In the politically charged atmosphere of Doral, voters are being asked not just to elect three out of five council members in the Nov. 5 election, but also to decide on several key amendments to the city’s charter.

One of the most significant proposals, Amendment 8, could drastically change how council members are elected by eliminating runoff elections.

Currently, Doral’s charter mandates a runoff election if no candidate secures more than 50% of the total votes. The amendment seeks to eliminate runoff elections, except in the case of a tie, and instead elect the candidates that receive the most votes, regardless of whether they achieve an outright majority. If passed, critics worry about the prospect of reduced representation, as candidates could win with less than half of the voters’ support.

Jose Smith, a former city attorney for Miami Beach and North Miami Beach, and currently a special magistrate for North Miami, says eliminating runoff elections could increase the risk of electoral corruption. He said the change may lead to the rise of “ghost” candidates — those whose names appear on the ballot but aren’t actively campaigning, with the goal of diverting votes away from a legitimate candidate to influence the outcome of the election.

“Democracy is fundamentally based on majority rule. While it may not be illegal to eliminate runoff elections, elected officials should govern with a majority vote from their constituents,” Smith said. “The recent Frank Artiles case illustrates this concern, where ghost candidates can fragment the vote and mislead voters”.

Recently, former Florida Sen. Frank Artiles was found guilty of campaign finance violations. The case involved political operatives and a “ghost candidate” who likely influenced a close election, part of a plan to help state Senate Republicans win District 37 seat in 2020.

Ivette Gonzalez Petkovich, one of the five members of the city’s Charter Review Committee who voted in favor of putting the amendment on the ballot, said her focus was on voter representation — specifically, how many people actually participate in these elections.

She shared her experience in the 2022 city council election, in which she ran against Maureen Porras, who ultimately won the council seat. Gonzalez Petkovich, an attorney, received 43% of the 14,588 votes cast in the first round, while Porras got 38%. In the runoff, however, Gonzalez Petkovich lost, with 48% of the 6,697 votes, compared to Porras’ 52%. The city currently has over 34,000 registered voters.

Gonzalez Petkovich said if the amendment is approved it would not help her, because it is not retroactive. “I supported the amendment is because only a third of the voters who participated in Nov. 2022 ended up electing the council members”, she said. “Eliminating the runoff is a way to further ensure democracy.” Gonzalez Petkovich is currently running for Seat 1 against incumbent Rafael Pineyro.

READ MORE: A longtime advocate vs. an incumbent. Meet the candidates for Doral City Council Seat 1

The most recent runoff election in 2022 cost the city $55,782, while the 2020 runoff election incurred expenses of $52,144. Some politicians view the costs as a compelling argument for eliminating the runoff election altogether. These amounts are included in the city’s yearly budget.

“Eliminating the runoff would save the city money and reduce the number of fake candidates,” Porras said.

Opponents of the amendment believe eliminating runoffs without a primary or general election is dangerous.

Nicole Reinoso, a member of the Charter Review Committee and a candidate for council member, voted against the amendment, saying an elected official should win with an outright majority. “If a primary or general election had been proposed, I would have supported it, but that wasn’t part of the discussion,” she said.

Read more: Three Doral council candidates are promising to end the polarization. Who are they?

Pineyro agrees with Reinoso. He believes doing away with runoff elections will take attention away from local races, shifting it primarily to state or presidential elections, as will happen in November. “Eliminating the runoff takes away the opportunity for residents to get to know the candidates and their proposals more intimately,” he said. “These are the elected officials who, in the end, have a direct impact on the community’s daily lives.”

Another amendment on the ballot also deals with elections. Amendment 4 would require a mayor who has served two terms to take a four-year break before being able to run for a council seat. Currently, a mayor can serve two terms and immediately run for a council position without a break.

Another amendment would dramatically boost the salaries of council members. Amendment 5 proposes raising their annual compensation from $18,611 to $54,310.90 — almost triple the current salary. The amendment also seeks to cap the mayor’s salary at its current annual level of $77,587.

Council positions are part-time, with the exception of the mayor. If the amendment is approved, members of the council would not see changes in their responsibilities, although Porras pointed out council members already have the same responsibilities as the mayor.

Reinoso, a member of the charter review committee, opposed placing the amendment on the ballot. “In any job, such a dramatic salary increase without a change in responsibilities is unusual,” she said.

Seven other amendments are on the ballot that could change how appointments are made and how power is shared in city government. Currently, the Doral mayor leads council meetings, votes on council matters, creates committees, represents the city at events and in legal matters, works with other governments, and signs contracts approved by the council. Unlike cities with a strong-mayor system, where the mayor is the top executive, Doral’s mayor has a more limited role.

The proposed amendments would significantly reduce the mayor’s authority, shifting some of the powers to the city council. The council would take on the responsibility of making key appointments and would also need to approve the mayor’s interactions with other government entities.

Smith. said the proposed changes would “essentially diminish the mayor’s authority... empowering the council to appoint the administrator.”

Those who favor the amendments say they will “make the process more inclusive,” giving the council members more responsibilities similar to those currently held by the mayor.

Mayor Christi Fraga, who is running for reelection, criticized the proposed changes to the city charter. “These amendments don’t help or bring stability to our city. Instead, they take away power — not from me or the mayor’s office, but from the residents. The real problem is that these changes weaken the authority of the people who elect their mayor.”

Here’s what the other proposed amendments would do.

▪ Amendment 1 would change the name of the city’s form of government, from “Mayor-Council-Manager” to “Council-Manager,” without eliminating the position of the mayor.

▪ Amendment 2 would allow the council to create and organize committees. Currently the mayor creates committees and appoints members, subject to council approval.

▪ Amendment 3 would force the mayor to get council approval for official actions involving other government entities. Currently, the mayor represents the city in all such dealings.

▪ Amendment 6 would change the process for appointing the city manager. Currently, the mayor nominates the city manager, and the council confirms the appointment. Under the proposed change, the city manager would be selected by the council based on recommendations from a search committee, similar to the process for appointing the city attorney and city clerk.

READ MORE: Doral city manager resigns after claiming retaliation for refusing to be a ‘puppet’

▪ Amendment 7 would change how members are appointed to city boards and agencies. It proposes that each board or agency have five members, with the mayor and each council member each appointing one person. Currently board and agency members are appointed by the mayor subject to council approval.

▪ Amendment 9 proposes changing the review period for the Charter Revision Commission, which operates under the direction of the council to review and suggest changes to the city charter. The review cycle would shift from every five years to every 10 years.

▪ Amendment 10 seeks to replace the Office of Charter Enforcement with an Office of Inspector General. If the amendment passes the new office would be responsible for conducting investigations, audits, reviews, and oversight of municipal matters, including city contracts, programs, projects and expenditures.

READ MORE: Ethics Commission finds Doral councilwoman exploited her position to benefit side gigp333 casino

• The
• p333 casino
• impact
• Reshaping
• Doral