Miami taxpayers could be on the hook for City Commissioner Joe Carollo‘s frivolous and ridiculous lawsuit against the mayor, city clerk and others to take the strong mayor referendum off the ballot. They could be billed for his political stunt.
The lawsuit was dismissed — practically laughed out of court — in an 18-page ruling Saturday by Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Miguel M. de la O, who said that Carollo’s arguments had no merit. Not a single one. He basically called Carollo a sore loser who, having lost the vote at the dais when the commission voted to put the question on the ballot, turned to the courts.
Read related: Judge calls Joe Carollo sore loser, rips apart strong mayor lawsuit
Carollo has 30 days to appeal, though in matters of elections the courts want things expedited and the fact he hasn’t appealed yet indicates he took his spanking hard. But whether he appeals or not, the legal costs incurred so far can be estimated at between $25,000 and $80,000, depending on how many attorneys he had “consulting” on it. That could include Tania Cruz, the daughter-in-law of Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez, who got an email exactly two minutes and three seconds after the court’s online system confirmed receiving the case from lead attorney Jesus Suarez.
Suarez, who works for the Genovese Joblove & Battista law firm, doesn’t work for free and someone is going to have to pay him for his work.
“No payments have been made at this time,” City Attorney Victoria Mendez told Ladra after I asked. Keywords: At this time. That doesn’t mean that he won’t be paid in the future.
Read related: Joe Carollo files late campaign report, with $60K for mayor’s daughter-in-law
And, in fact, he could be paid from city funds after all. Carollo filed the lawsuit as a city commissioner, not as a citizen or as a voter. The first line of his emergency complaint says so.
“Plaintiff/petitioner JOE CAROLLO, as an individual and as a commissioner in the City of Miami, Florida, sues Defendants/Respondents …” The keywords there are as a commissioner.
Que descarado! That’s what’s called trying to “achieve standing” so the city would be on the hook — meaning he would be making taxpayers would be funding this political feud.
Is he going to do this every time he loses a battle on the dais? Every time the other commissioners vote against him, is he going to take it to court and make taxpayers foot the bill?
That could get very expensive.

Read Full Story

A Miami-Dade judge on Saturday ripped apart, er, ruled against a lawsuit filed by Miami Commissioner Crazy Joe Carollo in an 18-page spanking, uh, decision that basically calls him a sore loser who ran to the court after he failed to get his way on the commission.
Carollo is against the strong mayor referendum that city commissioners voted to put on the ballot in August. He was joined by Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez, who has gone on TV and radio against the measure, so it’s a defeat for him as well.
“The essence of the matter before the court is that Commissioner Carollo opposes changing the governing structure of the City of Miami to a strong mayor form of government. In his role as City Commissioner he argued against the issue being presented to, and decided by, the voters in the form of a ballot referendum,” wrote 11th Circuit Court Judge Miguel M. de la O in a final summary judgement for Mayor Francis Suarez and the other defendants in Carollo’s stunt, er, legal challenge.
Read related: Gimenez clan involved in Joe Carollo lawsuit vs strong mayor
“He now asks this court to declare the referendum illegal for a number of reasons, none of which have merit,” the judge continued in his intro. “The question of how the City of Miami should be structured is at its core a political one. Therefore, Commissioner Carollo must rely on his powers of persuasion to convince the citizens of Miami as to the folly of a strong mayor form of government, if it is indeed folly.”
Wait, powers of persuasion? Who says a judge can’t be funny?
De la O didn’t let Crazy Joe use his “powers of persuasion” in court even though Carollo, in true form, “sought to take dozens of depositions, and subpoenaed in excess of 30 witnesses to the October 5, 2018 hearing, all of which this Court deemed unnecessary.”
In other words, nananina said the judge, cutting Crazy Joe off before he could start.
He lays into Crazy Joe and fails all of his counts on what apparently amounts to a frivolous and ridiculous lawsuit:

The ballot language is, indeed, abundantly clear and complete on the purpose of the referendum and not misleading, the judge said.
The petition signatures do not need to meet Miami-Dade standards that are not required by the city of Miami charter and, even if they did, the city commission placed the referendum on the ballot, not the petitions, so that is a moot point.
And the complaint about the pay formula is not only moot, because that’s not the purpose of the measure, it also “misses the mark,” wrote de la O. “First, there is in fact a pay formula now, it is whatever manner and amount the Mayor is currently paid. Commissioner Carollo’s counsel stated at the hearing that the Mayor’s salary is set at the discretion of the Commission. That is a pay formula. It may be purely discretionary, but a discretionary formula is no less a formula.”

In other words: “Duh.”
Was it intentionally ridiculous?
If not, this should be a huge embarrassment for the attorneys because the lawsuit apparently doesn’t have a single leg to stand on. The judge laughs at it throughout the ruling, says that a comparison to a Leon County case under appeal was “remarkably different” and pokes so many holes in it that it almost seems like it was intentional. Like a parody of a lawsuit.
Read related: Joe Carollo files late campaign report, with $60K to mayor’s daughter-in-law
If it is, this could be fraud. Ladra can’t help but wonder how much was paid to Jesus Suarez, the lawyer whose name it is under who filed it, and maybe also Tania Cruz, Mayor Carlos Gimenez’s daughter-in-law — the one who got paid $60,000 for “mailers” during the campaign. She was likely advising Carollo on the matter, as evidenced by an email from Suarez to both Tania Cruz and her husband CJ Gimenez two minutes after the lawsuit was filed. “Done,” it said.
The public also needs to know who paid for it?  Someone is paying Suarez, at the Genovese, Joblove & Battista law firm. Five other firm emails were ccd as was Carollo campaign attorney Benedict Kuehne. They are not doing this for free. Is Cruz making more from a political action committee? Maybe her Papi-in-law’s PAC this time?
When Ladra first asked City Attorney Victoria Mendez if the city had paid the attorney, she wrote back “No payments have been made at this time.” Which sounded like the city could be paying for this frivolous lawsuit sometime in the future. So I asked again and got the same answer. “There are no records responsive to your request. The City is not paying Mr. Suarez at this time,” she wrote again.
What does that mean?
Neither Carollo nor Suarez returned several calls.
Ladra challenges Joey Flechas or Doug Hanks (since the Gimenez clan is involved) to find out what this lawsuit really was. Payoff to someone for something? Propaganda maybe?
Because the one thing it’s apparently not is a legitimate legal challenge.

Read Full Story

As expected, there are going to be a plethora of PACs pitching a yes vote on three controversial city of Miami ballot questions to voters — and, so far, nothing on the “vote no” side.
Joining the strong mayor initiative and stadium park retail center initiatives, which are getting all the attention, is also a question about a 99-year lease on the city’s Miami Riverside Center administrative building that nobody really knows anything about (more on that later).
These important referendum questions on the Nov. 6 ballot are being pushed and promoted by someone or other. Miami Mayor Francis Suarez for the first two, and Jorge Mas and David Beckham and Miami Commissioner Joe Carollo on the soccer stadium for starters. These people and others who will profit from these measures will use PACs to push the yes vote.
Read related: Miami Commission should kick no-bid soccer shopping center out of Melreese
So far, there doesn’t seem to be any “vote no” PACs forming. And isn’t that usually the case? That’s why getting it on the ballot is so important to these special interests. Once it’s going before voters, it’s just a sales job.
We already know about Miamians for an Independent and Accountable Mayor’s Initiative, which spent practically all the $275,000 it has already raised since launched in March to get the strong mayor petitions signed and the question on the ballot. This PAC also has a website at strongmiami.com to promote the measure. Ladra is pretty sure we have not heard the last from them.
But there are at least three other PACs for the November election that have appeared in just the last six weeks.
Two of those committees came on board last month.
Building Miami’s Future filed Aug. 10 for the vague purpose of “Special Referendum Election in the City of Miami.” But we know it’s the MRC question because the only contribution so far is for in-kind polling data by FredrickPolls valued at $14,000 and paid for by Adler Development Group, which wants to redevelop the city-owned property into a mixed-use complex with four towers. This PAC has Steven Brownstein as the chairman, Tina Spano as treasurer and Morgan Sirlin as deputy treasurer.
Read related: Mayor Carlos Gimenez clan involved in Joe Carollo lawsuit vs strong mayor
Accountable Miami PC filed Aug. 24 with the equally vague purpose of “Miami ballot issues” and has already collected $11,000 from banker Leonard Abess, Sergio’s CEO Carlos Gazitua and attorney Juan Mayol. Daniel Milian is the chairman. Political CPA Jose “Pepe” Riesco is treasurer and Jeannine Miranda is deputy treasurer. Ladra bets it’s a pro strong mayor PAC, seeing as how more accountability is the presumed outcome.
Another PAC turned up just last week.
The transparently named Miami Freedom Park Political Committee filed its documents with the city on Sept. 17 for the purpose of  “advocating for a Local Referendum amending the City charter.” Pablo Alvarez is the chairman, and Riesco and Miranda again as the CPAs.
That’s at least four PACs so far — there could be more registered at the state level — that will be vying for your attention, urging yes votes on the strong mayor, the MRC lease and the soccer stadium retail complex.
The poor no vote side never gets any organized money — except maybe, in this case, we just might see some against the strong mayor question coming from Miami Commissioner Joe Carollo or Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez or both.
Ladra will keep an eye on these PACs and any others that may form in the coming weeks so we can figure out who is investing in these three ballot questions and how much — and why.
This post was not paid for nor approved by any committee for anything.

Read Full Story

There’s no mention of them in the lawsuit filed Tuesday by Miami Commissioner Joe Carollo against the city and Mayor Francis Suarez in an attempt to stop the strong mayor vote, but the county mayor’s family is involved.
While the emergency complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief was filed in Miami-Dade 11th Circuit Court by Jesus Suarez, an attorney with Genovese Joblove and Battista, an email shot out that very night shows who had to be notified as soon as possible: Tania Cruz, the mayor’s daughter-in-law, and Carlos Gimenez, who could be the mayor’s lobbyist son or the mayor himself — but there’s really no difference as evidenced by last month’s elections interference.
The email was sent just before midnight, two minutes and three seconds after Suarez got notice of the filed documents. It had only one word in it: “FILED” All in caps. Like “DONE” or “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.” Like he is reporting to his real boss.
Genovese Joblove and Battista has long been affiliated with Gimenez and once employed his other daughter-in-law, Barby Rodriguez.
Cruz, who is married to the mayor’s lobbyist son, was the attorney of record for the Carollo campaign and represented him, alongside Ben Kuehne, during the challenge to his district residency brought on by Alfie Leon. Is she consulting now, too?
And CJ Gimenez, the lobbyist son that this is probably addressed to, has been with Carollo since the campaign and now beyond, helping him get an extension from Papi as head of the county elections department for the wording on the strong mayor ballot question and, now, helping Carollo challenge the measure in court.
The lawsuit — which also names Miami City Clerk Todd Hannon, Miami-Dade Elections Supervisor (by proxy) Christina White and the political action committee Miamians for an Independent and Accountable Mayor’s Initiative as defendants — argues that the “ambiguous and intentionally misleading” ballot language doesn’t clearly tell voters what the mayor’s compensation will be under the strong mayor change (watch this become the crux of an anti campaign) and other changes that take power away from the commission. It also argues that the petitions themselves are invalid because some of the circulators are not registered Miami-Dade voters, as required by county code.
Read related: Carlos Gimenez abuses power in election interference for lobbyist son
Interesting  points that seem to have merit. Ladra is not sure she likes the strong mayor idea, either. I mean, look how great it’s been for the county. And the Suarez version is even more powerful and convoluted (more on that later).
But I’m more interested right now in how deeply involved Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez is in this fight. And why?
First he abuses his power to intervene in the elections process on behalf of his lobbyist son and Carollo, getting the commissioner a one week extension because Carollo thought he could kill the referendum measure with time. Gimenez didn’t get the extension for Suarez, who had previously sought an extension of a few days but was told he couldn’t have one and wanted to have the ballot language approved at a special city commission meeting Aug. 6. No, he did that for Carollo, who still couldn’t deliver even after Gimenez took over the elections department and deemed himself the elections supervisor.
And now the Gimenez family is behind, er, um, consulted on a lawsuit against the ballot measure.
What lengths will Gimenez go to on this issue? Isn’t it too bad he’s not as passionate about rail?
A Getty miage captures a much happier and friendlier Francis Suarez and Carlos Gimenez on Marlins opening day.
Is this just an opportunity to muddy Suarez on behalf of Carollo and his son’s career, or is there something more personal at stake? Las malas lenguas say Gimenez has long thought about running for Miami mayor after he is termed out at the county in 2020. Is this the tailgate party? But then, wouldn’t he want the strong mayor measure to pass.
Some political observers believe it’s going to pass anyway, given Miami’s sewn-up vote, and that this presents Gimenez with an opportunity to muddy Suarez while allowing for the strong mayor vote to pass and then using the younger mayor’s inexperience against him in 2021.
It could happen. God help us. At least it is one explanation behind the Gimenez clan involvement in this lawsuit. Have another?

Read Full Story