UPDATED: So this is why she didn’t run for re-election.
Former Miami Beach Commissioner Joy Malakoff, who said she wouldn’t run again because of a back injury, was hired by the city at Wednesday’s commission meeting to do three months of community outreach for the city’s general obligation bond effort for $50,000. Guess her back is feeling much better.
This juicy job was not advertised. There was no competitive process for it. And believe me, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of people who could do it better than Malakoff, and in two languages.
By the end of Friday, after Ladra had made a series of inquiries, Malakoff “withdrew” her name from consideration. But the kicker is that there may have been a Sunshine Law violation because at least one commissioner got a late night call Tuesday about this item. From who? She wouldn’t say. But that means it’s interesting.
Normally, a former commissioner would have to wait two years after leaving office to work for or lobby the city, but commissioners on Wednesday — after the city attorney reminded them that they could — waived that rule in order to give Malakoff the palanca position. Both the vote to waive the rule and the vote to award the contract to Malakoff was 5-2, with only Commissioners Michael Góngora and Kristen Rosen Gonzalez voting against both times.
But it’s a moot point. Earlier Ladra said it was illegal and I certainly think it was invalid. That’s because Miami Beach — which has more rules about campaign contributions than any other city probably on Earth, prohibits anyone who gave to a candidate’s political campaign from becoming a city vendor, which is what Malkoff did on Wednesday, for at least a year. She left office three months ago, after contributing to both Mayor Dan Gelber’s and Commissioner Micky Steinberg’s campaigns. Ladra had first written that they shouldn’t have voted on this, but rather recuse themselves. I thought commissioners were the ones that were prohibited from voting on items for vendors who contributed.
Mayor Dan Gelber
Gelber, who only called me back after he read the story to correct me, fell all over himself to correct me and explain that it wasn’t exactly illegal. He pointed me to the ordinance and indeed, it says that “a person or entity other than a vendor who directly or indirectly makes to a candidate elected to the office of mayor or commissioner shall be disqualified for a period of 12 months following the swearing in of the subject elected official from serving as a vendor with the city.” This, too, can be waived by a 5/7th vote.
So, wait a minute. If the commission waives that part of the Beach ethics ordinance, then she can have the job. So the same mayor and/or commissioners who get the campaign contribution can then turn around and waive the rule that prohibits their benefactors from getting a juicy city contract?
“I actually looked at it the other day,” Gelber told me about Ordinance 2-487, giving me the number.
So he thought he was going to have to waive both sections of the ethics ordinance: The one that prohibits a former employee or elected from being a vendor and the one that prohibits a person or entity who gave to his campaign. Like that is so much better.
Ladra is glad the mayor corrected me because, actually, this is worse. He was going to waive both ethical requirements. For a guy who ran on ethics, this is rich.
But it gets better (or worse).
Gelber first told me that Malakoff didn’t get the job outright, that the commission simply authorized the city manager to negotiate a contract with her up to $50,000. We all know that’s how it works in every city and at the county. Electeds authorize or instruct the city manager or mayor and the negotiation is done. It doesn’t come back. And Gelber knows this, too, because he contradicted himself moments later.
“I don’t quibble with the fact that there are people more qualified. He may hire them, too,” Gelber said, referring to the city manager. “He may not have to go through us. There’s going to be lots of people doing outreach.”
First, whoa! “Lots of people?” How much is the city going to spend to convince residents to increase taxes? How many of those people are gonna be campaign contributors and friends? And, secondly, aha! “He may not have to go through us,” he said. And I asked him to confirm. “The only reason it was before us is because we couldnt hire her,” without the waiver, Gelber told Ladra, “because she was a commissioner. He needed that.”
But, then, he certainly wouldn’t have to come back to the commission.
Commissioner Michael Góngora
Góngora told Ladra he voted against Malakoff getting the plum post because there was no prior announcement or open, competitive process. The job came up during a discussion item, an update from the city manager on the efforts to get a GOB passed. Then suddenly, out of nowhere City Manager Jimmy Morales explains how they’ve been thinking about hiring Joy Malakoff, who was sitting in the audience, as a consultant to do outreach.
Only Góngora and Rosen Gonzalez seemed shocked, really. Every other commissioner talked about her unique knowledge and experience, laying it on pretty thick. Like, almost too much, you know? Over compensation. Commissioner Ricky Arriola practically drew a sword to defend his colleague. Really, anyone who cares about this has to watch the video on Facebook posted by former Commissioner Michael Grieco (more on that later).
Though she had previously voted to move forward with the GOB exploration process, citing parks and a swimming pool as some of the projects she would like to see funded, Rosen Gonzalez told Ladra Friday that she hasn’t decided whether to move forward with what is essentially a tax increase until she has details on how much it would be and how it would impact homeowners. She certainly wasn’t ready to hire someone to do outreach. Once, and if, the city gets to that point, she wants to advertise the position and hire a professional.
“This is obviously a political favor,” Rosen Gonzalez said on the dais, raising questions about Malakoff’s skills set for this particular position. But more importantly, telling her colleagues that she had gotten a late night call on Tuesday from someone telling her about the item. Who made that call? On behalf of whom? Nobody even asked her! Some might think that one of the commissioners would have been curious.
Góngora said he would have voted yes had it been presented as what it was, instead of snuck into a discussion item like a Trojan horse. He urged his colleagues to defer the item to the first meeting in March, three weeks from now, so that it would be properly noticed for what it was. His colleagues seemed adamant to make this happen now.
“Discussion items are typically not an action item,” Góngora told me later. “It was mislabeled and misleading. It hadn’t been advertised and properly noticed. The item didn’t say vote three times to hire someone. It said update.
“It seemed like a set up.”
Ya think?
Morales knew he was going to bring this up. It appears it was something that city staffers have been talking about. And at least Gelber was brought into the fold (though it appears Arriola was in on it, too), because the mayor said that “when I first heard about this idea, I thought it was a fair and good idea.”
So that begs the question: When did he first “hear” about the idea? From who?
Malakoff said that she was “asked to sell the GO bonds to the community and I’d be happy to do so.” Who asked her? When?
The city manager did not return several calls from Ladra. He returned a text message at 5:36 p.m., four hours after I texted him, with “She withdrew from the process.”
What freaking process?
When I texted Morales three minutes later asking for the letter or email in which Malakoff withdrew, Morales — who also used to be a poster child of ethics — didn’t respond.
But at this point, it doesn’t matter that Malakoff didn’t take the job that was offered, if not illegally then certainly unethically — though I would bet on the first. Because Ladra believes there was a Sunshine Law violation here. And that this was a deal done on the campaign trail — a job created for Joy, who endorsed several candidates last year. There is just no way that this wasn’t worked out behind the scenes.
This is something for Joe Centorino and the Miami Dade Ethics and Public Trust Commission to look into. Consider this post my complaint if you have to, Joe.

Read Full Story

On Wednesday, a 19-year-old former student with an assault rifle walked into Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County and opened fire, killing 17 people and wounding at least 15 more.
On Thursday, at 1 p.m., the Florida Senate Appropriations Committee will consider a bill that would make it easier for convicted felons who have had their rights restored to get a gun permit without the state first getting all the criminal background information.
Yep, you heard that right. Convicted felons whose rights have been restored can’t vote, but they can sure get their guns. Paperwork, schmakerwork.
This is in addition to a slew of proposed bills in the Florida House that will allow guns in private schools (HB 113), allow guns in public schools (HB 621), allow guns on property owned, rented, leased or used by churches or religious institutions (HB 1419) and make it easier for people to get their guns back after they’ve been confiscated by police (HB 6013). Ladra will watch as these move through committees. Stay tuned.
Today’s scheduled discussion will be about Senate Bill 740, sponsored by Sen. Kelly Stargel (R-Lakeland). Buried in a couple of paragraphs near the end of the 98-page Senate Bill 740 — an agricultural piece of legislation about oyster harvesting and water vending standards and seed labeling and restrictions on telephone solicitors — is a change in the law that allows agents with the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to grant firearm permits within 90 days even when the criminal background checks are not complete.
Here’s the actual language from page 88 of the bill:
“In the event the department receives incomplete criminal history information or no final disposition on a crime that may disqualify the applicant, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services must expedite efforts to acquire the final disposition or proof of restoration of civil and firearm rights, or confirmation that clarifying records are not available from the jurisdiction where the criminal history originated. Ninety days after the date of receipt of the completed application, if the department has not acquired final disposition or proof of restoration of civil and firearm rights, or confiration that clarifying records are not available from the jurisdiction where the criminal history originated, the department shall issue the license in the absence of disqualifying information. However, such license must be immediately suspended and revoked upon receipt of disqualifying information.”
So, basically, they’re gonna take the guns back when they give them to people who shouldn’t have them. “Ooooops. Sorry, Mad Dog. Can we have that AK back?” Not sure how that’s gonna work.
Currently, gun permit applications are held indefinitely until all the background criminal history information is complete. And according to published reports quoting proponents of the bill, only 1% of gun permit applicants are denied based on incomplete information. So we need to change the law for this one percent? What possible public policy purpose could this relaxation on background checks — which reportedly was requested by Agriculture Commissioner and gubernatorial candidate Adam Putnam — provide the community? I can’t think of one.
Well, maybe, just out of respect for the 17 students and teachers killed Wednesday in a high school, maybe the committee members ought to table this for another day.

Read Full Story

Miami-Dade made a very excited announcement Wednesday.
No, our county leaders haven’t solved the transit problem — not even close. They haven’t found a real, professional with airport experience to run MIA. They haven’t decided to respect the people’s vote and create the Pet’s Trust as they promised to. They didn’t find the perfect location and situation for a new civil courthouse. They didn’t pass any new climate change development regulations. And they haven’t discovered a way to save tapayer dollars in wasteful publicity stunts that only feel good but do very little to actually benefit the community.
No, the announcement made Wednesday was that our county had unveiled its very own condom brand. Actually, “its first branded condom,” according to the press release. Italics are mine. Because are we to expect more condom brands from our elected local leaders? Can Ladra suggest an erect palm tree against a sunset backdrop for the next one?
This first condom was unveiled on Valentine’s Day, for all the PR value. This is not a joke. Mayor Carlos Gimenez and Commissioner Sally Heyman and Commission Chairman Esteban Bovo even posed with a giant and (we hope) mock condom for the photo-op. At the press conference. Press conference!
This first condom is Miami-Dade’s collaboration with the Florida Health Department’s Getting 2 Zero HIV awareness campaign — because the goal is zero new cases and zero stigma — hence Sen. Rene Garcia also in the photo op. And this is not to take away from the campaign. Ladra is all for HIV awareness and free condoms for everyone — which the county is distributing all this week at locations near you. Miami-Dade has one of the if not the highest rate of HIV infection in the country. Currently, there are almost 27,000 people living with HIV/AIDS in Miami-Dade — that’s one out of every 85 adults. We need as many free condoms as we can get. And it will rain condoms at FIU’s Green Library today, dubbed “Condom Day.”
But is this really what we want our county commissioners to be spending their time doing? Posing with giant condoms? Once they initiate/approve the collaboration, sure, they can do something to help the state campaign. But celebrating? With photo ops?
This is the hard work they want $100,000 a year for? (More on that later.) Already, Deputy Mayor Maurice Kemp (far left) has already spent too much time away from his $230,000-a-year job.
Perhaps it is because the pats on the back come few and far between at County Hall. So they just can’t help themselves. But, seriously folks, whatever time, cost and effort was made designing and/or printing this special wrapper and redecorating the lobby at County Hall and producing all this feel good publicity crap could have been saved and our community better served by hooking the state up with existing HIV awareness organizations that really know how the community and how to distrubute existing brands of condoms all year long.
What we really need is protection for when the county screws us. But in the meantime, here’s where to find the free Miami-Dade brand condoms.

Feb. 15 Health Fair at Curley’s House, from 10-3 p.m., 6025 NW 6th Ct.
Feb. 15 Educational Table at MDC-Kendall Campus, from 11-2 p.m., 11011 SW 104th St.
Feb. 15 Condom Day at FIU’s Green Library, 10:30-2 p.m., 11200 SW 8th St.
Feb. 16 Health Fair at Government Center, 10-4 p.m., 111 NW 1st St.
Feb. 16 HIV/STD Testing The Hub at LGBTQ, 10-2 p.m., 1130 Washington Ave., Miami Beach
Feb. 22 HIV/STD Testing at Flamingo Park, 2-7 p.m., 1200 Meridian Ave., Miami Beach

Use at your own risk.

Read Full Story

Miami-Dade Elections Supervisor Christina White has added the West Flagler library branch to the list of early voting locations for the needless May 1 House District 114 special election. But that doesn’t solve the problem for the two Republicans in next week’s primary.
Or, really, for the one Republican who stands to lose the most and might not make it to the general.
Early voting started Saturday at three polling places in Coral Gables, Pinecrest and Cutler Bay. But two polling places in the northern end of the district that are normally open for early voting in countywide elections — West Miami Community Center and the West Flagler library — are not. And White told Ladra that there was nothing she could do now. Florida statutes require that she set the early voting calendar at least 30 days prior to the first day. Her hands are tied.
Unfortunately, this could have a damning make-or-break effect on one of the candidates.
Jose Pazos — a Marine and son of a an ex political prisoner in Cuba who has lived in the district all his life — has his base of support in the West Miami and Flagami area, where the older Cuban voters may remember him from his run in 2010 (although the district lines were redrawn somewhat) and are more likely to vote for Pazos than someone named Andrew. Conversely, Andrew Vargas — an attorney who really doesn’t have a base anywhere as he recently moved in from the Lakes of the Meadows area, where he was running for office just a few months ago — will likely have more fans in Pinecrest and Cutler Bay than a Jose would.
Is this fair? Ladra understands that White can’t do anything about it now. But why didn’t she add the other two polling places — or at least the one that is being added to the May election — from the beginning?
There are 20 early voting locations in a normal countywide election, but they don’t activate all of the ones in a particular city or district for a smaller race, White said. There may have been more early voting sites in the most recent special election in Senate District 40 and House District 116, but there were three times as many voters as in District 114, she added.
She also said that there were more eligible registered voters in Coral Gables than Miami and West Miami combined. In fact, she had considered having only two polling places, but the district is “very long and narrow and two is probably too few,” White said.
“The decision was not made from a cost perspective but on whether it is warranted.”
But what does that mean? And who makes that determination? Is it White or her boss, Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez?
Read related story: Limited early voting in House 114 GOP primary could be voter supression
Three is still too few, as evidenced by the fact that a fourth site has been added to the May 1 election, and several local leaders got involved: The West Miami mayor, Miami Commissioner Manolo Reyes, county Commissioner Rebeca Sosa and local Republican Party honcho Nelson Diaz, who even threatened to sue the county under the federal voting rights act if they did not add the two other polling places. But they were too late: The first complaint White got about the issue was when Diaz contacted her on Jan. 12 — 29 days before the first day of early voting — said Elections Spokeswoman Suzy Trutie.
White also said that she expected Flagami and West Miami voters to easily access the Gables library branch, which is historically one of the highest peforming polling places (and so far this election is no different). But couldn’t we expect as much of the Pinecrest voters, which I assume there are fewer of? Ladra thinks that it’s much easier for the soccer moms with GPS to find the Coral Gables branch than the working class transit card holders and elderly voters of the northwestern part of the district. White’s caluclations didn’t take that into effect. Maybe the Pinecrest library branch should have been the polling place that was discarded. I wonder what the historical turnout is there compared to the West Flagler library.
Numbers show that only two people voted at the Pinecrest library over the weekend, compared to five people at the South Dade library and 44 people in Coral Gables. On Monday, four people voted at the two southern locations and 19 people voted in the Gables. On Tuesday there were no voters at Pinecrest — zero — three at South Dade and 16 in the Gables. On Wednesday, three votes at each of the two southern  locations and 15 in the Gables.
Hopefully, the higher numbers in the City Beautiful indicate voters traveling in from West Miami and Flagami. Ladra also hopes the turnout picks up as the week progresses.
Because anything but a landslide is going to raise eyebrows.

Read Full Story

UPDATED: The city has put a time certain of 11 a.m. on this discussion — not 5 p.m., as requested so more people could attend. Think that’s not by design?  
Coral Gables administrators are falling all over themselves now to ensure their residents that the new proposed public safety building the city has been discussing for several years will meet the needs of both the police and fire department — despite concerns from both unions that they were not consulted in the planning and that the design will cause both space and operational problems.
The city manager will bring commissioners up to speed at Tuesday’s meeting, but a number of concerned residents say that they will also attend to see if concerns raised weeks ago by the police and fire unions, who say they were left out of the planning process and that could result in problems longterm.
Last May, city commissioners approved a land swap with Codina Development, giving them the 2801 Salzedo Street site where the leaking, dilapidated police and fire headquarters building sits now in exchange for property on Minorca adjacent to the city-owned parking Lot 6 just a couple blocks north. The new $34-million facility will also include a parking garage for at least 160 vehicles — and that’s one of the concerns some people have: Why is a public parking garage as part of a police and fire facility a smart idea in a post 911 world?
One other issue is size. While the city says that the building is bigger — 116,000 square feet compared to 88,000 currently — the way the space is appropriated could result in smaller spaces for everyone. There’s a large space, perhaps a whole floor, devoted to a training center, for example. Like the city is going to go into the law enforcement training business? The biggest impact is to the fire department, which can have up to 15 firefighter paramedics sleeping at the station at one time and will have about a third of the space. There’s talk that all the trucks won’t fit in the bays. Even so, the exit and entry will cause traffic problems on Minorca, said Gables Professional Firefighters Association President Mike Chickillo, a driver engineer.
There will be delays in response times, he says.
Read related story: Coral Gables residents get mail questioning their safety
Chickillo also said that while the design firm has done dozens of other public safety buildings before, he only found one fire station. And he feels like his department is an afterthought. “It’s like they are building a public safety building and putting a fire station in it,” he told Ladra Friday. One example is the lack of any outdoor bays, which could cause health problems for the employees unless there is a state-of-the-art exhaust system.
At a time when the city is considering annexations of Little Gables and High Pines, Chickillo and Coral Gables Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 7 President John Baublitz wondered if the new building has been planned for growth.
Both union presidents said Friday that, while there were still several concerns, the administation had reached out and met with them since a Miami Herald story by Linda Robertson exposed the lack of communication. “They’re assuring us there’s enough room for everybody,” Baublitz told Ladra, sounding way less than convinced.
Said Chickillo: “They are being more inclusive, but it would have been better if they had included us from Day One.”
Gables spokeswoman Maria Higgins-Fallon told Ladra Friday that the issues had been resolved. “Some of it was misinformation,” she said, adding that there have been multiple public meetings about the building. “City leaders have met with a number of people from the community and both the police and fire department,” Higgins-Fallon said. “Some of the issues were clarified.”
She also said that the city had published information on its website to keep folks up to date and had even paid for a full page ad in Sunday’s neighbors section (photographed here) to assure residents that “public safety is our top priority” and that the building would be perfect for the city’s needs.
That’s because, by now, residents are involved. The Riviera Neighbors and Ponce Homeowners associations have encouraged members to go to the meeting Tuesday. North Gables resident activist Maria Cruz — the resident that a police major spied on during a commission meeting — started a petition on change.org asking Mayor Raul Valdes-Fauli and the commissioners to ask the administration some questions at Tuesday’s meeting and to make it time certain at 5 p.m. so more residents can attend.
At least 500 people had signed the pettion as of early Monday morning (today).
“We believe it is essential for those who will be using the building to be part of the process. Their success and well being ultimately will translate in saving lives,” the petition states before asking a series of questions that reveal issues go far deeper than the building and could be tied to the resentment people have that Assistant City Manager and wannabe police chief Frank Fernandez is, as director of public safety, overseeing the police and fire chiefs.
“Why was everything kept so secret that even those severely impacted were kept from seeing the plans?”
Read related story: Coral Gables cover-up on police ‘spy’ protects managers
Fernandez, at a Crime Watch committee meeting earlier this month, said the petition was “propaganda” akin to “Fidel Castro’s Cuba.” Ladra was not there but spoke to three people who were and who told the story the same way: He had allowed Baublitz to answer questions — you know, to make it seem like all is harmonious in their world. But when someone asked about the petition, Fernandez — who we all know is the one that, ironically, put the spy on Cruz — interrupted and said he would be the one to answer that question, calling it propaganda.
Cruz, who is Cuban, is offended. “I take great issue with that because propaganda is what they are doing,” she said.
“People are just asking questions,” said one of the residents who is concerned and was at the meeting. “That comment was completely out of place.”
Chickillo, who was not at the Crime Watch meeting, said he also heard about the comment. “If anyone is doing Cuba-style propaganda, it’s them.”
And it does seem that the city is going out of its way to sell the proposed building as is. They even took out that full page Neighbors ad Sunday.
The one that curiously leaves out the fact that the building will be discussed at Tuesday’s meeting at City Hall.
 

Read Full Story