2024 Miami Libertarians Voter Guide
Special Thanks to Suzanne Gilmore
State Constitutional Amendments
60% supermajority vote is required for the approval of state constitutional amendments
| Ballot Title | Subject | YES/NO | Reasoning |
| Florida Amendment 1, Partisan School Board Elections Amendment (LRCA) | Amendment 1 would make school board elections partisan beginning in 2026. Candidates would be nominated for the general election through partisan primaries and be featured on the ballot with partisan labels, such as Democrat and Republican. As of 2024, the Florida Constitution requires school board elections to be nonpartisan, meaning that partisan labels do not appear on the ballot next to a candidate’s name.[1] | YES | Since the political parties have introduced partisan approaches to the education and degree of indoctrination of our children, it is critical to be able to determine which partisan system our elected school board candidates may introduce into and support in the schools. |
| Florida Amendment 2, Right to Hunt and Fish Amendment (LRCA) | Amendment 2 would provide a state constitutional right to hunt and fish and declare that hunting and fishing are the preferred means for “responsibly managing and controlling fish and wildlife” and “shall be preserved forever as a public right.” | NO | The right to hunt and fish already exists in Florida Statutes. If Amendment 2 passes it will make fishing a ‘public right’ opening up our waters to massive foreign commercial fishing vessels. A ‘public right’ is not restricted to just Florida citizens. This Amendment will lead to hunters trespassing on private property, emboldened with their new constitutional right, as they have done in other states that have passed similar amendments. |
| Florida Amendment 3, the Marijuana Legalization Initiative (CICA) | Amendment 3 would legalize recreational marijuana for adults 21 years old and older. Individuals would be allowed to possess up to three ounces of marijuana (about 85 grams), with up to five grams in the form of concentrate. Existing Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers would be authorized under the initiative to sell marijuana to adults for personal use. | YES | While regulation and the organizers promising legalizations and taxation is not ideal, the passage of Amendment 3 would drastically reduce the impact of the War of Drugs in the United States, the federal program that attempts to criminalize all forms of cannabis consumption including home grow. |
| Florida Amendment 4, Right to Abortion Initiative (CICA) | Amendment 4 would add the following language to the Florida Constitution’s Declaration of Rights: “… no law shall prohibit, penalize, delay, or restrict abortion before viability or when necessary to protect the patient’s health, as determined by the patient’s healthcare provider.” Amendment 4 would maintain the current constitutional provision that permits a law requiring parents to be notified before a minor can receive an abortion. | YES | Florida’s 6-week abortion ban is effectively a comprehensive ban on abortions for any reason, even those performed to preserve the life of the mother or in the case of rape. Enforcement of the Florida abortion ban would require a drastic police state style information control on people’s movements and financial transactions. There is a significant movement to even criminalize someone traveling out of the state to get an abortion where it is legal. Former President Trump and the Florida Democrats are both supporting this measure to restrain a policy that has gone too far. |
| Florida Amendment 5, Annual Inflation Adjustment for Homestead Property Tax Exemption Value Amendment (LRCA) | Amendment 5 would provide for an annual inflation adjustment for the value of the homestead property tax exemption that applies to non-school taxes. The adjustment would be made every year on January 1 based on the percent change in the Consumer Price Index reported by the U.S. Department of Labor if the change is positive. This is in addition to existing exemptions to residential property tax. | NO | The Libertarian Party of Florida has consistently opposed these new tax exemptions because they do nothing to reduce spending, the true source of burdensome taxation. Instead, this type of exemption transfers the tax burden to other property owners which in turn affects prices in the market that ultimately affects everyone, defeating the supposed purpose of the proposed exemption. |
| Florida Amendment 6, Repeal of Public Financing for Statewide Campaigns Amendment (LRCA) | Amendment 6 would repeal Section 7 of Article VI of the Florida Constitution, which provides for public campaign financing for statewide candidates who agree to spending limits. | NO | The Republican-dominated state legislature placed this measure on the ballot to eliminate an aspirational program that attempts to level the playing field between candidates that are backed by corporate or special interests and those of regular people. While Libertarians do not support tax dollars going to fund anything individuals do not agree with, this constitutionally protected program to help advance precious electoral and voting rights should be protected, if only to send a message that we need more, not less legal protections. Defeating Amendment 6 might be the only way to send this message within our political system. |
Miami-Dade County Area
Municipal Ballot Questions
Must pass with a simple majority 50+1% of the vote
| Ballot Title | Subject | YES/NO | Reasoning |
| MIAMI-DADE COUNTY Should Miami-Dade County take action to expand free public Wi-Fi access countywide, includingadvocating for any necessary changes to state or federal law? | This is a Non-Binding Straw Ballot on Countywide Public Wi-Fi Access. | NO | With Internet access readily available by cell phone, this question is advancing the proposition for county government to spend tax dollars on a boondoggle to provide “free” Public Wi-Fi Access. |
| BAL HARBOUR REFERENDUM Shall Miami-Dade County levy a homeless and domestic abuse tax of one percent on the sale of food,beverages, or alcoholic beverages for establishments licensed to sell alcoholic beverages for consumption on premises that gross over $400,000 annually, except for hotels and motels, within theboundaries of the Village of Bal Harbour? | This is a proposal for a new local option sales tax. | NO | We oppose any new sales taxes which also targets sales at the major shopping mall, Bal Harbour Shops. Since both receive tax dollars already at a county-level program, It is more likely to be used for other, unlisted purposes and could backfire and make the community more attractive to the homeless. |
| CUTLER BAY REFERENDUM 1 It is proposed that Section 3.11 of the Town Charter be amended to provide that the Town Manager shallendeavor to engage members of the public of all ages regarding matters of interest affecting the Town through multi-channel modes of communication, including through traditional media, online communication,community events, town hall meetings, and other effective and innovative forms of communication. | The Cutler Bay town charter Section 3.11 currently requires the Town Manager to only perform actions that are previously authorized and budgeted by the town council. It literally reads, “the town council shall, subject to budgetary limitations, appropriate sufficient funds to make the proficient use of cost effective information technology designed to make the administration of the town’s government accessible and transparent”. This question asks to give the Town Manager greater independent authority. | NO | Questions like these come up to empower administrators to do more with less interference from the elected council. This change makes a convoluted charter section even more convoluted and opens the door for more staff and more burdensome taxes. This is not the fix that is needed. |
| CUTLER BAY REFERENDUM 2 It is proposed that Section 3.11 of the Town Charter be amended to provide that the Town Manager shallperiodically review the Town’s existing environmental protection regulations, and, if necessary,recommend amendments to the Town Code, Growth Management Plan, policies, or other Townstandards to promote responsible environmental stewardship. | The purpose of this charter referendum is to allow for “Periodic Review Of Town Laws To Promote Environmental Stewardship”. The Cutler Bay town charter Section 3.11 currently requires the Town Manager to only perform actions that are previously authorized and budgeted by the town council. It literally reads, “…reduces the use of paper and the town’s “carbon footprint”; and other technologies that save energy…” for the duties that the Town Manager must perform. This amendment expands and explains the duties of the Town Manager in this capacity. | YES | See above |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 1 The Charter currently provides that the City shall have a “Mayor-Council-Manager” form of government. It is proposed that the Charter be amended to clarify that the City shall have a “Council-Manager” form ofgovernment. The proposed amendment does not eliminate the position of the Mayor. | This charter referendum seeks the voters of the city of Doral to “Clarify Form of Government” by changing the city government from a “Mayor-Council-Manager” to a “Council-Manager”. | YES | Many cities are run by a full-time administrator, who performs the duties of hiring and firing, removed from political pressure and accountable under a contract, which is described as a “council-manager” form of government. The city of Doral currently has a “strong mayor” form of government where the elected mayor is also the chief executive that makes decisions, such as hirings. Council governments who find themselves at odds with the mayor find it difficult to rein in the mayor’s authority outside of an election. A strong mayor form of government itself lends itself to less accountability and towards more abuse of public funds as a result. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 2 The Charter currently provides that the Mayor creates and appoints, subject to Council approval,committees of the Council. It is proposed that the Charter be amended to change the manner in whichsaid committees are created so that the Council may create and organize itself into standing committees,special committees, and ad hoc committees, and upon formation of any such committees, the Councilmay appoint its members. | This charter referendum seeks to restructure city government away from the centralized strong mayor approach where the mayor’s supporters are appointed to real policy making committees and quasi-judicial boards. By passing the “Revised Process for Creating Standing, Special, and Ad Hoc Committees, and Appointment of Members”, the council desires to take on a more direct role in the decisions of government. | YES | See above. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 3 The Charter currently provides that the Mayor is the official designated to represent the City in all dealingswith other governmental entities. It is proposed that the Charter be amended to provide that no official action or position may be taken by the Mayor on behalf of the City in his/her dealings with othergovernmental entities except as authorized by the Council. | Here, the Doral Council wants to require “Council Authorization Required When Mayor Dealing with Other Governmental Entities” instead of allowing the mayor to have the authority to enter the city in agreements unilaterally. | YES | See above. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 4 The Charter currently provides for a limitation on the consecutive length of service as Mayor, but allows individuals who served two consecutive terms as Mayor to seek the position of Councilmember without a break in service. It is proposed the Charter be amended to provide that individuals who serve two consecutive terms as Mayor must be out of office for four years before seeking a Councilmemberposition. | This proposed change would add a “Requirement for Break in Service for Mayor Seeking Position of Councilmember” such that term limits would apply to the mayor like it does for councilmembers. | YES | See above. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 5 The Charter currently provides that Mayor and Councilmembers’ annual compensation is $50,000 and$12,000, respectively, which is adjusted annually using Urban CPI, and are currently $77,587 and $18,611. It is proposed the Charter be amended to cap the Mayor’s compensation at the current salary of$77,587; Councilmember compensation be adjusted and capped at 30% less than the Mayor’s salary,which is $54,310.90; and eliminate future increases, including CPI. | This change freezes salaries for the mayor and council rather than increase automatically. The mayor and council are paid full-time salaries to serve. | YES | See above. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 6 The Charter currently provides that the City Manager is selected differently than the other two CharterOfficers, the City Attorney and City Clerk. It is proposed that the Charter be amended so that theappointment of the City Manager follows the same procedure as the City Attorney and the City Clerk, byproviding that the Council selects the City Manager subsequent to the recommendation of a searchcommittee. | If the earlier Referendum 1 passes changing the form of government to council-manager then there would be a need for a “Revised Process for Appointment of City Manager” to ensure the council has the authority to hire a full-time administrator. | YES | See above. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 7 The Charter currently provides that the Council establishes such boards as it deems advisable but that the members shall be appointed solely by the Mayor subject to Council approval. It is proposed theCharter be amended to provide that boards be comprised of five members, and that the Mayor andCouncilmembers shall each appoint one member to each board. | If the earlier Referendum 1 passes changing the form of government to council-manager then there would be a need for a “Revised Process for Appointment of Members to City Boards and Agencies (“Boards”)”. | YES | See above. |
| Doral Referendum 8 The Charter currently requires a run-off election if none of the candidates for office receives a number ofvotes greater than 50% of the total number of ballots cast. It is proposed that the Charter be amended toeliminate run-off elections, except to break a tie vote, and to revise the majority vote requirement forelections so that candidates receiving the most votes are elected. | Elimination of Run-off Elections | NO | While it is appreciated that run-off elections are a costly taxpayer funded exercise in democracy, having the elected officials elected by a plurality of support can be discriminatory or disenfranchise the vast majority of voters who did not support the elected official. |
| DORAL REFERENDUM 9 The Charter currently provides for an Office of Charter Enforcement. It is proposed that the Charter be amended to eliminate said office, and to replace it with an Office of Inspector General, which is anindependent body to perform investigations, audits, and oversight of municipal matters including Citycontracts, programs, and expenditures, in order to identify, investigate, and prevent inefficiencies, fraud, waste, mismanagement, misconduct, and abuse of power. | Replace Office of Charter Enforcement with an Office of Inspector General | YES | More transparency is better than less, especially removed from the political process. An independent auditor, which is what the Office of Inspector General provides, will allow for less political gamesmanship over review and public transparency over municipal operations. Other cities such as the City of Miami recently implemented a similar structure and Broward County has operated with this type of oversight for many years successfully. |
| Miami Referendum 1 Shall Section 4 of the City Charter be amended to require continuous residency in the district in effect at the time of qualifying for a minimum of one year immediately preceding qualifying for candidates running for City Commissioner and require continuous residency in the City of Miami for a minimum of one yearimmediately preceding qualifying for candidates running for Mayor? | Charter Amendment to Require Continuous Residency Immediately Preceding Qualifying forMayor and City Commissioner | YES | A 1 year seasoning requirement for anyone to qualify for running for office is reasonable. |
| Miami Referendum 2 Shall Miami’s Charter be amended authorizing sale and/or lease of 5.4 acres on Watson Island basedupon fair market value of $135,000,000 to Ecoresiliency Miami LLC for residential and commercial usespursuant to applicable zoning, waiving bidding, and requiring: Returning 13 acres to City to construct new public waterfront park at no cost to City; Cancelling existing theme park and hotel lease; and Contributing $15,000,000 for affordable housing, infrastructure, and other public benefits? | Charter Amendment: Partial Conveyance for Revised Development at 1111 Parrot Jungle Trail on Watson Island | YES | Private development on Watson Island is a good thing which has remained stuck under public ownership. |
| Miami Referendum 3 Shall City Charter be amended to revise existing leases at 888 MacArthur Causeway, sell 3.2 acres ofleased property to tenant for fair market value of not less than $25,000,000, reduce overall development,extend term 24 years, waive bidding and authorize, at no cost to City: $9,000,000 contribution to affordable housing plus infrastructure improvements; Timeshare units become condominiums; Mixed-uses to include office; and Expanded public waterfront and pedestrian promenade along Biscayne Bay? | Charter Amendment to Revise Mixed-Use Leases on Watson Island | YES | Private development on Watson Island is a good thing which has remained stuck under public ownership. |
| Miami Referendum 4 Shall Section 7 of the City Charter be amended to allow more time for the Miami-Dade Elections Department to better prepare and conduct a runoff election for City of Miami elections involving the Mayor and City Commissioners by changing the date of a runoff election from the third Tuesday after the firstMonday in November to the second Tuesday in December, in odd-numbered years? | Charter Amendment to Change Runoff Date to Allow More Time Between General and Runoff Election | YES | Increasing the time between the general and run-off elections from 2 weeks to 4 weeks. Doesn’t add to the frequency of run-offs. Run-offs are common for the city of Miami. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 1 | Charter’s “Citizens’ Bill of Rights”: Amending Existing Rights, Incorporating County Ethics Commission’s Enforcement | YES | The city of Miami Beach’s ethics code has always been robust and improvements to ensure its enforcement have been a long time coming. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 2 | Charter’s “Citizens’ Bill of Rights”: Amending Circuit Court Forfeiture Remedy | YES | The change would give the courts more leeway on how to deal with public corruption cases that vary from minor to gross and encourage more civil enforcement. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 3 | Charter Section 1.03: Sale/Lease of City property; right-of-way vacations;management/concession agreements | YES | The City of Miami Beach requires after substantial debate and dealmaking to vote to approve real estate deals with developers or vendors proposing to manage city property. This proposal would improve the review of these deals before going for voter approval. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 4 | Election of City Commission: Moving City’s Runoff Election Date, Installation/TermCommencement, Conforming Office Terms | YES | Increasing the time between the general and run-off elections from 2 weeks to 4 weeks. Doesn’t add to the frequency of run-offs. Run-offs are common for the city of Miami Beach. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 5 | Amend Charter Section 2.05: Public Hearings and Public Notice for Ordinances | YES | Establishing a process requiring two public hearings instead of one for proposed City ordinances. This creates more transparency. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 6 | Charter Section 2.07: “Vacancies in City Commission” | NO | The proposed charter change has the impact of avoiding a special election to fill 4-year terms of office if appointments are made within 30 days. There is too much potential for abuse with this proposal. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 7 | Charter Amendments: Clarifying and Conforming Certain Charter Language to Applicable Lawsand/or Current Usage | YES | This is a useful update to the charter that clarifies that the one-year residency requirement to qualify as candidate applies to the year “immediately” prior to qualifying, and clarifies filing requirements for qualifying by petition. Additional changes are minor. |
| Miami Beach Referendum 8 | Approve 1% Tax on Food and Beverage Sales for Homeless Assistance / Domestic ViolenceCenters | NO | This proposed a new taxes disguised with good intentions that may have the unintended effect of encouraging the behavior included in this proposal. |
| Miami Gardens Referendum | Waiver Of City Manager Residency Requirement And Defining Distance Beyond City BoundariesUpon Good Cause | YES | The ability to recruit a greater pool of qualified administrators will benefit taxpayers. However, this rule does exist because people generally did not want bureaucrats making decisions that do not affect their own day to day quality of life (since they do not live in the city). |
| Miami Springs Referendum | Four-Year Staggered Terms of Office and November Elections | NO | The proposed Charter amendment provides for a transition to four-year, staggered terms for Mayor and Council with elections to be held in November of even-numbered years. |
| North Bay Village Referendum 1 | Public Notice Requirements | NO | The proposal asks to allow the city to lower the standard of public notice by avoiding newspapers of circulation and instead rely on its own publicly accessible website. This proposal is open to abuse. |
| North Bay Village Referendum 2 | Employees Of The Village Clerk’s Office | YES | The Charter to be clarified to give the Clerk responsibility for all personnel within the Clerk’s office and the Clerk answers to the commission. |
| North Bay Village Referendum 3 | Continuous Residency Requirement | YES | One year residency requirement is reasonable. |
| North Bay Village Referendum 4 | Qualifying Period | YES | This proposal asks to set a window of 10 days for qualifying for local office in the village charter instead of a qualifying period (that could be set as short as a day or two). |
| North Bay Village Referendum 5 | Single Family Property | NO | Land use and future development of single-family properties be restricted to single-family residential usage |
| North Bay Village Referendum 6 | Limit On Village Debt | NO | Public debt is a multi-generational burden on taxpayers. This proposal would make it easier for North Bay Village to go into debt to finance capital improvement funds on its own. This proposal opens taxpayers to potential abuse. |
| North Bay Village Referendum 7 | Charter Non-Substantive And Technical Updates | YES | The Village Charter would be amended to strike sections that are obsolete or in conflict with state law and to reflect additional non-substantive changes. |
| Pinecrest Referendum 1 | Separate Consecutive Term Limits for Mayor and Councilmember | NO | While this is well-meaning to allow the current mayor to seek consecutive terms back to the city council, the public is not necessarily at disservice by requiring a 2-year break in service here. Pinecrest has a manager-council form of government which makes the mayor a ceremonial figurehead. |
| Pinecrest Referendum 2 | Partial Terms of Office of Less Than Two Years | YES | This is a reasonable, compromise rule for term limits where someone filling in for someone who left office early is not penalized with early term limit restrictions from seeking future office terms. |
| Pinecrest Referendum 3 | Calculating Consecutive Term Limits When There is a Gap in Service | NO | Most term limits require at least a 2-year gap in service. However, this proposal reduces the gap of service to a mere six months or 180 days. This short duration defeats the purpose of term limits when you consider this is still within the same budget year. |
| Pinecrest Referendum 4 | Method of Filling Vacancies in Office | YES | This proposal refers to a strange scenario where there is a special election for a mayoral vacancy or a vacancy of the entire council. This is a rare occurrence. However, without such a mechanism, the alternative is a direct appointment by the governor without any further special election. |
| Pinecrest Referendum 5 | Non-Substantive Technical Updates to Charter Relating to Elections Timelines | YES | This is a non-substantial change to the charter. |
| South Miami Referendum 1 | Enactment of purchasing limitations by ordinance of the City Commission | YES | This is a reasonable change making the commission determine by ordinance the purchasing authority of the city manager and departments. |
| South Miami Referendum 2 | Four-year term of office for City Mayor | YES | The Charter be amended to set the Mayor’s term consistent with the City Commissioners’ term offour years, beginning with the 2026 South Miami General Election. Right now, the mayor only serves for two years before having to seek reelection. |
| South Miami Referendum 3 | Bond referendum for improvements, infrastructure and property for Parks/Recreation, PublicWorks and Public Safety | NO | NO NEW TAXES |
| Surfside Referendum 1 | Residential uses on Lots between Collins and Harding Avenues | NO | The Charter be amended to limitresidential uses on said lots to detached, single-family, multi-family and townhomes only unless by unanimous vote of the Commission with all members present and a minimum 60% vote of the Electors which is overly restrictive. |
| Surfside Referendum 2 | Residential uses on Lots West of Harding Avenue | NO | Same as above. |
| Surfside Referendum 3 | Prohibition of Lot Subdivision | NO | Same as above. |
| Surfside Referendum 4 | Ensuring Collection of Obligations due to the Town | NO | Eliminates the ability to extend, reduce, waive or forgive by the Commission code enforcement liens |
| Surfside Referendum 5 | Amendment Prohibiting Development and Construction of Structures Within Point Lake | Not enough info, leaning NO | Prohibits any structure within Point Lake, North Canal and South Canal, except for marine structures used for private recreational or leisure purposes, that are permitted in the Town Code and are accessory and subordinate to an upland waterfront single-family home |
| West Miami Referendum 1 | Amending Charter Article III, Section 3.03 electing commissioners by separate city-wide seats | YES | Commissioners would be elected to separate city-wide seats with all electors casting one vote for each seat on the ballot, with the Vice-Mayor designated by the Commission. This proposal would improve representation by requiring commissioners to focus on their district as well as the city as a whole. |
| West Miami Referendum 2 | Amending City Charter to change Mayor’s term of office to a four-year term | YES | This creates a formal office of the mayor that is directly elected by the voters instead of elected amongst the elected commissioners. |