At the Miami Dade county commission meeting yesterday, I was curious what transformation may have occurred as a result of the recall of former Miami Dade mayor Carlos Alvarez and Natacha Seijas, district commissioner from Hialeah. On the table in the special meeting: to set a date for the election to fill empty seats. There was also a question whether an interim mayor would be appointed by the commission. I wondered: had attitudes changed? Was arrogance banished, now that the catalyst-- Seijas-- had been dismissed by 88 percent of voters? Had The New Age of Humility arrived?
The TV news cameras were out in force. Not that they had done much good, exposing the depths where Seijas and her supporters wallowed. On several occasions I had witnessed Seijas commandeer the TV trucks to her purposes. She had less luck with the Herald, despite the fact her supporters complained to the publisher every time a story appeared that contained a whiff of criticism against her core constituency; the builders, developers and rock miners. The Miami Herald printed "by the barrel of ink", she would declaim from the dais while her funders rubbed shoulders with the brass at One Herald Square. It became a popular rallying call of the unreformable majority (and part of the insanity that led Art Teele to blow his brains out in the Herald lobby). According to yesterday's meeting, the refrain hasn't lost its currency. If you read EOM you will know our view: The Miami Herald hasn't done nearly enough to expose the toxic sludge through which Miami Dade politics moves in a torrent. Yesterday, there were again dark utterances from the dais against the media. For doing what? For instigating the public? For using hysteria as a tool to sell advertisements?
The commissioners still find fault everywhere -- too few voters, too few town hall meetings, too few opportunities to meet with each others' constitutents-- everywhere but in their own culpability for the sorry state of the county. Won't the media finally expose how many BILLIONS in infrastructure deficits piled up during the time in which "growth paid its own way"?
A few themes emerged, along the lines of the dark undercurrent of Miami-Dade ethnic politics. During the Charter Review process two years ago (whose recommendations were entirely rejected by the county commission), former state legislator, GOP operator and lobbyist Miguel De Grandy represented the status quo. He claimed (rather, lectured) that anything other than single member districts disenfranchises minorities. It is an appealingly simple concept for the deal-makers on the African American side of the county commission and was embraced, yesterday, by Audrey Edmunson and Barbara Jordan although in cryptic, incomplete thoughts. They are against anything that threatens single member districts (ie. the addition of some at-large members of the commission, as recommended by the Charter Review). So are the Cuban Americans: Javier Souto, Joe Martinez, et al.
Single member districts mostly represent the horse-trading of votes by distant commissioners in the inner city for zoning changes in open space and farmland to benefit land speculators who seed and fertilize political campaigns. That is the equation that Seijas represented in her metaphorical whip and leatherettes. But who gets metaphor on the county commission? (please click, 'read more')
No one. Certainly not Javier Souto who reliably delivers the inappropriately memorable whenever he asks "for a few minutes to speak". Yesterday after emphasizing something about co-chairing the 1992 state legislative committee on reapportionment-- that delivered a Congressional seat to my dear friend, Carrie Meek, he said five times-- he added, "At the end of the day we are shooting ourselves in the head." He meant, foot. Who knows what he was shooting at, but the African American commissioners nodded. (Souto also said, "I decided to leave before I vomited on the people.") I had no idea what the 29 year veteran of political life was talking about and from the fidgeting on the dais-- exasperation, tedious patience-- no one else did, either. Someone in the audience waved a toy American flag at the end of a pencil or chopstick.
There were other non-sequitors worth mention. At the start of the meeting, Chairman Joe gave two members of the audience an opportunity to speak. Miss Williams-- a constituent of Barbara Jordan-- got up to ask that she be appointed county mayor as she was the only candidate to run in the last election in which Alvarez was voted in. She demanded her "first amendment rights" for the "60,191 people who voted for me". I was prepared to move to the speaker's podium to throw my own name in the ring for the interim appointment (Please appoint me, relentless blogger and critic, to fill the vacuum in County Hall.) , but one Pedro Martinez who "put his life on the line when this was a ghost town", which was in 1959, took the wind out of my sails. I assume he meant the Bay of Pigs. "Enough is enough!", he sort of thundered, winning me over. Then he darkly intoned against one who I assumed was Norman Braman, our billionaire benefactor who turned the county commission jugos cart upside down. And that was enough for me. Clearly I haven't been listening to Spanish language radio, but what I gather is that the refrain echoed from several directions on the dais-- that a small group that controls the media (I'm guessing, bloggers too?) is responsible. Oh that small group! Oh those do good'ers! Oh, oh, oh!
Small groups. Media. Meeting in the dark. Conspiracies to wreck democracy. Actually, there are a handful of reporters who, if they had adequate backup and funding from their corporate gigantic parents, could run about half of them to federal prison. But when I go on about that, your eyes glaze over the same way mine did when Joe Martinez kept saying, "some day we have to go back to governing and not just reacting one crisis at a time."
Joe. Joe who wants to fix the Urban Development Boundary is wistful for the chance to "govern". I'm not entirely oblivious to the fact that while the elections and charter amendments ping around in the county attorney's office and on the dais, that the operations of government have virtually ground to a halt. Sources tell us that morale is dragging along the bottom like a claw anchor on smooth rock bottom. It does make me wonder what the county commission is good for, that couldn't be provided by a strong regional civil service taking direction from a county administrator. Why, the county commission?
Joe Martinez is looking forward to the county commission governing again and said so enough times to make even the "ink by the barrel" crowd wake up. But what exactly has Joe Martinez done, other than the bidding of the Growth Machine when the going was good; ie. the time in which he was able to secure a sweetheart price for a building lot from Charlie Martinez of the LBA and Lennar co-host of suburban sprawl where presumably his wine cellar is filled? (If you don't get the reference, read our archive under "Martinez" back to the beginning.) Or to shill for Lowe's at the edge of the Urban Development Boundary. (Read our archive, "Lowes") We all remember the performances, the rent-a-crowds dragged in to fill the Chamber and diminish the do good'ers, and we all know perfectly well that it would not take much juice to recall Joe Martinez. Next!
The will of one man-- Norman Braman-- his wallet, and feisty volunteers organized around Vanessa Brito in Hialeah shook up the political order. Alas, if yesterday confirmed anything, it is that the order is intact. For the time being the lobbyists representing the builders, contractors, rock miners et al. are out of sight. Construction and real estate development is in the biggest ditch since the Great Depression. Yet the facilitators are itching for action. All there. Watching on their video monitors and reading the blogs.
Who could fail to observe yesterday Raul Martinez in the county chamber. Former Hialeah mayor, former candidate for US Congress, former subject of a federal criminal investigation and former supporter of every development pushing to the Everglades. Hialeah was Everglades. Sweetwater was Everglades. Kendall was Everglades. If Joe, Javier, Pepe, Bruno et al. yearn to govern again, just wait for Raul to be up on that dais, settling into his seat and cellphone.
24 comments:
You said: Seijas represented in her metaphorical whip and leatherettes.
Not only have you turned my stomach--that vision is forever etched in my brain to torture me. Thanks for a good column- liked the sludge reference too - there goes breakfast.
Best post ever on Eye on Miami! Good work.
The charter review task force DID NOT recommend at large seats. Maintaining single member seats was recommended by the task force by a vote of 14-1. Only victor Diaz voted no. Please check your facts!
You said it all. Joe must go. Are you listening Norman? Let's do it so we can sign petitions during the election.
Single member districts have prevented the hispanic voters from having every single commission seat and the only reason it has not worked as well as it ought to is that people like you and like Braman have not bothered to find better candidates to run.
it must be nice to be an armchair quarterback--you never suffer an interception or are sacked--you just tell everyone else what they are doing wrong.
You need some at large seats Not ALL seats. Do you know what an EDITORIAL is reader? It is writing about your opinion.
Looks like Stephen Cody is reading your blog.
at large:
At the request of Task Force, additional staff research was provided to include: • Information regarding persons of Haitian Ancestry or Ethnic Origin in Miami-Dade
County who were counted in the US Census 2000 • Three Case Studies on Proposed At-Large Districts which included maps and 2000 and
2005 population figures:
o Case Study 1 proposed four at-large districts
o Case Study 2 proposed six at-large districts
o Case Study 3 proposed five at-large districts
Recommendation 6. The Task Force recommends that the composition of the Board of County Commissioners be
kept as it is currently, with 13 single-member Commission Districts. (Motion passed: 14-1)
Reasons/Justifications
In arriving at its final recommendation to retain the current system of election, the Task Force felt that the success of the current system in securing a diverse and geographically representative Board strongly militated against any change. In addition, although appealing in theory, the practical and logistical difficulties of implementing alternative voting systems in a community as diverse as Miami-Dade County led to the rejection of these alternative proposals. Finally, although public criticism of the parochial tendencies of the current system are of concern, the Task Force felt that these issues could be better addressed through other mechanisms of Charter reform, including but not limited to, the study of the current process for municipal incorporation and annexation. Consequently, after concluding its deliberations on the manner by which the Board members are elected, the Task Force voted to accelerate Issue No. 5 (Study of Municipalities and Unincorporated Municipal Service Areas) in order to continue the general discussion of how to promote more regional forces for the Board and redirect the burden of delivering some municipal services to local governments.
Recommendations part 1 of the Charter Review Task Force:
Executive Summary
The Miami-Dade Charter Review Task Force (CRTF) has accomplished its charge, and adopted its eighteen (18) final recommendations regarding the Miami-Dade County Home Rule Charter. This Final Report describes the process of the Task Force deliberations, summarizes factual investigations and provides a brief synopsis of the rationale for the final recommendations. Following the conclusion of this report, dissenting opinions are provided.
October 31, 2007 Final Recommendations
In its October 31, 2007 Initial Report, the Task Force made the following recommendations:
1. The Public Safety Director should remain an appointed position. However, the Task Force recommended that the electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether they wish to amend the Home Rule Charter to provide that: the Public Safety Director (i.e. Sheriff, Police Chief) shall be appointed by the Mayor for a period of four (4) years, at the expiration of each term subject to re-appointment; that the appointment can be vetoed by a super majority (two-thirds) vote of the County Commission; that the Public Safety Director could be removed by the Mayor subject to the consent of a simple majority vote of the County Commission; or by the County Commission subject to a super majority (two-thirds) vote. Once appointed, that person shall carry out the functions of the office independent of the Mayor and County Commission except for funding and budgeting matters. (Motion passed: 10-5)
2. The Supervisor of Elections should remain an appointed position. However, the Task Force recommended that the electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether they wish to amend the Home Rule Charter to provide that: the Supervisor of Elections shall be appointed by the Mayor for a period of four (4) years, at the expiration of each term subject to re-appointment; that the appointment can be vetoed by a super majority (two-thirds) vote of the County Commission; that the Supervisor of Elections could be removed by the Mayor subject to the consent of a simple majority vote of the County Commission; or by the County Commission subject to a super majority (two-thirds) vote. Once appointed, that person shall carry out the functions of the office independent of the Mayor and County Commission except for funding and budgeting matters. (Motion passed: 10-5)
3. The position of Property Appraiser become an elected position. (Motion passed: 12-4)
4. The Task Force recommends that the electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether they wish to amend the Home Rule Charter to provide that County Commissioners shall receive a population based salary provided by Florida’s Statutory formula (approximately $91,995); Commissioner’s terms in office shall be limited to two, four-year terms; and Commissioners shall be prohibited from having outside employment. (Motion passed: 14-0)
The Task Force further recommends that the Home Rule Charter not be amended with respect to the following issues:
5. The Tax Collector remain as an appointed position. (Motion passed unanimously: 14-0) 6. The manner in which the Board of County Commissioners is currently comprised shall
remain as is, with 13 single-member Commission Districts. (Motion passed: 14-1)
January 29, 2008 Final Recommendations
Since the release of its Initial Report, the Task Force continued its work, and on January 17, 2008 adopted the following additional final recommendations. The Task Force further recommends that:
7. The County Commission appoint an independent Task Force to prepare and submit a comprehensive plan in 2009 for countywide incorporation, accomplished through annexation and/or incorporation, subject to amendments or changes by two-thirds vote of the County Commission, and that such plan be placed on the ballot for all citizens to vote on at a general election in 2010. (Motion passed: 9-5)
8. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to empower future Charter Review Task Forces to place proposed Charter amendments directly on the ballot, if the proposed Charter amendment is approved by a two-thirds vote of the Task Force members present; and to provide that the appointment process for future Task Force members be the same as contained in Sections 1 and 2 of the resolution creating the current Charter Review Task Force, with the exception that the provision allowing Commissioners to appoint themselves to the Task Force be deleted. (Motion passed: 9-5)
9. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that the time period to collect signatures for proposed Charter amendments and citizens’ initiatives be extended to 120 days and that proposed Charter amendments must only be placed on the ballot during a general election. (Motion passed: 14-0)
10. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to require the County Commission to hold a public hearing on any citizen initiated changes to the Home Rule Charter on the date the County Commission sets the election date on the proposed Charter amendment. A public hearing shall also be required for any Charter amendment initiated by the County Commission. (Motion passed: 14-0)
11. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether of the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that the County Commission hold a public hearing on the proposed initiative at the time a citizen initiative petition is presented to the County Commission for possible passage or repeal of an ordinance. (Motion passed: 14-0)
12. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that the County Commission shall adopt no resolutions or ordinances regulating the citizen petition procedures as defined in the Home Rule Charter. (Motion passed: 14-0)
13. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to reflect that the certification and petition gathering provisions contained in Article 8 of the Home Rule Charter should also govern citizen initiative petition procedures to amend the Home Rule Charter. (Motion passed: 14-0)
14. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that the Clerk of the Court, rather than the County Commission, approve as to form any citizen initiative petition. (Motion passed: 14-0)
15. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that bid protests shall be heard by hearing officers charged with making final determinations based on findings of facts and conclusions of law; that the appeal process shall be governed by the rules of procedure set forth in State of Florida’s Administrative Procedure Act; and that the findings of the hearing officer would be final, subject to appeal by a disappointed bidder to the County Commission solely on an abuse of discretion standard. (Motion passed: 8-6)
16. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that any Comprehensive Development Master Plan application requesting that the Urban Development Boundary (UDB) line be moved must be approved by a vote of at least 3⁄4’s of the County Commissioners then in office; that every five years an independent body shall be constituted to conduct a comprehensive and holistic study as to where the UDB line should be drawn; and that if a change in the location of the UDB line is recommended by such independent body and such change in location is approved by a simple majority vote of County Commissioners present, such recommendations must be submitted for approval by the electorate in the form of a referendum. (Motion passed: 9-5)
17. The electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether the Home Rule Charter should be amended to provide that all zoning applications, including variances and setbacks, be heard first by the Community Councils with any appeals from those decisions being heard by hearing officers charged with making final determinations based on findings of fact and conclusions of law, that the appeal process shall be governed by the rules of procedure set forth in the State of Florida’s Administrative Procedure Act and that the findings of the hearing officer would be final subject to appeal to the County Commission solely on an abuse of discretion standard. (Motion passed: 14-0)
18. That the electors of Miami-Dade County be asked whether Section 9.07 of the Home Rule Charter shall be amended in the following manner (Motion passed: 17-0):
A. Amendments to this Charter may be proposed by a resolution adopted by the Board of County Commissioners or by petition of electors numbering not less than ten percent of the total number of electors registered in Dade County at the time the petition is submitted to the Clerk. Initiatory petitions shall be certified in the manner required for initiatory petitions for an ordinance.
B. Amendments to this Charter may be proposed by initiatory petitions of electors shall be governed by the following procedure:
1. The person proposing the amendment shall submit to the Clerk a proposed petition, in the form specified in section (2) below, and proposed ballot language, including a title. The Clerk shall without delay approve as to form a petition for circulation in one or several copies as the proposer may desire.
2. The petition shall be printed in 14-point font and contain the following information: (a) the title and text of the proposed amendment, printed in English, Spanish and Creole; (b) a statement in each petition circulator's own handwriting, setting forth his or her own name, both in printed and signature form; (c) the residence address of the circulator; (d) dates between which all the signatures on each individual petition were obtained; and (e) a sworn statement that the circulator personally
circulated the petition and witnessed each signature as it was being written.
3. Initiatory petitions shall be certified in the manner required for initiatory petitions for an ordinance.
4. The Board of County Commissioners shall call an election to be held within 60-120 days of the date that a certified petition is presented to the County Commission. Such election shall be called in conjunction a countywide with the next scheduled general election. ;however, if no countywide election is scheduled to occur within 60-120 days or presentation, a special election on the position shall be called.
C. Amendments to this Charter may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners at any time. Elections on charter amendments proposed by the Board shall be held not less than 60 nor more than 120 days after the Board adopts a resolution proposing any amendment.
D. The result of all elections on charter amendments shall be determined by a majority of the electors voting on the proposed amendment.
E. All current ordinances and resolutions regulating initiative petitions shall be repealed.
Some of these charter changes suck.
I think it was strange they did not do a study of 2 at large seats.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NO SHOW AT COMMUNITY FORUM
Written by ALEC SCOTT
"More than 1,000 people gathered Monday to talk with Miami-Dade County commissioners about crime, early childhood education and jobs. None of the 12 commissioners showed up."
read more:
http://www.sfltimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6854&Itemid=144
I know you HATE Martinez, but at least get the facts correct. Martinez has always been an advocate for at-large seats. His only question/problem has been on how it would be done to ensure equal representation.
I read your blog to get an outside view on the issues in our County, but it astonishes me how you are so quick to bash those who chose to stay in office to finish their work rather than aspire for political grandure.
Martinez could save a life and you would still find something to say about that.
He is correct to say that the Board needs to stop making their priorities what media dictates they should be.
Responsible decisios have to be made with a clear mind. He said from the beginning that we should not rush these charter questions to the ballot without clear discussion and input, but was out voted. Where is the right up on that?
The WRITE UP on that is not here because you and he are wrong. I just read over the charter review task force minutes. There were meetings ALL over the county. The task force met for over a year. How much friggin' discussion do you need. AFTER ALL OF THAT....ALL OF THAT WASTE OF VOTERS TIME and Charter task force time, the county commission would only put a couple of do-nothing-much charter changes on the ballot.
And Martinez is a bully and one of the unreformable majority. He has always supported his buddies. He pushed for the Lowe's UDB move. He has done enough bad stuff to out weigh the good stuff.
After reading the task force recs I don't see any mention of a 5 year lobbying ban or a rec for at large seats. Interesting.
Using at large seats, after Judge Donald Graham outlawed them in Meek v. Metro Dade County, will only disenfranchise Black and Non Hispanic White voters and will invite a new Voting Rights Act lawsuit. You'd end up making another lawyer very rich.
Stephen Cody appeared at the meeting as a guest speaker and talked them out of adopting any at-large seats, much to the anger of Murray Greenberg, who Cody beat in the case before Judge Graham.
They have at large seats in Jacksonville. So stop being an alarmist.
Genius: They do have at large seats in Jax, but they don't have the same established history of racial discrimination against Blacks and the same patterns of racially polarized voting.
I'm not being an alarmist. I'm being a realist.
Using at-large seats creates a legislative position that Black voters have no hope of electing a candidate of choice.
You might like the perspective that an at-large seat gives, but regional and at-large seats were shot down during the remedy phase of the Meek case.
Genius
Keep in mind that the adding of at large districts definitely means a reduction in the number of black commissioners.
In theory at-large commissioners look fine. But even with the number of commissioners it has now, the black community feels and is isolated and left out of many things.
So reducing the number of black commissioners (by creating at-large seats that can only be won by Hispanics, who are the super-majority of the county at large), may just increase racial isolation in our community.
I do not have the answer, I am just putting this on the table.
The Blacks feel isolated?
What about the Anglos? The last I looked there wasn't an overwhelming number of them on the dais.
Whites/Anglos pay a good portion of all the taxes in Miami-Dade County. How many white Anglos on the 13 member Commission? And I mean non-Cubans. Any? One?
Post a Comment