The Miami Springs Municipal Election is Tuesday, April 4th.  Here’s everything you need to know about where to go, when to go, and what’s on the ballot.

2023 Candidates for Miami Springs City Council
2023 Candidates for Miami Springs City Council

Tuesday, April 4th:

  • Where:  Miami Springs Golf and Country Club
  • When:  7am – 7pm

Sample Ballot

Below is a sample ballot with the list of candidates for Miami Springs City Council Group I, Group II, and Group IV.

GROUP I INTERVIEWS:

Group I Candidates: Orlando Lamas, MaryJo Mejia, and Jorge Santin
Group I Candidates: Orlando Lamas, MaryJo Mejia, and Jorge Santin

Orlando Lamas

MaryJo Mejia Ramos

Jorge Santin

GROUP II INTERVIEWS:

Group II Candidates: Councilwoman Jacky Bravo and Jennifer Graham
Group II Candidates: Councilwoman Jacky Bravo and Jennifer Graham

Jacky Bravo

Jennifer Graham

GROUP IV INTERVIEWS:

Group IV Candidates: Former Councilman Victor Vazquez and Tom Hutchings
Group IV Candidates: Former Councilman Victor Vazquez and Tom Hutchings

Tom Hutchings

Victor Vazquez

CANDIDATE FORUM VIDEO:

REFERENDUMS:

This referendum is no big deal.  It simply changes from 60 days to 10 business days (or basically 2 weeks) the time period where the City Clerk has to receive the signatures from potential candidates and confirm whether the candidate qualifies to run for office.  The only person to really benefit from this is the City Clerk.

Some will argue this favors incumbents who know how to navigate the election process and hurt the newcomer.  We agree with this sentiment.  However, if you’re really interested in running for office, you’ll figure out what you have to do ahead of time.

We don’t believe this will have an impact on Springs residents.

The City Council has term limits which only allow a councilperson to serve a maximum of 4 consecutive terms.  Each term lasts two years, but if someone is appointed or elected to fill a vacancy, that partial term (even if it was just one day) is considered a full term.

We generally don’t have an issue with this proposed change for someone elected to fill a vacancy, but do have an issue for someone that’s appointed and thus not elected to office.  Thus we recommend a NO vote on Referendum number 2.

This poorly worded referendum is basically trying to fix a logistical problem.  The City of Miami Springs is supposed to hold a special election to fill a vacancy if someone resigns with 120 days or more left before the next election.  However, the State of Florida and the County Elections department requires 90 day notice to hold an election.  So this creates a logistical nightmare.  By extending this period to 180 days, it allows the City Council to appoint or fill vacancies if a term is vacated with less than 180 days.  If the term is vacated with greater than 180 days, then a special election will be held.

We generally prefer elections to appointments, however, this is a pragmatic fix to a logistical problem facing the city.

This has now happened three times over the last few years where a council person has resigned to run for another office.  Let’s take former councilman Jaime Petralanda.  He resigned tor run for the Miami-Dade School Board.  His resignation notice was given in the Spring / Summer time frame, but he remained in office until the November county wide election.  Petralanda resigned his post and an appointment was made to take his seat.

Victor Vazquez did something similar.  He gave notice that he was resigning to run for Miami-Dade County Commission in the Spring / Summer time frame of last year.  However, he remained in office until he was legally required to resign from his post in November.  Then, the Council appointed George Lob to take his place.

If this change were made, the City could add a ballot question to the Countywide election at minimal cost and replace the resigning councilperson with a proper election instead of an appointment.

We definitely support this.  Again, we prefer when you, the voters of Miami Springs, choose the councilperson over an appointment.

We strongly recommend a YES on referendum number 4.

Who doesn’t want to remove “obsolete” provisions?  Sounds like something good, right?  However, this seems to legalize a lot of “technical” changes to the charter without voter approval.  We all know technical changes can make the difference between having enough parking and not having enough parking.

We’re going to recommend a NO vote on this one.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here