Residents continue lawsuit to block amendment
Voters in the city of Miami voted yes down the line to three referendums on the Aug. 20 ballot. The first two questions will replace the city’s auditor general with a new office of inspector general, which has broader investigative powers. More on how that office will work later.
The third question about the gym equipment at Maurice Ferre Park could become the subject of the first investigation by the new inspector general, who should look into how this even got on the ballot in the first place.
Voters overwhelmingly voted to keep the illegally-installed ‘outdoor gym’ equipment by a huge margin, 79% to 21%. And who can blame them? The ballot language made it difficult to vote no: “Shall the city of Miami keep the already installed outdoor gym equipment like in many of our parks at the City park located at 1075 Biscayne Boulevard, Miami, FL 33132, also known as Maurice A. Ferré Park, to enhance recreational facilities and promote community health and fitness for all our residents?”
Who wouldn’t say yes to “enhance” and “promote” community health? It sounds awesome. But it’s a dirty trick. And voters didn’t get the whole story.
This equipment was already scheduled to be ripped out. After months of complaints from downtown residents, both the planning and zoning advisory board and the city commission determined that the Bayfront Park Management Trust, a semiautonomous board chaired by Miami Commissioner Joe Carollo, did not get the proper permits completed, or any community input, before installing the gym, which critics say is contrary to the master plan, which makes that park passive. The PZAB ruled in November that the permit — called a “warrant” in this case– was invalid and revoked it. After the Bayfront Trust appealed that decision — this is a semiautonomous city board appealing the decision made on behalf of residents, by the way — the city commission rejected that appeal and upheld the ruling in May.
Read related: Joe Carollo and the horrible, terrible, no good, very bad day at Miami City Hall
But two weeks earlier, Carollo introduced a ballot question through a pocket item — which means it wasn’t advertised or noticed on the agenda — at a commission meeting where District 2 Commissioner Damian Pardo was absent. That was by design. Carollo is sneaky that way. Pardo has been criticized for being MIA and falling prey to Carollo, but he announced at a prior meeting that he was going to be out. Commissioners have deferred items before if a district commissioner isn’t there. They could have done the same thing and held off for two weeks, when the commission considered the appeal of the PZAB decision to remove the outdoor gym.
Commissioner Miguel Gabela Gabela was the only one who voted against putting the question on the ballot, out of respect for the district commissioner. There’s been a long tradition in the city of Miami to wait for the district commissioner to weigh in before doing something of such magnitude. Gabela — who is battling Pardo on the Community Revitalization Agency issue (more on that later) — also said on Spanish-language morning radio that he voted no.
Carollo has said it passed 3-1 so it still would have passed. But Pardo never had an opportunity to sway someone — probably Commissioner Manolo Reyes — against it.
“This never should have been allowed,” Pardo told Political Cortadito, adding that nobody knew it was a binding question at the time. “Everybody thought it was a straw ballot.”
Pardo has compared this act by Carollo to his other abuses of public office to retaliate against his political opponents and have his way with the Bayfront Park Trust, which lacks any real oversight of its finances. The Bayfront Park Trust was the applicant that put in the outdoor gym.
“How do you override the code and a city commission meeting,” Pardo asks. “This is repealing what commissioners passed. What it really tells you is how dysfunctional and complicit the city is. How does something go to referendum the same day that it’s brought to the commission?”
In other words, there should have been more discussion.
Read related: Miami ballot referendum on outdoor gym at downtown park is misleading
A group of residents who sued to try to stop the referendum only days before the Aug. 20 vote, but a judge said it was too late to remove Amendment 3 or stop the tabulation of results. The judge denied the temporary injunction filed with the complaint saying there would be no irreparable harm because a court can always void the election results.
The city on Tuesday filed a motion to have the lawsuit dismissed because the election in question already happened. But there is no reason to believe the judge will do that.
The complaint states that the referendum violates the city’s administrative zoning procedures and “seeks voter approval of a development project that violates the City’s zoning code,” but also In violates state zoning laws and election code that requires ballot language be “clear and unambiguous.”
And also unbiased.
“The language of Referendum 3 omits vital information, and is unclear and misleading to voters,” the lawsuit states. “The ballot language, for example, fails to communicate to voters whether the referendum is binding or non-binding, what, if any, official action may result from the referendum, and contains unlawful editorial commentary designed to suggest the City’s desired electoral result.”
Yeah! Who wouldn’t say yes to “enhance” and “promote” community health? Did Ladra ask that already? The point is that the language is exceeding suggestive.
“As a safeguard for democracy, Florida law requires that all ballot referendums be clear and unambiguous, and that they not suggest a preferred result to voters,” attorney Marc Burton, who represents six downtowners who sued, told Political Cortadito. “We believe that the referendum violated these requirements and that there is no way to tell what public sentiment would be in response to a properly worded and legally permissible question.”
The other interesting thing about the referendum pointed out in the lawsuit is that it used the wrong address. According to the county property appraiser, the address is for a Miami-Dade water and sewer pump, outside of the property line for Museum Park, which is 1095 Biscayne Boulevard, not 1075.
It looks like a typo, but the attorney for the residents argues, basically, that the sloppiness indicates the unnatural speed and hastiness with which the ballot question was rammed through. Because Carollo had a short window of time while Pardo was away.
Read related: Damian Pardo again tells Joe Carollo to resign in exchange for bank documents
Some people have cast this as yet another punishment against District 2 residents by Carollo, who was the commissioner that led the effort last year to divide Coconut Grove into three districts (later reversed by a judge).
Ladra sees it as another battle in the political war between Carollo and Pardo, who will bring an item to the commission meeting next week that would change the make-up of the Bayfront Trust board and give the District 2 commissioner more control. Gabela has a separate discussion item on the chairman of the board, which downtown residents have petitioned to change.
Stay tuned. This is gonna be good.
Miami voters win on inspector general, lose on ‘outdoor gym’ referendum added by Ladra on
View all posts by Ladra →
