Plans for the Amerian Dream megamall — billed as the largest retail center/amusement park in the U.S. — will go before the Miami-Dade County Commission for the first time Wednesday as they seek changes to the county land use and development master plan maps. And the two big topics will be traffic and tax breaks.

After all, we are talking about 3.5 million square feet of retail, a 350,000-square-foot amusement park, a 350,000-square-foot water park, a miniature golf course, an indoor ski slope, a lake with underwater submarine rides and water skiing, a 120,000-square-foot entertainment zone with restaurants and nightclubs, a youth sports center, one or more hotels providing 2,000 rooms and enough parking to accomodate all of that.

Traffic is the main concern plaguing both those who opppose the megamall and those who are in favor. There should be plenty of public speakers Wednesday as commissioners consider amending the Comprehensive Development Master Plan, the first step to allow for the mall’s construction.

“I would just hope the plan they show us has a robust transportation plan that allows people to get in and out relatively easily,” said Commission Chairman Esteban Bovo, who otherwise supports the mall because of the jobs it will create — Ladra has heard anywhere from 30,000 to 46,000, with 15,000 being permanent — and the $35 million or so in tax revenue that it is estimated to provide beginning the first year of operation, he said.

“Make no mistake, it’s going to have an impact,” Bovo said. “If what they submit to the board does not show a transportation plan that works for them and for us — and they know this — then this is not going to fly.”

A lot of folks also want promises that developer Triple Five Group is not going to seek tax breaks either from the county or the state — not even through the creation of a special taxing district that would divert tax dollars from the county’s general fund and earmark them for infrastructure and traffic mitigation that the mall’s developers would otherwise have to pay from their own pockets. Impact fees are estimate to cost Triple Five close to $120 million.

“At no time has anybody represented to me in any kind of way that they plan to come to us for financial support,” Bovo said. “He can go to the state and get transportation dollars, but the county is not going to entertain using property taxes to support this project.”

Triple Five sure talked to Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez about a tax break. Gimenez admitted to the Herald that they had been asking for subsidies since Day 1.

Read related story: Mega mall gets public land on rushed timeline

But they already got a tremendous deal on the land, didn’t they? After months of secret negotiations with Gimenez, the mayor in 2015 lobbied the state to put the land — 80 some acres they had already identified they needed to complete their accumulation of properties — on the surplus properties list so that the county could buy it at government-to-government prices. Then he sold it to the developer without getting appraisals or putting it out to bid — for the same government price, $12.3 million. That’s $153,750 an acre, which Ladra is sure is way below market value. So, Gimenez had the county act as a pass through for a special government price on 80 acres of land for a private megamall development. We should hope there’s no more coming from the public trough.

Gimenez told the Miami Herald that he had told Triple Five the county was not interested in diverting any taxes through any “tax increment financing” or special taxing district mechanism and that he had told them so. But the developer has tapped government financing before, for the Mall of America in Minnesota and the first American Dream mall, which is an unfinished empty shell in Meadowlands, N.J. And one of Triple Five’s lobbyists, former State Sen. Miguel Diaz de la Portilla — who coincidentally sponsored legislation last year to allow counties to create their own tax increment financing districts for commercial developments — wouldn’t commit to a no and told Herald reporter Doug Hanks that it was too early for any conversation about public funding.

Too early? Pffft. Here’s a translation of that: Yes, we are going to seek public dollars wherever we can but we just don’t want to talk about that until we get the ball rolling and it is too difficult or cumbersome to stop it.

Diaz de la Portilla also told Ladra that this was just the first of at least seven to nine public meetings and steps for the megamall development. If the requested changes to the CDMP are approved by the commission Wednesday, that gets transmitted to the state for review by several agencies which could set conditions for further approvals. Then it comes back to the county in April or May for zoning changes and the development agreement. That’s when the real wheeling and dealing is supposed to start.

The flagship DLP also said that the only real opposition is coming from competing malls (who, in a funny twist, hired Gimenez pal and fundraiser Alex Heckler as their lobbyist). But Ladra has talked to residents in Miami Lakes and Palm Springs North, as well as environmentalists, who are concerned about the impact. Some business leaders have also quietly questioned the wisdom of such a huge megamall development at a time when retail sales are suffering nationwide (which may be why the New Jersey version of the American Dream is not yet awake).

That brings us back to the taxing district thing, which could possibly offset the losses of a down retail market. While it’s supposedly too early to talk about tax breaks, Diaz de la Portilla said he would be willing Wednesday to talk about anything that commissioners ask him about it. So commissioners better ask him about it! Ladra is talking to every single one of you. We are all watching.

Read related story: American Dream lobby team = casino connections

Although, really, Ladra doesn’t know how much we can believe what the developer and/or their mouthpiece says. The American Dream application says the project, once complete, will attract 40 million visitors a year. That’s more than twice as many as the 19.3 million people who visit Disney’s Magic Kingdom annually. So you’re really telling us there’s going to be more visitors here than at Disney World? Really? Does a ski slope in South Florida have that much pull? 

If that is the case, then the transportation plan better be freaking magical.

There’s also an application at Wednesday’s meeting for a zoning amendment to the land development map for a mixed-use project on a neighboring site by the Graham Companies. This project has a proposed 3-million-square-foot business park with retail, offices, industrial space and hotels, as well as 2,000 apartment.

And that, alone, is expected to generate more than 10,000 new trips by 2020.

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.