The Latin Builders Association sent out an email blast last last week, right before early voting started, with their endorsements for the Nov. 8 election. But there was one glaring omission: Hillary Clinton wasn’t on it.

Hillary Clinton wants to know why she was slighted, omitted from the list, Mr. Lastra

That’s odd. The LBA had endorsed Clinton earlier this month, and it was big news, too, because it is the first time the group — the largest organization of Hispanic construction professionals in the U.S. — supports a Democrat for president.

“Throughout its 40-year history, the LBA has consistently endorsed candidates who have conservative principles, a pro-business mindset, believe in limited government regulation, and possess strong business ethics and family values that have closely aligned with ours,” LBA President Alex Lastra said in a statement. “In the past, these candidates have tended to be from the Republican Party.”

But, he added, the president should also “possess the right temperament, sound judgment, knowledge of national and international issues and the ability to bring people together, regardless of party affiliation.”

“It is clear that, in this election, the candidate whose values best align with the LBA and who possesses these important qualities is Hillary Clinton.”

But now it’s been less than two weeks and already they forgot how wonderful she is. Or maybe they just ain’t that proud of it? Because her picture and name are MIA from the list of endorsements they announced Friday morning.

Were they afraid to include even one Democrat in what is otherwise a completely Republican slate card? Did they get a lot of blow back from the community after the Hillary nod?

Ladra called Lastra and left a message to find out why Clinton had been left off. But we are not holding our breath. The LBA is probably playing out of sight, out of mind.

The list doesn’t have any mention of the top of the ballot and starts, instead, with the Florida Senate race and their nod to Sen. Marco Rubio. Then it goes into the mayoral race (which is non partisan), congressional races, state races, the county clerk’s race and only one school board runoff.

Probably because the other contest is between two Democrats and they just don’t care who wins.

I’m not scared of what might happen if Donald Trump loses.

We woke up Thursday morning to a new climate of fear among political observers and junkies after the Republican presidential candidate hinted during the last debate Wednesday that, should he lose, he may not accept the election results.

For days now, and less than a month before the election, Trump has claimed that the election has been rigged against him by the media, the Department of Justice, the FBI and a group of “global special interests.”

On Monday, he tweeted “Of course there is large scale voter fraud happening on and before election day. Why do Republican leaders deny what is going on? So naive!” On Wednesday, he said there are “millions of people that are registered to vote that shouldn’t be registered to vote” and wouldn’t commit to accept whatever happens.

“I will look at it at the time,” Trump told moderator Chris Wallace and the projected 70 million or so American people watching. “I will keep you in suspense.”

This wait-and-see response seems to have caused a rippling shudder across the media and social media platforms as the Twitterverse bristles with murmurs about a possible civil war. After all, the last time someone didn’t accept election results was in 1860, when a Republican named Abraham Lincoln won the election — and we all know what happened after that.

But c’mon! Civil war? In 2016? Maybe I’d be a little more frightened if a sitting president were to say that he was not going to accept the results. A sitting president can command the military. But what power does Trump have? What on Earth can he do except whine and pout? He is just doing what The Donald always does — ranting like a lunatic because he can’t accept reality. What a cry baby. Look how much he complained about a silly little skit on Saturday Night Live.

Maybe he just wants to secure his TV time after the election. He’s addicted to it. In fact, the thing that scares me most about his not accepting the results is that it could mean six more months of 24/7 Trump TV.

Ladra has relatives, friends and acquaintances, however, who are truly scared of possible riots and uprisings. They think the “basket of deplorables” — which is admittedly one of the worst things a politician has ever said about a wide group of voters, clueless and disenfranchised as they may be — will drop their chicken wings, grab their rifles and AK47s, leave their trailers, hop in their pick-up trucks, raise the confederate flag and go all postal on the electorate. Especially the bad hombres of the electorate. You’re probably at greater risk if you are black, Hispanic, gay, a journalist, use solar energy, wear Jesus-like sandals or are otherwise suspected of being even the teensiest bit liberal.

If you think about the last year of the Trump campaign as a precursor to incite racial and xenophobic violence, it almost seems like some kind of conflict is inevitable when Trump loses. Hopefully it will be contained to isolated incidents by crazy White trash militia people who are immediately arrested. Maybe Trump can be arrested, too. If his intent to destabilize the post-election environment ends in violence and domestic terrorism.

But you know what? I’m more scared of what could happen if Donald Trump actually wins. Those are the truly frightening results.The

He could also appoint Supreme Court justices that will set us back decades as far as equality and women’s rights. Women could die from alley abortions. Married gays may have to get divorced. Mosques could be outlawed. People could be arrested for having Muslim friends.

Global warming will happen faster without the Environmental Protection Agency that he would eliminate and civil rights may be violated at schools because there will be no Department of Education to keep tabs on that stuff. The poor will stay poor.

The first amendment could be a thing of the past as President Trump limits media access to him, the White House or any federal agency to only those reporters who are “nice” by his standards. Our information from the government could be reduced to meaningless catch phrases repeated over and over again.

Rudy Giuliani could be our director of Homeland Security. Chris Christie could become Attorney General. We could have a group of thugs with tri-state accents running our federal government.

And, most frightening of all, maybe Trump could have SNL cancelled and Alec Baldwin jailed.

Bring on the civil war then. It will make for good skits.

Proponents and opponents of an imagined light rail train that loops around South Beach will discuss the pros and cons of the project at a community forum Thursday night organized by Miami Beach United.

Last we heard, there are three possible deals on the table, all from qualified bidders. Proposals are due Nov. 3. But everybody seems to believe that Alstom is the favored vendor after Mayor Philip Levine and City Manager Jimmy Morales traveled to France to meet with them. Morales was instructed by the commission to begin negotiations with Alstom in July. 

The rail, which the community is calling a streetcar, will loop around South Beach from the convention center to 5th Street and from Dade Boulevard and Alton Road to Washington Avenue. It is expected to cost about $387 to build and $16 million a year to operate (at first because that grows). And it is projected to take five years to build.

This comes after Levine, Miami Mayor Tomas Regalado and Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez apparently lost their marbles and agreed last year to seek their rail systems separately. They abandoned plans for Bay Link that would cross the MacArthur Causeway and connect the Beach with downtown Miami until later. And they basically rejected more than $8 million already secured in state funding for a new study. All each city had to provide was $417,000. And they might still be able to get federal funding. 

Supporters say the loop is a good first step to the eventual Bay Link and that it will take cars off the street.

Opponents it will make traffic worse because it will cause chaos on Beach streets as they are torn up once again and because it’s made for tourists. Most locals would rather walk five blocks than go around what they call “Levine’s loop” or “the train to nowhere” and many say it is a waste of taxpayer funds. It could also be called the Alex Heckler express since the lobbyist (who just hosted a fundraiser with Levine for Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez) is the one promoting this idea.

“Nobody wants this taxpayer paid train to cater to tourists,” said Commissioner Kristen Rosen-Gonzalez. “Levine has not listened to all the residents who do not want that train. And there are a lot of them.”

That’s why the forum tonight might turn into a train-trashing session. MBU’s stated goals are to:

• Educate residents on the Miami Beach Light Rail Project with some background on Miami-Dade County SMART plans
• Provide residents with “pros and cons” regarding the plan
• Identify ways residents can be engaged throughout the planning process
• Generate ideas and feedback for the Miami Beach Light Rail Plan

Nowhere does it say stop the train. But there will be people who want to do that. Robert Lansburgh, who leads the Stop the Train movement (more than 700 likes on Facebook) is participating. So is Michael Barrineau, president of the South of Fifth Neighborhood Association. There are also light rail advocates like Mark Needle, an active resident of the Flamingo Park neighborhood.

Activist Frank Del Vecchio will attend. He said the city has not answered 11 questions that the West Avenue Neighborhood Association has about the train’s impact to residents. He is concerned that the city has already entered into consulting contracts worth more than $6 million and hired staff dedicated to advance the project.

The questions are: 

1. What are the consultant reports and when are they due?
2. Are the reports public record and how can they be accessed?
3. Will the reports address the particulars of elevating tracks along the route addressing Sea Level Rise? 
4. Separated out, what is cost of streetcar? Of  street raising? Of pump stations? Of intermodal transit facilities?
5. Will the reports provide a construction budget and timetable?
6. Will the street raisings be separately budgeted?
7. What Streetcar and related items are in the recently approved 2016/2017 (both operating and capital)
8. What is the current timetable for city commission consideration of and action on the Streetcar project: (Please identify the action item and the scheduled or expected date of consideration, and type of action required (Resolution, Ordinance, Budget amendment, Contract approval, etc.)
9. Will the studies identify the required number of intermodal transit facilities, the minimum required capacity of each for number of trains to be serviced and stored, and the minimum number of vehicle parking spaces to be provided?  Will the locations, either specific or approximate, of such facilities be provided?
10. What agencies other than the City of Miami Beach are required to approve any aspect of the project, including configuration of State Roads located in Miami Beach that are included in the route?  If State Roads are included in the route whose responsibility will be the raising of those roads for sea level rise purposes?
11. What is the nature of the approval or approvals required?  Please cite the relevant requirement(s).

Del Vecchio also has loads of other questions about connectivity and how committed the county and Metropolitan Planning Organization are to connecting light rail since they’ve been talking more and more about rapid bus transit. Furthermore, he points to some study that indicates traffic could actually increase because of left turn limitations caused by Levine’s loop.

Hopefully, these questions will be answered Thursday night at the forum, titled “Are We On The Right Track?” It will begin at 6 p.m. at the Miami Beach Woman’s Club, 2401 Pine Tree Dr. (Free parking at the Hebrew Academy).

But Ladra doubts the conversation will end there.

It’s that time of the election cycle again when people start asking me how they should vote on this or that. Almost everyone needs guidance on ballot questions that don’t get as much news coverage as the candidates.

Except for the medical marijuana amendment, the second on the ballot, folks are pretty unaware about the other questions — probably because they haven’t received much media attention. There aren’t as many questions as we’ve had in the past, so it should not be discouraging — unless you live in North Miami Beach, where there are 10 charter amendments on the ballot. Other cities like Miami and Miami Beach also have questions posed to their voters. We may come back to those later.

But for now here are Ladra’s summaries and recommendations on countywide questions:

Amendment One: Rights for Solar Choice.  Vote NO

No matter what anybody from either the Republican or Democratic parties say, neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump are the biggest fraud on the ballot. That honor goes to a question, not a candidate. The solar question, because it’s not what it pretends to be. Instead of expanding and simplifying the use of solar panels, this constitutional amendment will make the current cumbersome and restrictive monopoly system part of the status quo and keep Florida as one of five states that currently bans the sale of solar energy directly to consumers. It will be more difficult, if not impossible, for pro-solar groups to get their initiatives passed.

This ballot initiative is being pushed and financed (to the tune of $21 million) by big utilities and, yes, big bad FP&L. When they realized that the pro-solar initiative, Floridians for Solar Choice, did not gather the sufficient amount of signatures to get their progressive measure expanding solar options for consumers on the ballot, these utility interests decided to get their own referendum on the ballot disguised as the pro-solar initiative. “Choice,” my butt.

Justice Barbara Pariente‘s dissenting opinion on the ruling allowing the measure to go forward has been requoted multiple times because it is so apropos. She called the language “a wolf in sheep’s clothing” and said the question was “masquerading as a pro-solar energy initiative.”

An insider on the campaign called it  “political jiu-jitsu” and a savvy move, according to a Miami Herald story. It is really quite brilliant, if evil, political strategy. The question is worded in such a way that it could lead voters to think we’re improving our solar choices. They aim to fool us. Don’t be fooled. Vote no.

Amendment 2: Medical pot for debilitating diseases. Vote YES.

It’s inhumane to keep medical marijuana from the people who need it. There is no reason to think that this would harm anyone. Are you going to tell Ladra that alcohol is less harmful? Or Celebrex for that matter? Have you heard the disclaimers on TV? Why risk difficulty breathing, slurred speech and vomiting blood “and something that looks like coffee grinds” to treat debilitating arthritis when a little pot will do? Ladra is pretty certain the pharmaceutical industry is the one financing any campaign against this. They stand to lose millions. If you ask me, this amendment doesn’t go far enough. And it’s inevitable.

Read related story: Doctors and nurses say vote yes on medical marijuana

Amendment 3: Tax exemption for first responders. Vote YES

This almost goes without saying. They are the police and firefighters who we rely on. We owe them everything. There is nothing left to say. Oh, maybe, three little numbers: 9, 1, 1.

Amendment 4: Tax exemption for seniors. Vote YES

Surely, we can find revenues elsewhere and allow our growing senior population to age at home. Especially since we waste so many millions on pet projects given to people with palanca, i.e. the electeds’ friends and family members and campaign contributors. Why can’t we see a constitutional amendment on campaign finance reform statewide?

Miami-Dade charter amendment: Taxing districts. Vote YES

This would allow cities to create and manage special taxing districts where property owners pay additional taxes for additional lighting or services such as security or grounds keeping. And, well, there are arguments that they could do it more efficiently and inexpensively. They certainly can’t do worse than the county, which was found last year to be over-billing some property owners to make up for others who were not paying their fair share. The mayor admitted the mismanagement went on for years. So you might think that cities can better manage this.

Read related story: County moves special taxing districts’ funds to cities control

We have to be careful, of course. And make sure there are safety nets. Because for every Coral Gables and Miami Lakes — where Councilman Manny Cid is pushing for this — you have cities like Opa-Locka and Hialeah, where this might become a brand new cottage industry for political insiders to abuse.  You can see the consultants and lobbyists now, salivating at this potential new stream of revenue at the expense of taxpayers who are going to be sold a bill of goods on services or amenities they don’t really need.

But the bottom line is that cities should be in control of any additional services or amenities that property voters have to vote to approve anyway. That’s why residents incorporate: So they have more control. Yes means more control.

Miami-Dade charter amendment: Public Records. Vote YES

Wait a minute: Don’t we have that right already under Florida Sunshine laws? Sorta. Because while the state law can be enforced, it is more difficult to do so locally and some requests could be legally denied. This gives the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust the teeth to enforce the public records laws. We already have a hard enough time getting public records. We should do anything we can to make obtaining public funds easier. Vote yes.

The last candidate forum hosted by the Kendall Federation of Homeowners Associations sounds like it might be a little one-sided: While three candidates have confirmed their attendance, their opponents will likely be MIA.

All of them are — surprise, surprise — incumbents.

By now, we are used to Miami-Dade Carlos Gimenez skipping the neighborhood debates and forums with School Board member and mayoral challenger Raquel Regalado. He agreed to three debates only after he was forced into a runoff — two on TV and one on radio (at 10 a.m. on WMBM Thursday morning) but none in front of a live audience. You don’t have to wonder why.

But the invite from the KFHA also says that Republican incumbent State Rep. Michael Bileca had not confirmed his attendance, though his challenger, Jeffrey Solomon, will be there. 

Also not coming: U.S. Rep. Carlos Curbelo, the Republican incumbent who is apparently sending a “representative from his office” to face former Congressman Joe Garcia, who Curbelo beat in 2014 amid damaging headlines about voter fraud. He shouldn’t be allowed to send a stand-in. We are not voting for a stand-in.

Also, Ladra hopes that when he says “office,” he means someone from the campaign office, not from his government office.

It’s a shame that Gimenez, Bileca and Curbelo have so little respect for the Kendall voters that they would skip this last opportunity to reach them at a debate where they would engage with their opponent. 

Tsk, tsk.

If you want to hear the one-sided arguments from the challengers, the event begins at 7:30 p.m. at the ‘civic pavilion’ at the Kendall Village Center, 8625 SW 124 Ave. (it’s that little room in front of the movie theater).

Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine is having a fundraiser for Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez Tuesday. Also hosting: Beach Commissioner Ricky Arriola and lobbyist Alex Heckler, who is partners with former State Rep. and original G-man Marcelo Llorente.

The event is at Levine’s company offices, Royal Media Partners at 960 Alton Rd.

Gimenez and Levine have been buddy-buddy almost since the latter was elected in 2014. They did an ice bucket challenge together (photo left). And even though the two disagreed on funding for the BayLink leg of new rail, they joined forces on battling Zika and flew to Washington together (even though Gimenez repeatedly says we have to solve our problems here) to lobby Congress for more funding.

The Beach mayor even has a cameo in a Gimenez campaign ad (so does Hialeah Mayor Carlos Hernandez, the admitted loanshark).

Levine’s support means a lot to Gimenez, who needs Anglos (read: non Hispanic white) voters and Democrats to gain the edge over Miami-Dade School Board member Raquel Regalado, who forced him (surprise!) into a runoff in the August primary.

But what does Levine want from Gimenez? The torch, maybe?

It is no secret that Levine originally planned to run for Miami-Dade mayor. Consultants convinced him that that would be impossible because his last name doesn’t end with a vowel or a Z. But Ladra hears he is a stubborn man. While we also believe that he has eyed the governor’s mansion, maybe he holds out hope that he can compete in a crowded Miami-Dade field come 2020 when Gimenez is termed out. He may think he’d have a helluva leg up with the predecessor’s blessing.

Or maybe he just wants Gimenez and his monied pals — Heckler et al — to help him raise funds for the governor’s race?

Nah. Levine is a proud millionaire who likes to self-fund his campaigns and buy little old Cuban ladies with chachkies and salsa parties.

In fact, why is he hosting a fundraiser at all? Can’t he just write a check for whatever it is he’d raise?

Ladra can’t wait to see how many Beach city vendors are on Gimenez’s next campaign report.