and won his first term as mayor to fill a vacancy in 1996.
Eight years — or 16, if someone serves as both mayor and commissioner — is plenty of time to enact an agenda. Lifetime term limits would put a stop to the revolving door of the same politicians serving in Miami.
It’s unclear what will happen if the measure passes and former Commissioner Frank Carollo, who already served two terms, wins the District 3 seat. The issue would likely go to court.
Critics of this proposal say that voters should decide at the ballot box whether it’s time for a politician to retire. That’s misguided. Longtime incumbents usually have an advantage in fundraising, which can keep qualified candidates from running and virtually guarantees reelection.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREWho decides the political endorsements?
In advance of local and state elections, Miami Herald Editorial Board members interview political candidates, as well as advocates and opponents of ballot measures. The Editorial Board is composed of experienced opinion journalists and is independent of the Herald’s newsroom. Members of the Miami Herald Editorial Board are: Amy Driscoll, editorial page editor; and editorial writers Isadora Rangel and Mary Anna Mancuso. Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
What does the endorsement process look like?
The Miami Herald Editorial Board interviews political candidates to better understand their views on public policy and how their policies will affect their constituents. Board members do additional reporting and research to learn as much as possible about the candidates before making an endorsement. The Editorial Board then convenes to discuss the candidates in each race. Board members seek to reach a consensus on the endorsements, but not every decision is unanimous. Candidates who decline to be interviewed will not receive an endorsement.
Is the Editorial Board partisan?
No. In making endorsements, members of the Editorial Board consider which candidates are better prepared to represent their constituents — not whether they agree with our editorial stances or belong to a particular political party. We evaluate candidates’ relevant experience, readiness for office, depth of knowledge of key issues and understanding of public policy. We’re seeking candidates who are thoughtful and who offer more than just party-line talking points.
This story was originally published October 22, 2025 at 11:09 AM.
