Two Miami referendum campaigns are taking their arguments to voters’ screens through a pair of ads seeking approval of a $450 million police-and-fire bond and rejection of an up to 75-year Virginia Key marina lease.
Both measures go before city voters Nov. 3.
One pair of ads in English and Spanish airing in support of Referendum 1, dubbed “Safe and Ready,” links outdated facilities and gaps in emergency coverage to the need for new investment.
The ads begin with news footage of firefighters and police pressing city leaders to improve working conditions. They then urge voters to approve new fire stations, shorter emergency response times and safer neighborhoods.
“When someone is having a heart attack, a stroke, or another life-threatening emergency, those extra minutes matter,” Mayor Eileen Higgins, who supports the proposal, said in a statement.
“The Safe and Ready Miami bond is about giving our firefighters, emergency responders and police the facilities and resources they need to do their jobs and helping get lifesaving help to residents faster.”
The campaign says city records show some neighborhoods averaging more than 10 minutes for emergency help to arrive. Fire Chief Robert Hevia presented data in May showing the city areas of South Grove, Shenandoah, Flagami and Liberty City regularly exceeding eight minutes in response time, Miami Today reported.
Referendum 1, if approved, would authorize up to $450 million in general obligation bonds for fire stations and a public safety headquarters serving police and other first responders. The plan also addresses deferred maintenance.
The city’s ballot resolution caps the debt-tax rate at 0.5935 mills, supporting Higgins’ argument that the borrowing would not require increasing that rate. Property taxes would repay the bonds, with individual bills determined by taxable property values.
Polling in May by Higgins adviser Christian Ulvert found 67.5% of Miami voters supported “Safe and Ready” after learning about the proposal, the city’s aging emergency response infrastructure, projected improvements to emergency response times and what the survey described as a “modest cost to the typical household.”
Meanwhile, the local Preserve and Protect Miami advocacy campaign is running a new ad titled “Suntex Exposed,” urging voters to reject Referendum 3, which would approve a long-term Virginia Key lease.
The ad questions the record of Suntex Marinas — one half of a pair of out-of-state companies pursuing the agreement — in maintaining the Miami Beach Marina.
The ad shows damaged concrete, exposed reinforcing steel and caution tape, while the campaign says Miami Beach closed portions of that marina this Summer.
It also accuses Suntex of withholding revenue owed to Miami Beach.
This week, Political Cortadito reported on a 2025 Inspector General audit that found Suntex underpaid Miami Beach roughly $173,500 in parking receipts — a finding the Dallas-headquartered company disputed.
Miami Beach Commissioners approved settlement terms with the company in February.
In Miami, Referendum 3 would authorize a 45-year lease with Suntex and Connecticut-based RCI Group, with two 15-year renewal options and roughly $80 million in redevelopment work at the Rickenbacker and Marine Stadium marinas.
The companies would also pay Miami escalating minimum annual rent starting at $2.2 million, plus 6% of gross revenue.
“Voters deserve to know exactly who we’re doing business with before we make a commitment that will last generations,” Rickenbacker Marina President Aabad Melwani said in the campaign release.
Melwani founded the Preserve and Protect opposition campaign with Gramps Getaway owner Adam Gersten. Both of their businesses operate at the waterfront targeted for redevelopment.
The “Suntex Exposed” ad follows two others the campaign launched last month. One called Suntex and RCI “the same investors buying up our homes, driving up rents and displacing working families.” The other highlighted that the lease rate is “based on below-market 2017 rents” — a detail Florida Politics reported in August.
City Commissioners voted unanimously in June to place the proposal on the ballot after courts found Miami had improperly discarded the results of the earlier competitive process.
Miami voters rejected a separate no-bid marina agreement in 2021.