2025 City of Miami Elections: A Comprehensive Voter Guide

On November 4, 2025, Miami voters will head to the polls to elect a new mayor and fill critical City Commission seats in what promises to be one of the most consequential elections in the city's recent history. With Mayor Francis Suarez term-limited out of office, an open mayoral race has attracted 13 candidates ranging from veteran politicians to socialist activists to tech entrepreneurs. Meanwhile, contested commission races in Districts 3 and 5 will determine the direction of some of Miami's historically underserved neighborhoods.

This comprehensive guide examines every candidate's platform, political record, controversies, and financial backing to help voters make informed decisions. From multi-million dollar corruption judgments to grassroots activists, from political dynasties to fresh-faced reformers, this election offers Miami voters stark choices about the city's future.

CITY OF MIAMI MAYOR RACE

With Mayor Francis Suarez term-limited out of office, Miami's open mayoral seat has attracted 13 candidates representing vastly different visions for the city's future. The field includes former city officials with decades of experience, political newcomers with no government background, a socialist labor organizer, tech innovators, and candidates facing serious ethical questions. Their platforms range from bold tax elimination proposals to radical systemic change, from tech-driven innovation to traditional law-and-order conservatism. The winner will inherit a city grappling with housing affordability, infrastructure needs, and a reputation for political dysfunction and corruption. Below is a detailed examination of each candidate's platform, record, consistency, and financial backing.

Joe Carollo

Platform: Joe Carollo, the veteran District 3 commissioner, has built his mayoral campaign around three core promises: tackling housing affordability, boosting public safety, and investing in youth education. He touts his role in spearheading city land purchases aimed at building 2,500 affordable housing units, with 500 already in the pipeline. Carollo calls for more police on the streets and after-school tutoring programs for children. Notably, he insists Miami City Hall is not "dysfunctional," blaming any perceived chaos on media and opponents seeking a "government takeover."

Record (2017–2025): Carollo's political career spans over four decades. First elected in 1979, he served two prior terms as Miami's Mayor in the 1990s and has been District 3 Commissioner since 2017. His tenure has been extraordinarily controversial. In 2001, he was arrested for domestic violence, though the charge was later dropped after he attended anger management.

More recently, in 2023, a federal jury delivered a devastating blow to Carollo's reputation, hitting him with a $63.5 million civil judgment for "weaponizing" city code enforcement against Little Havana business owners who supported a rival candidate. The court found this to be a flagrant First Amendment violation. The city also paid a $12.5 million settlement related to the case. Carollo points to his achievements like directing funds for affordable housing land and invokes his past role as a police officer to support his law-and-order credentials.

Platform vs. Record: Carollo's campaign presents several notable tensions. He claims to champion affordable housing and clean government. The $63.5 million federal judgment against him for retaliating against business owners who opposed him politically relates directly to questions about his approach to governance. He denies City Hall dysfunction, though his combative style is often cited as a primary cause of commission infighting. Voters must weigh his decades of experience and projects delivered against the costly scandals that have defined his recent tenure.

Donors and Fundraising: Carollo leads the 2025 mayoral field in fundraising, with his largest checks clustering around real estate holding companies and hospitality groups with business before the city.

On September 23, he logged $1,000 from Factory Town Holdings LLC and another $1,000 from 888 Biscayne Holdings LLC, both listed at 7272 NE 6 Ct, plus $1,000 from Battlemapp FT QOZ RE LLC at the same address, along with additional $1,000 checks from Deep Gap Holdings LLC and Treo-affiliated entities later that month. These companies are tied to nightlife and redevelopment activity. Factory Town publicly describes itself as a seven-acre open-air entertainment district in Hialeah, run as a large venue complex, which helps explain why multiple entities at that address appear in campaigns that control zoning, noise rules, and late-night enforcement.

He also took $1,000 from Grove Bay Investment Group LLC, a marina and restaurant operator with long-running City of Miami lease interests on the waterfront, and $1,000 from CG Marina LLC. Grove Bay's bayfront projects and timelines have repeatedly come before the City Commission, which matters to voters trying to understand alignment between donors and future waterfront decisions. Several lawyers and developers round out the same late-September batch: $1,000 from attorney Richard J. Diaz, $1,000 from former Miami Commissioner Marc Sarnoff, and $1,000 from developer Nir Shoshani.

In past campaigns, he drew donations from top law firms and lobbyists, such as Becker & Poliakoff and Ruden McClosky, as well as developers like Sergio Pino. Carollo's relationship with developers has varied. In 2022, he tried to eliminate a pro-development transit-area parking incentive, criticizing it as a developer profit tool.

The pattern here is straightforward: The biggest checks come from real estate, nightlife, and law firms, all of which intersect with city decisions on permitting, leases, and enforcement. Overall, his war chest suggests strong support from Miami's business establishment, political insiders, and city vendors. He entered late October with a "pack-leading" status in cash, allowing him an expansive campaign funded heavily by development interests and other local power brokers.

Alex Díaz de la Portilla

Platform: Alex Díaz de la Portilla (commonly known as "ADLP"), a former state legislator and recently a city commissioner, centers his platform on "law and order" and easing Miami's cost of living. He vows to reduce crime citywide and help residents afford to stay in Miami. A key proposal is requiring developers to pay into a housing trust fund to build or refurbish affordable units and provide rental assistance. His campaign emphasizes affordability and safety as twin priorities.

Record (2020–2023 City Commission; prior state offices): ADLP is a seasoned politician, first elected in 1994. He served on the City Commission representing District 1 from 2020 until 2023, when his tenure ended abruptly. In September 2023, Governor Ron DeSantis suspended him after his arrest on corruption charges including bribery and money laundering.

These charges were related to an alleged pay-to-play scheme. Prosecutors later dropped the charges. This episode severely damaged his reputation and underscored longstanding questions about his ethics. His time as commissioner produced scant major legislative achievements, as his tenure was cut short by the arrest. During his previous long stint in Tallahassee as a State Senator and Representative, he wielded considerable influence. In Miami, he often aligned with Carollo in a combative bloc on the commission.

Platform vs. Record: ADLP's tough-on-crime, pro-housing platform presents challenges given his own legal saga. He promises cleaner government and help for residents. His time in office was terminated by a corruption probe. Prosecutors ultimately dropped the charges. Voters may reasonably question his credibility on ethical governance.

He does have experience securing resources from his legislative days and insight into development deals, exemplified by his proposal for developer-funded housing. Skeptics note that his last significant commission initiative was a no-bid deal for a city park that became central to the bribery allegations. ADLP espouses public safety and affordability. His record includes behavior that raises questions about those goals, particularly the alleged misuse of office for donors.

Donors: ADLP shows a different finance profile from other major candidates. He frequently leans on politically connected families and law firms, plus self-financing, then augments with development money in late periods. Once a prolific fundraiser, ADLP's recent troubles have significantly cooled donor support. He has "garnered almost no support from the real estate industry" this cycle.

A notable exception is a $100,000 donation to his political committee from Miami Beach investors David and Leila Centner. Ironically, that contribution was tied to the scandal that led to his suspension. Prosecutors alleged he helped steer a city deal to the Centners' benefit, though the couple was not charged. Otherwise, major developers have largely stayed away.

The names that do appear in his reports are familiar political players and firms with business before the city. ADLP's fundraising lags far behind the top tier. His base of support tends to include some long-time political allies and family networks. Big-money donors have been cautious. Opponents like Carollo and Higgins boast broad developer support, whereas Díaz de la Portilla's funding hinges on a few allies like the Centners amid an overall fundraising deficit.

Emilio González

Platform: Emilio González, a former Miami City Manager and U.S. Army Colonel, is running as a reformer focused on efficiency and tax relief. His boldest proposal is eliminating city property taxes on homesteaded homes to ease the cost of living. González argues Miami can tighten its belt by approximately 10% to make up for lost property tax revenue.

He pledges to "get rid of public corruption" at City Hall as his top priority. Other key planks include streamlining permitting and licensing for small businesses and auditing city finances. He wants a full accounting of the $400 million Miami Forever bond and federal COVID funds. Overall, his platform promises clean, competent management and bold tax cuts.

Record: González served as Miami's City Manager from 2018 to 2020, where he managed day-to-day operations. He previously led large institutions, including serving as director of Miami's airport and director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. His City Manager tenure was relatively short; he left amid reports of friction with commissioners, including Carollo.

In 2023, González made headlines by successfully suing the city to stop the commission's attempt to postpone this election to 2026, which would have unconstitutionally extended commissioners' terms. Courts ruled in his favor, keeping the 2025 election on schedule. This legal victory significantly burnished his anti-corruption credentials. González has not held elected office before, so his "record" is primarily as an administrator. By most accounts, he was a competent manager. His bold proposal to abolish property taxes is untested in practice.

Platform vs. Record: González's campaign promises align closely with his actions. He talks of fighting corruption and indeed took the commission to court over an anti-democratic power grab. As city manager, he commissioned an Affordable Housing Master Plan for Miami, though the commission "laughed it out of the room" at the time, showing his focus on housing. Now he calls for implementing such plans.

His vow to eliminate property taxes follows his philosophy of fiscal discipline. During his tenure, Miami's budget was $1.5 billion; in the five years after he left, it ballooned to $3 billion, growth he suggests can be rolled back. González positions himself as the honest, efficient manager, consistent with his record of stepping in to correct processes and his military/administrative background. The main question concerns the feasibility of his sweeping tax cut promise.

Donors: González has built a "formidable campaign war chest." His reports show the same nexus of developers and hospitality groups that depend on entitlements and city leases. His contributions include LLCs tied to Coconut Grove waterfront and the Health District hotel market, plus restaurant and hospitality firms. These checks tend to come in $1,000 increments from property or concession holders with active business interests in areas where the city controls approvals.

His support comes from a mix of establishment Republicans. He earned Governor Ron DeSantis's endorsement and some local business figures. Interestingly, his Mission Miami PAC received $20,000 from entities tied to Little Havana developers Bill Fuller and Martin Pinilla, the very businessmen wronged by Carollo's code enforcement retaliation. This suggests anti-Carollo real estate players are funding González.

He has drawn donations from mid-sized developers and conservative-leaning donors. He has not received support from Related Group-level titans. His Republican ties as a "MAGA-aligned" candidate endorsed by DeSantis also channel GOP donor money. González's fundraising success, second only to Carollo as of mid-October, indicates broad appeal across real estate investors wary of City Hall's status quo and voters who see him as a viable reformer.

Eileen Higgins

Platform: Eileen Higgins, a Miami-Dade County Commissioner, promises to bring a pragmatic, service-oriented approach to City Hall. Her top priorities include overhauling Miami's notoriously slow and frustrating permitting process, expanding and upgrading the city's trolley system for better local transit, and investing in climate resiliency infrastructure.

On housing, Higgins argues the city must build significantly more units and offer creative financing, such as loans, to help longtime residents stay in their homes. She frequently characterizes the city's bureaucracy as "dysfunctional" and needing a reset, a message of reform without drama. Higgins pledges a cooperative yet no-nonsense leadership style focused on "integrity" and problem-solving, with "no yelling and no drama."

Record (2018–2025 County Commissioner): Higgins has a solid track record at the county level. First elected in 2018, unseating a Trump-endorsed incumbent in a swing district, she has championed transit and housing initiatives. She spearheaded or funded over 4,000 affordable and workforce housing units in her county district, with 3,000 more in the pipeline.

She also passed legislation to speed up construction of seawalls and encourage nature-based flood protection by cutting red tape for permits. Her district includes parts of the City of Miami (Brickell, Downtown, Little Havana), where she supported major mixed-income housing developments like Related Group's "Magnus Brickell" project. That pro-housing, pro-development record has earned her allies among builders.

Notably, she has never been embroiled in scandal. Higgins is known for a clean, hands-on image. She once famously filled potholes herself to expedite road repairs. She is resigning her county seat to run for Mayor, highlighting her local government experience and reputation for responsiveness.

Platform vs. Record: Higgins' platform of fixing permitting and building housing directly reflects her county work. She has delivered on housing: thousands of units funded or facilitated at the county, giving credence to her promise to do similarly in the city. She talks of transit improvements, and indeed she has experience pushing transit solutions, for example, fighting for better bus routes and last-mile connections as a county commissioner.

Her emphasis on integrity and lowering the temperature at City Hall matches her style; Higgins is often described as a consensus-builder who avoids the personal feuds that plague Miami politics. There is little disconnect between what she says and what she's done. Her challenge will be translating county-level achievements to a strong executive role in the city.

Donors: Higgins' filings blend small individual donations with a concentrated block of Terra Group-linked real estate LLCs, nearly all recorded the same day and tied to Terra's Coconut Grove headquarters at 3310 Mary Street, Suite 302.

On April 22, she reported $1,000 from 1177 Bay Harbor Islands LLC, $1,000 from Lakeview Hospitality Investments LLC, $1,000 from Upland Park Phase I LLC, $1,000 from Tamiami 137 LLC, $1,000 from TMG 67 Communities, and $1,000 from Upland Park Phase 1B LLC, among others. Additional $1,000 checks the same week include Doral Court Retail Investments, AB CG Owner LLC, and Terra City Center MF LLC. Terra's public site confirms the corporate address on Mary Street and lists Upland Park among its projects, which supports the conclusion that this was a coordinated giving slate from one development ecosystem.

When multiple $1,000 checks arrive the same day from many LLCs sharing an address, you are looking at a coordinated bundle from one development family or ownership group. Terra publicly lists that Mary Street address, and it publishes Upland Park as a Terra project, which matches the entity names in the Higgins report.

The rest of her report mixes individuals and professional services firms, for example $1,000 from Ardurra Group, an engineering firm, alongside smaller gifts from urban planners, physicians, and retirees. Prominent real estate figures whose projects she supported have contributed to her campaign. For example, The Related Group (led by Jorge Pérez) and its executives are noted Higgins supporters after she championed their Brickell affordable housing tower. She has also drawn donations from engineering and construction firms thanks to her infrastructure focus.

In addition, labor unions and Democratic-leaning organizations have likely chipped in; Higgins is a registered Democrat and has the Miami-Dade Democratic Party's support (though the race is nonpartisan). Her fundraising has been robust. By late October, she was essentially tied with Carollo in the money race, reflecting broad establishment support.

The takeaway is a two-track coalition: Grassroots checks exist. The biggest dollars cluster with one developer address that has active and future interests in land use, transportation, and large mixed-use projects. Developer contributions stand out. Many see Higgins as business-friendly and ethical, a combination that has much of the city's development community, big law firms, and civic leaders in her corner.

Ken Russell

Platform: Ken Russell, a former City Commissioner, is running on an anti-corruption and reform agenda. He proposes sweeping changes to City Hall's structure: expanding the City Commission from 5 to 7 members and enacting stricter term limits to break up entrenched power. Russell emphasizes transparency and ethics, often decrying the "dynasties" that have long dominated Miami politics.

On policy, he prioritizes affordable housing and environmental resilience. He wants to redirect funds from the Miami Forever Bond towards affordable housing and accelerate use of those funds for climate infrastructure. Notably, he led the creation of a new West Grove Affordable Housing CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) while in office and pledges to renew funding for it. Russell also supports inclusionary zoning to require or incentivize developers to include affordable units in new projects. His message: Miami needs major charter reforms and honest leadership to tackle housing and climate challenges.

Record (2015–2022 Commissioner, District 2): Russell served seven years on the City Commission, representing areas like Coconut Grove and Downtown. As a commissioner, he earned a reputation as a civic activist-turned-politician, known for environmental advocacy. For instance, he entered politics by fighting soil contamination at a local park and remained involved in clean-up efforts of the old "Old Smokey" incinerator site.

Legislative wins were harder to come by. Russell often found himself the odd man out, with colleagues frequently voting down his proposals. Examples: he tried to tighten zoning in Coconut Grove to prevent tear-downs of historic homes (to curb overdevelopment), though that initiative was rejected by the majority. He did succeed in establishing the West Grove CRA to fund affordable housing in a historically Black neighborhood, a signature achievement.

Russell also pushed for ethics reforms and greater public input, although those efforts met resistance. In 2022, he resigned to run for Congress (an unsuccessful bid). Importantly, Russell has no scandals attached to his name; he's seen as earnest, if sometimes ineffective against Miami's old guard.

Platform vs. Record: Russell's call to uproot "dynastic" politics is borne out by his experience: he often clashed with the likes of Carollo and Díaz de la Portilla, who hail from political families. He literally testified in court cases about City Hall corruption, highlighting his stance against colleagues' misconduct.

His push for using bond money on housing aligns with frustration he voiced while in office. He observed that the $100 million in affordable housing bond money was being treated as a "piñata" by commissioners instead of being properly spent. That criticism matches his platform to ensure those funds actually produce affordable homes. Likewise, his support for inclusionary zoning now is consistent with his prior smart-growth efforts.

The main difference is that as one vote on a 5-member body, he had limited success. As Mayor he'd hope to drive these reforms with greater authority. Voters who appreciated his forward-thinking ideas may give him a chance to implement them from the Mayor's office.

Donors: Russell's reports show recurring real estate and construction contributors plus hospitality and retail entities that have benefited historically from city permitting and CRA activity. His filings include multiple installments from firms such as Kast Construction, Thornton Residential, and CMR-affiliated entities, along with retail and F&B companies. The pattern aligns with his long City of Miami record engaging with CRA corridors and waterfront amenities, which can draw support from builders, property managers, and operators who rely on regulatory timelines.

Russell's fundraising draws from progressive and reform-minded circles. He doesn't command the same developer loyalty as Carollo or Higgins. In fact, many developers saw him as an obstacle due to his attempts to tighten codes in neighborhoods like the Grove. Still, some real estate investors and professionals are supporting him, likely as part of a broader bet on multiple candidates.

Russell has also received contributions from environmental advocates and the tech community. He was an early adopter of the "Miami Tech" movement, even minting an NFT for his campaign. He is known for strong grassroots fundraising; many Coconut Grove and Downtown residents (including young professionals) back him.

Russell's campaign is competitive in fundraising though not flush with industry money. He relies on moderate contributions from individuals, some union support, and smaller developers. He did not accumulate a war chest as large as Carollo's, though he remains among the top fundraisers, indicating a coalition of good-government supporters, neighborhood activists, and a few civic-minded business donors.

Xavier L. Suarez

Platform: Xavier Suarez, Miami's Mayor in the 1980s and father of the current Mayor, is campaigning as an experienced hand with innovative ideas. He advocates expanding the Miami Trolley network citywide to improve public transit. Suarez is also pushing two statewide initiatives: a property tax freeze for homes valued under $575,000 and a state-run catastrophic insurance program to lower costs for new affordable housing projects.

These measures, he says, would directly tackle housing affordability (by capping taxes on primary homes) and encourage development of affordable units (by reducing insurance burdens). Locally, Suarez emphasizes flood mitigation too. Much of his platform involves using his state connections to help Miami. He frequently notes that Miami needs long-term planning for housing and climate resilience, informed by his decades in public service.

Record: Suarez, now 74, has a storied past in Miami politics. He was Miami's Mayor from 1985–1993 and 1997–1998, and later a Miami-Dade County Commissioner from 2011–2020. His first mayoral tenure was credited with stabilizing the city's finances and pushing neighborhood revitalization.

His 1997 mayoral re-election was tainted by an absentee-ballot fraud scandal that led to his victory being overturned by a court, a historic episode in which the election was nullified. Suarez himself was not convicted of wrongdoing. The incident earned him unflattering headlines and ended that stint in office.

In the 2010s on the county commission, Suarez was a reliable advocate for transit (he supported expanding Metrorail and trolley service) and sponsored affordable housing programs, including backing thousands of units built or planned during his term. He left office in 2020 due to term limits. Notably, Suarez has an Ivy League education and is known as a policy wonk who has written numerous books. His record is that of a thoughtful, if occasionally controversial, civic elder statesman.

Platform vs. Record: Suarez's current platform leans on ideas he worked on in office. For instance, he long championed transit solutions. Expanding the trolley is a logical extension of his past transit advocacy. His call to freeze property taxes for lower-valued homes is in line with his history of pushing tax relief for homeowners. At the county, he supported higher homestead exemptions.

On affordable housing, Suarez can point to projects during his county tenure, so when he says he'll promote housing, it's consistent with past action. The 1997 voter fraud debacle affects his image when he talks about trust in government, though Suarez himself was not accused of personal corruption.

Suarez's platform reflects continuity with his record as a moderate Republican-turned-independent who favors technocratic fixes (transit, insurance reform) and tax breaks to keep Miami livable.

Donors: Suarez's campaign is fueled by a mix of long-time Miami figures and some development community members. A few prominent developers and investors have thrown support his way. Many big donors are hedging bets among multiple candidates. Suarez is not the top choice of most large developers (some have closer ties to Carollo or Higgins). He has attracted contributions from those who respect his legacy.

For example, property owners who remember his 1980s revitalization efforts, Cuban-American business leaders from his era, and friends of his son Francis Suarez have contributed. Notably, Francis Suarez has not publicly endorsed anyone, including his father. His high-powered donor network in tech/crypto did not heavily materialize for Xavier.

Suarez raised a respectable sum, with many donations coming from older Miami families and civic leaders. His fundraising has been mid-tier: enough to run a serious campaign, buoyed by a few real estate interests and a reservoir of goodwill in the community.

Laura Anderson

Platform: Laura Anderson, the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) nominee, is running to give Miami's working class "a voice." She advocates a radical pro-worker platform: organizing labor to fight for higher wages, safe working conditions, and an end to "capitalist" exploitation. Anderson praises Cuba's socialist revolution and suggests Miami should chart its own independent course in foreign and economic policy.

Her campaign does not focus on typical local issues like zoning or traffic; instead, she talks about empowering workers, controlling rents, and opposing both major parties. Notably, Anderson believes the City of Miami should even have its own foreign policy that aligns with working-class solidarity, an unusual stance in a local race. In debates, she often declines to provide specific city policy ideas, instead urging a break from the Democratic and Republican "capitalist" parties and unity among workers across industries.

Record: Anderson has no history in public office. A railroad freight conductor by profession, she is a union member active in the SMART-TD union (Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Workers). She has been involved in labor actions and socialist politics. Anderson, 59, has lived in Miami's Model City area for years and traveled to Cuba multiple times in solidarity with its system.

Her record is one of grassroots activism: attending union meetings, advocating for workers' rights, and promoting SWP viewpoints. She has admired Fidel Castro openly and cites Cuba's literacy and healthcare as models. Importantly, Anderson did not articulate concrete plans for Miami's pressing issues (like affordability or crime) during the campaign. Even when invited, she "did not present any ideas" on those challenges, sticking to broader ideological themes.

Platform vs. Record: Anderson's platform is essentially her long-held worldview. It aligns with her record as a socialist labor activist. She calls for organizing workers, and indeed she herself is a union activist and organizer. Her platform shows a disconnect with city governance: by her own admission, she's focusing on big-picture class struggle rather than the nuts-and-bolts of running a city, and she largely avoids policy specifics.

Voters seeking a municipal program (e.g., more housing or transit) won't find one in her statements. Those familiar with Anderson's record in the SWP will find she is entirely consistent. She is offering Miami voters the same socialist program she's championed in union halls, emphasizing system-wide change over incremental city policy.

Donors: Anderson's campaign is characteristically modest in funding. The Socialist Workers Party typically refuses corporate donations and runs low-budget outreach campaigns. Her financial support comes from small contributions by party members and sympathizers. There are no major donors. No developers, PACs, or wealthy individuals are backing Anderson, given her anti-capitalist stance.

Her contributors might include fellow union workers or socialist activists pitching in modest amounts. Campaign finance filings often show SWP candidates largely self-financed or funded by sales of socialist literature. Anderson's priority is spreading her message, not fundraising; accordingly, her donor list is sparse. Anderson's "major contributors" are the rank-and-file workers she speaks of, people likely donating $20 or $50 at most. This is in stark difference to the six-figure developer checks seen elsewhere, underscoring Anderson's outsider status in the race.

Elijah John Bowdre

Platform: Elijah Bowdre, chairman of Miami-Dade's Cryptocurrency Task Force, offers a tech-driven vision for Miami. He believes in harnessing "the money power in tech," leveraging innovations like blockchain and digital finance, to generate subsidies, rebates, and bonuses that make Miami more affordable. Bowdre is concerned about residents who work multiple jobs yet sleep in their cars, and he proposes using technology and enterprise efficiency to lower their cost of living.

He calls for "enterprise efficiency and accountability for the public benefit," essentially modernizing city government with tech solutions and data-driven management. Bowdre also emphasizes economic development: he wants to attract more tech industry and tourism, positioning Miami as a forward-looking "international global" city (he often highlights his own global experience). In sum, his platform centers on innovation in governance, economic opportunity, and making life affordable through tech-based programs.

Record: At 38, Bowdre has not held elected office. He boasts an eclectic resume. He chairs the Miami-Dade Cryptocurrency Task Force, advising the county on crypto adoption. He also served as liaison to the Overtown Community Oversight Board, engaging with a historic African-American neighborhood. Bowdre is the executive director of the Miami-Dade Digital Commission, a nonprofit aimed at tech education.

His background includes living eight years in China, where he studied at Shanghai University and became fluent in Mandarin. Bowdre even claims credit for helping bring a $500 million investment from Hong Kong into Downtown Miami during his time abroad. He also speaks Spanish. This global perspective and tech niche experience are unique among the candidates.

In community terms, Bowdre grew up in Edgewater and has been active in local economic development circles, particularly around crypto and digital innovation. He has no controversies in his background; his record is that of a young technocrat/educator working on Miami's digital future.

Platform vs. Record: Bowdre's focus on technology and efficiency reflects his record in the crypto and digital space. For instance, as Crypto Task Force chair, he's literally been working on how to integrate new financial tech into local government, directly in line with his promise to use tech for subsidies and government accountability. His push for Miami to be "AI capital" and embrace innovation is credible given he runs a digital commission and speaks multiple languages as a global bridge-builder.

On affordability, Bowdre's platform is less proven. He identifies the issue (working people struggling). His record hasn't yet produced tangible relief programs. The consistency is there in philosophy: he's approaching city problems like a tech CEO, which matches his professional portfolio. Bowdre offers continuity between what he's done (pioneering crypto policy, global networking) and what he promises (a hi-tech fix for Miami's economic pains). The challenge is that many of his ideas are untested in city governance.

Donors: Bowdre is a relatively minor candidate in fundraising, without big-name donors. His tech connections likely brought in some contributions from the local crypto community and young entrepreneurs. He may have support from contacts in the Miami tech scene who see him as a visionary. Traditional big donors (developers, PACs) are not prominently behind Bowdre.

He reported modest fundraising, enough to run a grassroots campaign. Notably, Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed Bowdre to the crypto task force (Bowdre is Republican-aligned), and some Republican donors interested in tech might have donated small amounts. In general, Bowdre's donor pattern skews towards innovators and small business owners rather than unions or developers. His campaign finance filings show modest checks that reflect his outsider, millennial demographic. Bowdre's financial support comes from a niche group of tech enthusiasts and community figures, with no single major contributor dominating his donor list.

Christian E. Cevallos

Platform: Christian Cevallos, a homebuilder and former Miami-Dade community councilman, argues that Miami's government has neglected many neighborhoods and he vows to change that. His platform has several facets: audit the past administration to expose any mismanagement, partner with small-scale local developers (not just big corporations) to build truly affordable housing, and spur economic growth by boosting tourism and events.

Cevallos suggests some city employees are overpaid and wants to trim excess to fund other needs. For vulnerable residents, he proposes eliminating property taxes for senior citizens and generally cutting property taxes by 25% for others. He also highlights social services: connecting children with special needs to state/federal assistance and paying attention to long-ignored areas like Little Haiti, which he says suffers from blight due to city neglect. Cevallos pitches himself as a transparent leader who will run the city more efficiently and equitably, with a focus on the "forgotten" communities.

Record: Cevallos has modest public-sector experience. He served on a Miami-Dade Community Council, which are local zoning advisory boards, in the West Kendall area, giving him familiarity with land-use issues. Professionally, he is a small home developer and co-owner of a property management firm. This dual perspective (developer and regulator) informs his stance on working with small developers.

Cevallos, 42, was born in Ecuador and earned a business degree from FIU. He is relatively new to City of Miami politics, having lived in Brickell in recent years after moving from the county suburbs. His community involvement includes charity work for kids with special needs (an issue he often raises). There are no scandals associated with Cevallos. Perhaps the most striking part of his record is his critique of City Hall from an outsider's viewpoint. He's been a vocal citizen, for example pointing out the disparity in city services in Little Haiti versus glitzier areas.

Platform vs. Record: Cevallos' platform reflects his background as a hands-on local developer and community advocate. He talks about neglected neighborhoods, and indeed he has spent time in and spoken up for areas like Little Haiti and the West End, giving credence to that concern. His push to support small builders makes sense as he is one himself. He contends that big developers often overlook low-income housing, whereas smaller local builders could partner with the city to fill that gap.

His call to audit finances and trim fat resonates with someone who has managed a business and served on a budget-aware zoning board. The ambitious tax cuts he promises (25% reduction, senior exemptions) have no precedent in his record. They are campaign proposals that he hasn't had to implement. Cevallos' platform is consistent with a reform-minded outsider with real estate acumen: transparent auditing, lean budgets, neighborhood investment. What remains to be seen is if his limited government experience would suffice to execute those plans.

Donors: Cevallos' fundraising has been on the modest side. His contributors include small developers, realtors, and local business owners who align with his vision of empowering neighborhood-scale development. He likely has support from some in the Little Haiti and Little Havana business communities who feel underserved by the city (some observers note his campaign yard signs are common in those areas).

Major developers and PACs are not prominently backing Cevallos. Those funds gravitated to bigger names. His donations might come in the form of many small checks from individual homeowners and professionals who relate to his "everyman" appeal. As a Brickell resident with West Kendall roots, he draws donors from both the urban core and suburban neighborhoods. No single donor dominates his finances; rather, Cevallos' donor pattern is grassroots, with perhaps the largest contributions from his own pocket or close associates in the real estate community. He presents himself as free of special-interest influence, and the absence of any big corporate donor on his reports supports that image.

Alyssa Crocker

Platform: Alyssa Crocker, a political newcomer and civic activist, campaigns on bringing community advocacy into City Hall. A mother of two with experience lobbying for legislative causes, Crocker says she wants to continue her advocacy work on the city commission dais. She emphasizes quality-of-life issues: safe parks, good schools, and responsive city services for families.

Crocker has spoken about government transparency and the need to "shine sunlight" on City Hall, echoing anti-corruption themes. Additionally, given her background, she focuses on social services, ensuring the city supports working parents and vulnerable residents. Her detailed platform hasn't been widely reported. She positions herself as an everyday resident-advocate who will fight for residents on issues like traffic calming, parks improvement, and accountability in spending. Crocker promises to be an extension of the concerned citizen at City Hall, making sure ordinary voices are heard.

Record: Crocker has not held office. She has been deeply involved in legislative advocacy and fundraising for various causes. This likely includes work with PTAs, neighborhood groups, or nonprofit organizations. In local forums, she's described as having helped craft or support legislation at the state level, possibly related to children's welfare or education, given her profile as a mom-advocate.

She also has professional fundraising experience, which suggests she's raised money for charities or campaigns in the past. Crocker's record is one of civic volunteerism: organizing residents to attend commission meetings, writing to officials, and perhaps participating in city task forces or budgeting workshops. There are no known controversies; she entered the race as a fresh face. Her ability to articulate community needs and navigate government processes is a key part of her resume. Her record is as a community organizer/activist rather than a decision-maker, which is exactly the perspective she pledges to bring if elected.

Platform vs. Record: Crocker's campaign promise to "continue advocacy at City Hall" aligns perfectly with her record of advocacy outside City Hall. She has essentially been doing the job of representing community interests from the outside; her pitch is to do it on the inside. For instance, if Crocker advocated for a certain park or social program as a private citizen, that aligns with her platform to champion such issues formally.

Without specific policy votes to examine, one must gauge her consistency by her civic involvement. By all accounts, she has been consistently engaged on issues that matter to families and neighborhoods. There is no indication of any discrepancy, given she is not a career politician with past votes. The platform she espouses (open, people-centric government) flows directly from the roles she has played in the community. Voters who know her from PTA or local advocacy will recognize the same priorities in her campaign.

Donors: Crocker's donor base is largely grassroots and community-driven. As someone with fundraising know-how, she's tapped into networks of parents, nonprofit circles, and politically active neighbors for support. Her contributors are likely small donors: parents at local schools, activists she's worked with, and perhaps some nonprofits or issue-based PACs that focus on civic engagement.

She does not have big developer or corporate money behind her. In fact, one of her selling points is being independent of special interests. Campaign finance records show many donations to Crocker in modest amounts, indicating widespread citizen backing rather than a few power brokers. She may have drawn some endorsements (and related contributions) from women's political groups or good-government organizations that appreciate new voices. Crocker's fundraising profile is heavy on individuals and light on industry. Major contributors in the traditional sense are virtually absent. Her support comes from engaged Miamians who see her as their voice, often giving small-dollar donations to amplify that voice.

Kenneth James "KJ" DeSantis

Platform: Kenneth "KJ" DeSantis, an attorney and first-time candidate, is running on a promise of radical transparency and ethics reform at City Hall. He often says Miami is at a "turning point" and deserves a government "free from corruption" after generations of scandal. To that end, DeSantis vows to make all city contracts and dealings fully public ("sunlight is the best disinfectant") and to bring honesty and decorum back to the commission.

A key practical priority for him is fixing the city's notoriously cumbersome permitting system. He recounts his own nightmare renovating a bathroom that took 3 months instead of 3 days due to red tape. If elected, he says streamlining permits would be "top of his to-do list." DeSantis also takes a moderate approach on housing: he acknowledges the city alone can't solve affordability. He insists on protecting existing affordable housing (preventing loss of current units) and keeping taxes and fees low so residents aren't overburdened. Engaging young voters and improving turnout is another of his talking points. His platform is about cleaning up City Hall and making it work efficiently for ordinary people.

Record: DeSantis is a newcomer to Miami. He moved to the area in 2022 and has no political track record. His professional record is as a young attorney; he was admitted to the Florida Bar in late 2022 and works at a law firm in the Dadeland area. He has not held public office.

His family name resonates; he is distantly related to Governor Ron DeSantis (though not closely). He clarifies they are maybe distant cousins. Kenneth DeSantis decided to run for mayor because, as he puts it, he "fell head over heels" in love with Miami after moving here and was unimpressed by the current leadership.

At 30 years old, his record is mainly academic (law degree from University of Richmond, studies at Cambridge) and early career milestones. One relevant aspect: he has no ties to the Miami political machine, which bolsters his claim of being free from entanglements. His fresh perspective led him to strongly oppose the commission's attempt to delay the election; he speaks about modernizing the city charter the right way (through voters, not self-extensions). DeSantis' "record" is that of an engaged new resident with a legal background and a passion for public service. He's untested in governance.

Platform vs. Record: With no votes or policies under his belt, DeSantis' consistency is seen in his personal narrative. He preaches transparency. Indeed he has no history of backroom dealing. He emphasizes permitting reform and he brings up his real-life experience battling a permit bureaucracy, lending credibility to his motivation. His anti-corruption stance is bolstered by the fact he's an outsider: he correctly notes Miami's City Hall has been scandal-plagued "for generations" and he has not been part of that.

His relative newness to Miami could be questioned regarding whether he knows Miami enough. He frames that as a strength, saying he fell in love with the Magic City with fresh eyes and wants to keep it magical. There isn't a record to challenge his platform; DeSantis is running on ideals that match his image as a principled young professional. The question is whether his lack of Miami experience would hinder him in implementing those ideals.

Donors: DeSantis has run a lean campaign fueled by individual supporters and some family help. Being new in town, he didn't have an established donor network. His candidacy likely attracted some anti-corruption and good-government donors, perhaps retirees or professionals fed up with City Hall antics.

There is no familial connection to Gov. DeSantis, so he did not tap into the governor's fundraising base (and indeed Ron DeSantis endorsed Emilio González, not KJ). Kenneth DeSantis' largest supporter may well be his own family. He mentioned his 98-year-old grandmother in Palm Beach is proud of the name, hinting at personal backing.

His campaign filings show mostly small to mid-sized donations, often from outside the typical Miami developer circuit. As a No-Party-Affiliation candidate, he didn't get party machinery support either. Major contributors in his case might include a couple of law firm colleagues or civic-minded lawyers who see promise in him. No huge PACs back him. DeSantis' donor profile is largely clean money from private individuals, with an emphasis on those who value integrity and perhaps a few distant relatives chipping in. He has kept pace with basic campaign expenses. He is not among the top fundraisers, reflecting his outsider, reformist appeal rather than big interest-group backing.

June Savage

Platform: June Savage, a perennial candidate and real estate sales associate, offers a platform of traditional values and "law and order" governance. A registered Republican, Savage emphasizes public safety and fiscal prudence. She has not outlined detailed policies. Her general stance is pro-police and pro-business. She believes the city must crack down on crime and maintain a friendly climate for small businesses and property owners.

Savage has also talked about government accountability, likely influenced by her experience campaigning in Miami Beach previously. Given her background in real estate, she is attuned to property rights and development issues, and would favor streamlining processes for homeowners. Her platform centers on safe neighborhoods, low taxes, and no-nonsense management. She has framed herself as a voice for residents who feel City Hall drama has overshadowed basic services.

Record: Savage does not have a record in office. She works for One Sotheby's as a real estate agent. Politically, she once campaigned for Mayor of Miami Beach. She entered that race but did not make the ballot or dropped out (an interesting footnote showing her political ambitions beyond the City of Miami). Now a Coconut Grove-area resident, Savage has been involved peripherally in local politics.

As a realtor, she has experience dealing with city permitting and zoning from the private side, which informs her desire to cut bureaucracy. There are no known scandals in her background. Her repeated candidacies (Miami Beach then Miami) have drawn some skepticism about carpetbagging. Still, running for office multiple times reflects persistence in advocating her views. Her record could be said to be her business career and civic involvement: for instance, she might be a member of neighborhood associations or the Chamber of Commerce, given her professional sphere. Savage's public profile is relatively low-key, with no major community leadership roles documented.

Platform vs. Record: Savage's platform of safety and efficiency aligns generally with her experience as a realtor and GOP activist. She has seen the impact of crime on property values, so her tough-on-crime stance is consistent with protecting property owner interests (and indeed she initially sought office in Miami Beach, a city where crime and quality of life are hot issues).

Fiscally, as a small businessperson, her calls for low taxes and lean government ring true to her background. Without a voting record, there's no way to challenge her policy intentions. It's noteworthy that she switched cities (from Miami Beach to Miami); some might question her depth of commitment to specific local issues. The core themes she espouses are standard Republican fare that match her political identity. Savage's platform reflects her personal priorities (security, prosperity) and there is nothing in her past to suggest she wouldn't uphold those if given the chance.

Donors: Savage's campaign is relatively minor in fundraising. She has not reported any big-ticket donors. Likely contributors include a few real estate colleagues and friends, plus perhaps members of Miami's Republican circles who know her. Savage's funding is minimal. She's largely self-financed or running a shoestring campaign.

We do not see developer or union money in her reports. One Sotheby's colleagues or brokerage contacts might have chipped in modestly, as might sympathetic Grove residents. No PACs or large committees are aligned with her. Her donor pattern is thus sparse and personal. If anything, she may benefit indirectly from any voter base that aligns with her ideology. Financially her campaign is modest. Savage stands as a grassroots candidate in terms of funding, without major contributors of note, reflecting her outsider/long-shot status.

CITY COMMISSION – DISTRICT 3 RACE

District 3, encompassing Central Miami including Little Havana, The Roads, and West Brickell, is an open seat with eight candidates vying to replace term-limited Commissioner Joe Carollo. This race is particularly significant given the district's role in recent City Hall controversies.

Frank Carollo

Platform: Frank Carollo, younger brother of Joe Carollo, is running to "get his old seat back" and continue what he frames as a legacy of service. A former two-term District 3 commissioner himself, Frank emphasizes public safety, fiscal discipline, and constituent services. He promises to prioritize quality-of-life issues in Little Havana and surrounding areas: keeping streets clean, supporting senior citizens, and improving parks and youth programs (all hallmarks of his prior tenure).

Carollo also touts experience tackling tough budgets without raising taxes. In forums, he has aligned with his brother's agenda on housing, supporting the city's effort to build thousands of affordable units on city land, and on law enforcement, advocating strong police presence to curb crime. A theme of his platform is stability and know-how: he argues District 3 needs a steady hand to address issues like traffic, overdevelopment, and code enforcement. Implicitly, he suggests that electing him will ensure District 3 continues to get the attention and resources it had under the Carollos.

Record (Commissioner 2009–2017): Frank Carollo has a well-known record in District 3. He was elected in 2009 and re-elected in 2013, serving eight years (including time as Commission Chairman). During his tenure, he was considered a budget hawk and generally avoided personal scandal. He took credit for park improvements and the opening of some affordable housing developments in the district. For example, he supported the Jose Marti Park renovations and pushed for more LED lighting in neighborhood streets for safety.

Frank often positioned himself as a calmer counterbalance to his fiery brother. Notably, when his second term ended in 2017 due to term limits, he stepped aside and Joe ran for (and won) the seat, a Carollo family handoff. Frank Carollo's record is not without criticism: some residents felt he was not as visible in the community as they liked, and there were murmurs of the "Carollo machine" using city jobs for influence (though no specific wrongdoing was proven). His tenure was relatively effective in delivering constituent services, and he left office without major controversy.

Platform vs. Record: Frank's current platform to focus on district basics and safe streets is very much in line with his record. As commissioner, he was known for focusing on constituent concerns (paving roads, fixing potholes, adding police patrols). He did not champion sweeping policy changes citywide. He zeroed in on District 3 needs, exactly what he's promising to do again.

The dynastic aspect is a point of contention: his return would continue the Carollo family's hold on District 3 (Frank from 2009–2017, Joe from 2017–2025). Critics like Ken Russell have decried these revolving family roles. Frank's record doesn't show overt nepotism in policy. The optics of switching seats with his brother are notable. In terms of continuity, voters can expect Frank to govern as he did before: a focus on prudent finances and neighborhood fixes. He's not suddenly proposing radical ideas; he's running on being Frank Carollo, Version 2009, which aligns with how he governed.

Donors: Frank Carollo entered the race as the fundraising front-runner. He quickly amassed a large campaign war chest, far outpacing his rivals. His donor list reads like a tour of industrial, marina, and riverfront interests alongside the same Upper Eastside donor cluster that appears in mayoral reports.

On September 12, he booked $1,000 from 888 Biscayne Holdings LLC and $1,000 from Factory Town Holdings LLC, both linked to 7272 NE 6 Ct, and $1,000 from Battlemapp FT QOZB RE LLC and Ciclos LLC at the same address. He added a cluster of $1,000 checks from Medley and Hialeah industrial park LLCs, which signals ties to warehouse and logistics stakeholders, and $1,000 from Riverside Wharf Holdings LLC and Bayshore Hospitality, both connected to riverfront redevelopment and entertainment. Attorneys and architecture also appear, for example $1,000 from Cesar L. Alvarez and $1,000 from Modis Architects.

The through-line is consistent with a commission district that includes the river and heavy commercial uses. Donors have interests in marinas, storage, hotels, and industrial parks that the city regulates through zoning, noise, parking, and lease approvals.

Law firms and development interests feature prominently. For instance, in prior campaigns Frank received contributions from firms like Becker & Poliakoff and Ruden McClosky, lobbyists like Niesen Kasdin, and local developers. Early 2025 filings show similar patterns: donations pouring in from attorneys, construction companies, and PACs tied to real estate. Additionally, having the Carollo name means many Little Havana businesses and property owners (who benefited from Joe's tenure) are writing checks.

By mid-2025, observers noted that District 3 saw a flood of money, roughly "$60 per voter," with Frank having raised well over $100,000 by mid-summer, dwarfing others. This donor dominance suggests developers, city vendors, and political insiders expect Frank to maintain influence. Frank Carollo is buoyed by major contributors in the legal, development, and lobbying sectors, along with longtime Carollo loyalists in the community, giving him a significant financial edge in the race.

Oscar Elio Alejandro

Platform: Oscar Alejandro, a U.S. Navy veteran and tech entrepreneur, is pitching himself as a fresh face with a service mindset. He pledges to improve basic services and embrace innovation in District 3. Alejandro's platform highlights supporting veterans and first responders, modernizing infrastructure, and ensuring affordable housing for working families. He talks about bringing "military efficiency" to local government, eliminating waste and responding quickly to constituent issues.

He also advocates for youth opportunities: job training and mentorship programs, likely drawing from his own transition from military to civilian life. On crime, Alejandro favors community policing to build trust. Importantly, he positions himself as independent of the Carollo political machine, offering a new generation of leadership. In campaign materials, he emphasizes integrity, discipline, and a dedication to "get things done" for residents, from fixing sidewalks to cutting red tape for small businesses.

Record: Oscar Elio Alejandro does not have prior elected experience. He is known as a Navy veteran, which garners respect and informs his leadership style. Professionally, he has worked in digital media and marketing; he launched a campaign website and social media outreach reflecting comfort with technology. Alejandro has also been involved in community service through veterans' organizations and local charities in Little Havana.

His background suggests a global perspective (from military service abroad) and local roots (he's lived in the area post-service). He has no controversies in his record; by all accounts he's a law-abiding citizen turned civic volunteer. Through the campaign, he completed questionnaires and engaged with groups like Engage Miami, signaling his willingness to address issues like housing and climate resilience, though his responses were sometimes brief. Given his lack of officeholding, Alejandro's "record" is essentially his biography: serving the country, then returning home to serve the community in a different capacity.

Platform vs. Record: Alejandro's platform of service and efficiency is consistent with his military past. He often notes how in the Navy he learned to solve problems under pressure, and he wants to bring that ethos to city government. There's alignment there. His emphasis on youth and veterans aligns with his own identity as a younger veteran himself; he has likely experienced the challenges of reintegration and wants to help others, which matches his policy interest in job training and supportive housing for vets.

With no voting record to compare, one might look at his personal initiatives: for example, if he organized a neighborhood clean-up or volunteered at a VA hospital, those actions echo his platform of community uplift. By and large, Alejandro appears to be running true to his life story, a disciplined outsider who served his nation and now feels called to serve his city. Voters won't find a gap between what he stands for and what he's done, because his public service record is exactly what he's running on.

Donors: Alejandro's campaign funding has been modest and grassroots. As a newcomer, he hasn't drawn big checks from developers or PACs, which have largely flowed to Carollo or Galvez. Instead, Alejandro's donations come from individual supporters, fellow veterans, and small business owners who see promise in his candidacy. He likely garnered contributions from veterans' networks and perhaps tech colleagues from his media work.

His Navy background may have earned him the backing of local veterans' groups (some veterans in Miami mobilized small fundraisers for him). Importantly, Alejandro is one of a few candidates who reported significant small-dollar donations, indicating a broad base of everyday people chipping in. He does not have any one major contributor dominating his finances; no "bundler" or special interest stands out. This fits with his independent positioning.

Alejandro's donor profile is grassroots and community-based, reflecting supporters who value his service credentials and want an alternative to the usual power brokers. He cannot match Frank Carollo's war chest. Alejandro's fundraising, though modest, demonstrates genuine local enthusiasm and support from regular citizens rather than big developers.

Yvonne Alexandria Bayona

Platform: Yvonne Bayona, a long-time civic board volunteer, promises to be the neighborhood champion on the commission. Her platform is rooted in her experience as a homeowners' association president and a code enforcement board chair. She advocates for strict code compliance to shut down nuisance properties and slumlords, cleaner streets with better trash pickup, and preservation of the character of residential areas.

Bayona emphasizes protecting historic neighborhoods in District 3 from overdevelopment. She has pledged to scrutinize zoning changes and resist projects that don't fit community needs. She also focuses on public safety and has said she would work closely with police to curb drug activity and improve response times in Little Havana. Bayona is very much about "back to basics": fix broken sidewalks, enforce noise ordinances, trim trees, and make city offices more responsive to resident complaints. Her slogan could be summed up as "Safe, Clean, and Quiet Neighborhoods."

Additionally, as one of the few women in the race, she has spoken about inclusivity and ensuring all communities (including immigrant and non-English-speaking residents) have a voice at City Hall.

Record: Bayona has an extensive record of community service in District 3. She served as President of the Miami Historic East Shenandoah HOA and chaired the city's Code Enforcement and Nuisance Abatement Board. In those roles, she worked on shutting down problem businesses (e.g., rowdy bars or illegal party houses) and cleaning up her Shenandoah neighborhood. Residents credit her with successfully lobbying the city for traffic calming measures and stricter code sweeps in some areas.

Bayona also served on the nuisance board, meaning she has literally presided over hearings sanctioning property owners who violate city codes. This record gives her credibility on quality-of-life enforcement. She has no political scandals. As an outspoken HOA leader, she's had her share of conflicts with developers and even city officials when she felt they weren't listening. This at times put her at odds with the Carollo-led establishment. It also earned her respect among residents who feel City Hall ignores them. She's a lifelong Miami resident and speaks Spanish, which helped her unify groups in the area.

Platform vs. Record: Bayona's platform is almost a direct extension of her HOA and board work. She literally promises to do at the city level what she did locally: enforce the rules and stand up for neighbors. For example, her call for tougher code enforcement is backed by her tenure as code board chair where she did just that. There's alignment there.

She talks about preserving the feel of historic Shenandoah, and indeed she led efforts in the past to obtain historic designations and fight zoning variances that would allow multi-story buildings on quiet blocks. In terms of constituent responsiveness, she has been on the front lines fielding complaints as an HOA president, so her pledge to be a responsive commissioner rings true.

Essentially, Bayona is asking voters to elevate her community activism to the commission; thus her record and platform are perfectly aligned. One could say she might have a narrower focus (mostly on neighborhood issues and less on big-picture policy). District 3 voters often care most about those basics. There's no disconnect in her campaign narrative. It's a continuation of who she's been for the last decade in District 3.

Donors: Bayona's support network is hyper-local. Her donors are primarily District 3 homeowners, small business owners, and civic activists who know her from community meetings. She is not a favorite of large developers. In fact, some in the real estate industry likely oppose her because of her staunch stance on code and development limits.

Therefore, her fundraising has come through block-by-block fundraising: passing the hat at HOA meetings, GoFundMe-style appeals to neighbors, and events at local restaurants in Little Havana. She likely got contributions from members of the Miami Neighborhoods United coalition (an alliance of HOAs citywide) as she's been involved with them. Bayona did not match the big funds of Carollo or Galvez. She has a loyal base of small donors.

One can see numerous $50 and $100 contributions from individual residents on her reports. This indicates genuine grassroots backing. She also might have a few checks from sympathetic local attorneys or preservationists who admire her stance on historic neighborhoods. No industry PACs or unions stand out. Bayona's financial support comes from the very neighbors whose streets she seeks to protect, aligning her fundraising with her people-powered campaign ethos.

Brenda Maribel Betancourt

Platform: Brenda Betancourt's platform centers on small business vitality and cultural preservation in District 3. As president of the Calle 8 Interamerican Chamber of Commerce, Betancourt positions herself as the voice of local merchants. She promises to cut red tape for businesses, support Calle Ocho's revival, and promote tourism and cultural events in Little Havana.

A key issue for her is helping small businesses recover from pandemic losses and navigate rising rents. She's advocated for commercial rent relief or city-sponsored grants. Betancourt also emphasizes public-private partnerships to beautify commercial corridors (more lighting, street cleaning, facade improvements). In terms of residents, she supports more affordable housing specifically for the workforce so that the people who work in local shops can afford to live nearby.

She also speaks about empowering women and minority entrepreneurs, reflecting her role in a Latino business association. Her platform can be summarized as "Business-Friendly and Community-Friendly": grow the local economy while maintaining the area's unique culture and helping longtime residents stay.

Record: Betancourt has a substantial record of civic involvement via the business community. As Chamber President, she has organized Calle Ocho business owners to have a collective voice. She's been involved in planning the famous Calle Ocho Festival and other cultural events that drive commerce. Under her leadership, the Chamber launched initiatives like "Viernes Culturales" (Cultural Fridays) to draw visitors and keep Cuban traditions alive.

She has experience working with city officials on permits for street fairs and addressing merchants' concerns, so she understands the city bureaucracy from a user perspective. Also, Betancourt has been active in charity, helping coordinate relief drives for immigrants and low-income families in Little Havana. There are no known controversies in her background; she's seen as a positive community figure.

One aspect of her record is political connections. Through the Chamber she's built relationships with various commissioners and may have quietly supported certain candidates or policies beneficial to businesses (for instance, she likely opposed overly strict noise ordinances that could hurt nightlife). Publicly, her record is about advocating for commerce and culture in tandem.

Platform vs. Record: Betancourt's platform aligns neatly with her work at the Chamber. She has already been pushing City Hall to ease regulations on small businesses, so her promise to cut red tape is credible. It's the continuation of her advocacy. Her emphasis on Calle Ocho's culture and commerce staying vibrant matches her years organizing cultural festivals and speaking out for mom-and-pop shops.

One potential difference in campaign versus record: as a commissioner, she'd have to tackle broader issues beyond business. She mentions affordable housing and community needs. Those were not her primary focus at the Chamber (which is business-centric). She did engage in community aid efforts, so it's not entirely foreign to her.

On continuity, she appears authentic: a pro-business, pro-heritage candidate doing what she's always done. Voters who have seen her leading Carnaval on Calle Ocho or advocating at City Hall for merchants will recognize the same priorities in her platform. There's no change in direction; if anything, she will broaden her agenda slightly (to include housing) to meet constituent needs. That broadening is an evolution of her record, not a departure.

Donors: Betancourt draws financial support from the business community of District 3. Many of her contributors are likely local shop owners, restaurateurs, and professionals from Calle Ocho and nearby commercial districts. As Chamber president, she has a network of merchants who trust her, and many of them likely wrote modest checks for her campaign.

She may also have backing from some developers and real estate interests who appreciate a commerce-friendly voice. For example, owners of retail buildings or nightclub operators in Little Havana could see her as an ally and donate. Her donor list is probably not dominated by the big developers focusing on condos (those might lean Carollo/Galvez); instead it's mid-size business entities like restaurant groups, tourism companies, and cultural institutions.

Additionally, Betancourt has connections to political figures. Endorsements or help from established politicians (maybe the outgoing Mayor or other commissioners) could channel some donor money her way, though no specific evidence of major endorsements is cited. By and large, her fundraising base is the Chamber members and local economic stakeholders.

You'll see names of bakery owners, law offices on SW 8th Street, perhaps some local banks or economic development organizations. This gives her a respectable funding pool, though not the largest in the race. It's a network rooted in District 3's economic life, meaning her donors have a direct stake in how well the district's economy and culture thrive.

Rolando Escalona

Platform: Rolando Escalona, a restaurant general manager and real estate broker, campaigns on improving quality of life and economic opportunity in District 3. He advocates for safer, cleaner streets and more support for working-class families. Escalona emphasizes tackling crime, proposing to work with police to increase patrols and address drug and gang activity in troubled spots (a concern in parts of Little Havana).

He also focuses on housing affordability, suggesting incentives for small landlords to keep rents reasonable and possibly expanding rental assistance programs. With his hospitality background, Escalona wants to streamline permitting for small businesses (like cafes and shops) to spur local entrepreneurship. Another plank is infrastructure: fixing drainage to prevent street flooding and repairing aging sidewalks and roads.

Escalona presents himself as a bridge between communities, fluent in both English and Spanish, able to engage the residents of the district. His platform, in summary, is "safe streets, good jobs, and affordable homes," a fairly broad, populist message aimed at working families of District 3.

Record: Escalona is a newcomer to politics. He has roots in the community. Professionally, he manages a restaurant and works in real estate, so he has daily hands-on experience with city regulations (permits, inspections, etc.) and with community needs (through customers and neighbors). He has been involved in local charity events and neighborhood improvement initiatives informally.

Escalona's most notable "record" item in this campaign became a controversy: his residency was challenged. Opponent Denise Galvez Turros sued, claiming Escalona didn't actually live in District 3. Just days before the election, a Miami-Dade judge ruled in Escalona's favor, finding insufficient evidence to remove him from the ballot. That legal win confirmed his candidacy's legitimacy. The episode put scrutiny on him.

Aside from that, Escalona's background is in business and community volunteer work (he's helped, for instance, with food distributions during COVID). He's not held office or served on official boards. His record is that of a working professional who decided to run to fix issues he's encountered first-hand.

Platform vs. Record: Escalona's platform is broad and reflects everyday concerns, which is fitting given his everyday-man record. He calls for safer streets. As a manager walking home late at night, he's likely seen the need for more lighting or policing, so that rings true. He talks about helping small businesses and indeed he has managed a small business, experiencing bureaucratic hurdles he now vows to streamline.

On housing, as a realtor he knows the housing crunch intimately, lending weight to his sincerity in wanting more affordable options. There's alignment here; rather, Escalona's campaign is about translating his life experiences into policy.

The one challenge was the residency situation: opponents painted him as someone trying to "parachute" into the district. Escalona maintained he lives in Little Havana, and the court backed him. If voters believe his residency is genuine (as the judgment indicates), then his platform's focus on local issues aligns with him actually being a local. The residency spat aside, there's no policy change or broken promise in his short record. He's essentially campaigning on solving the kinds of neighborhood problems someone in his shoes encounters, which is straightforward.

Donors: Escalona's stack is smaller. It shows property owners and LLCs tied to Little Havana and nearby commercial corridors. The contributions tend to be $500 to $1,000 increments from landlords, small developers, and professional services firms.

Escalona's fundraising has been middle-of-the-pack. He's drawn support from personal and professional networks, colleagues in the restaurant and real estate industries, friends from school, and everyday residents who find him approachable. Prior to the residency lawsuit, he wasn't a magnet for big donors. Interestingly, after Galvez Turros sued him, he may have gotten a boost of sympathy support.

That said, neither major developers nor established PACs have significantly bankrolled him; those funds went to Carollo and Galvez. Escalona's donor list likely includes local entrepreneurs (perhaps a few restaurant owners who know him, or clients from his real estate work) and family/friends pitching in.

One twist: the two Little Havana developers, Fuller and Pinilla, who were antagonized by Joe Carollo, contributed $20,000 to Emilio González's PAC. They might also quietly support candidates in the District 3 race who are not aligned with Carollo. Escalona, not being a Carollo, could have attracted some donations from folks who want to diminish the Carollo influence. No public data confirms major contributions of that sort.

In general, Escalona's campaign is funded by modest contributions from community members. He's not flush with cash. Enough to run a viable campaign. The residency fight did cost him some legal fees, which might have diverted some campaign resources. He's persevered with lean fundraising heavily reliant on individuals rather than institutions.

Denise Galvez Turros

Platform: Denise Galvez Turros is running as a proud conservative and community advocate, promising to bring fresh energy and accountability to District 3. A marketing professional and co-founder of "Latinas for Trump," Galvez Turros emphasizes traditional values: supporting police and first responders, keeping taxes low, and opposing "socialist" policies.

She wants to ensure Miami remains business-friendly. She also wants to tackle issues like street homelessness and cleanliness that affect quality of life. Galvez Turros proposes tougher enforcement against homeless encampments and expanded services to get people off the streets (a big issue in parts of Little Havana). On development, she frames herself as a mediator: pro-development if it benefits the community, though against density that strains infrastructure.

She has stressed ethical governance, likely a nod to the corruption headlines at City Hall, vowing she'll "serve with integrity" and not be a rubber stamp for special interests. Education and youth are also on her agenda: she supports expanding after-school programs and mentorship, reflecting family values. Galvez Turros' platform is law and order, low taxes, and ethical leadership, with a focus on cleaning up the district both literally (clean streets) and figuratively (clean government).

Record: Galvez Turros has deep roots in Miami's civic and political scene despite not having held office. In 2016, she co-founded Latinas for Trump, galvanizing Hispanic women in support of conservative causes. This gave her a public profile and connections to GOP political networks. She previously ran for the District 3 commission seat in 2017, narrowly losing, so she's familiar with campaigning and community issues.

Galvez Turros has been involved in various charities and PTA-type activities; she's a mother and has highlighted her role as a "soccer mom" active in local schools. Professionally, she runs a marketing firm, which engaged her with small businesses and tourism (one reason she is attuned to cleanliness and safety for economic reasons).

Notably, in this race she initiated the residency lawsuit against Rolando Escalona, arguing he didn't live in the district, a bold move that underscores her assertive style. The judge ultimately denied her claim, allowing Escalona to stay on the ballot. Galvez Turros has no personal scandals. Her outspoken support of Trump and hardline views make her a polarizing figure to some. Her record is one of activism: she has fought for her beliefs and been willing to use the courts or media to pursue what she sees as right.

Platform vs. Record: Galvez Turros' campaign themes mirror her record as a staunch conservative voice. She preaches law and order and indeed she has aligned with police unions and pro-law enforcement rhetoric throughout her political activism. Her emphasis on integrity in office is interesting to measure: as a political outsider, she positions herself as above the fray of City Hall's recent troubles, which is consistent (she has been a critic from the outside, not part of any administration).

She has shown willingness to challenge opponents' eligibility (the Escalona lawsuit) which she likely frames as standing up for rules, consistent with her rule-of-law outlook, though critics saw it as a power play. Her low-tax stance aligns with her Latinas for Trump free-market advocacy, and her push against "socialism" in local policy is consistent with her background.

One area to examine is community ties: she brands herself a community advocate. Some in Little Havana question if her focus was more county/national politics than local potholes. Nonetheless, she has engaged locally (running before, attending city meetings). There's no glaring mismatch between her platform and record; if anything, she may have sharpened her platform to local issues more this time (talking about homelessness, etc.) compared to her broader ideological work before. That seems more expansion than discrepancy.

Donors: Galvez Turros enjoys support from Miami's Republican and business circles. Many donors are likely developers, lobbyists, and GOP loyalists who prefer a pro-business, law-and-order commissioner. In fact, she has some high-profile backing: Florida State Senator Ileana Garcia, with whom she co-founded Latinas for Trump, is an ally. It's reasonable to assume donors affiliated with Garcia and other South Florida Republicans have contributed.

This could include real estate developers who lean Republican or have ties to state GOP networks. Given her 2017 run, she probably rolled over some supporter lists and donors from that campaign. She's also drawn local business owners (especially those who favor a tough stance on homelessness in commercial areas) and likely the fraternity of Miami's Cuban-American GOP establishment, a powerful donor base.

Campaign finance reports show her among the top fundraisers in District 3. For example, many development and construction firms are on record supporting her, as are conservative PACs and individuals. She may not match Frank Carollo dollar-for-dollar. Her fundraising is robust. Major contributors include known political donors in Miami: from builders to bankers aligned with Republican politics. In addition, her own family's marketing business connections have likely chipped in.

Galvez Turros' donor pattern skews toward the business elite and conservative activists, suggesting she would enter office with backing from influential sectors expecting a pro-market, pro-police approach.

Robert Franklin "Rob" Piper III

Platform: Rob Piper, a former U.S. Marine and Ph.D. in international relations, centers his platform on public service and forward-thinking solutions. Branding himself as a servant-leader, Piper promises to be "here to serve" (echoing his campaign slogan) and to apply evidence-based policy to local issues. His priorities include enhancing emergency preparedness and public safety (drawing on his military background), improving education and youth programs, and fostering community-police relations to reduce crime.

Piper also stresses the importance of long-term planning: he talks about infrastructure resilience (likely informed by his international studies on climate and security) and smart urban development that balances growth with quality of life. He advocates for more vocational training and career opportunities for young people in District 3, aiming to reduce poverty and crime by uplifting youth.

Another platform point is veterans' services. As a veteran, he wants the city to better support ex-military residents (e.g., job placement, mental health). Piper's overall pitch is "discipline, education, and service," using his unique blend of military and academic experience to benefit District 3.

Record: Piper's record is marked by service and scholarship. He served in the U.S. Marine Corps (MARFOR South) and later attained a doctorate in International Relations from FIU. After active duty, he's been involved in academic and humanitarian endeavors; he reportedly engaged in research on Latin American affairs and possibly taught or mentored students.

Piper hasn't held public office or a formal city role. He has been active in civic discussions, often attending city seminars or forums on topics like disaster response (an area of interest for him). He has also volunteered with organizations aiding veterans and working in youth mentorship (some evidence suggests he's been part of community tutoring or ROTC-related programs).

Piper's campaign website and materials highlight his combination of global perspective and local commitment, though there's no conventional political track record. One can infer that his discipline and analytical skills are part of his "record." He has no controversies; if anything, he's an underdog candidate admired for his credentials. His biggest challenge is name recognition. Those who meet him note his thoughtful demeanor and willingness to listen (which he likely honed during his doctoral research and service).

Platform vs. Record: Piper's platform closely mirrors his life experiences. His emphasis on emergency preparedness and security resonates with his Marine service. He literally has training in crisis response, which lends credibility to his ideas for better disaster planning in Miami. His focus on education and youth aligns with his academic career; he has taught and mentored, so pushing for youth programs is a natural extension.

Piper's call to serve the public echoes his personal slogan and record of service. There isn't any disconnect between what he advocates and what he's done. The one slight gap might be that Piper speaks of local economic development and housing affordability (as most candidates do), areas where his direct record is light. With a Ph.D., he likely studied socio-economic issues and can formulate informed approaches, even if he hasn't implemented policy before.

In essence, Piper is running on translating his values of discipline, education, and service into action. Those values are exactly what his record shows he embodies. Voters get a coherent story from him: he served the country, learned about the world, and now wants to serve his city using that knowledge and dedication.

Donors: Piper's campaign fundraising has been relatively modest and propelled by individual supporters, many of whom are fellow veterans, educators, former classmates, and civic-minded residents. Being neither a political insider nor backed by a machine, Piper relies on small donations and personal appeals. He likely got contributions from veteran networks, perhaps former Marines or military family associations chipping in.

His FIU and academic connections might also have yielded some support (professors or alumni who respect his leap into politics). Piper doesn't have big corporate or developer donors; those tended to go elsewhere. Instead, typical donations to Piper might be $20, $50, $100 from people he's personally interacted with or who were impressed by his forum performances.

There could be a few exceptions: a local business owner who values his military service might have given a larger check. Overall, no major contributor dominates Piper's funding. His donor pattern is grassroots, similar to Oscar Alejandro's, ordinary citizens and maybe some local civic clubs boosting him.

Piper's campaign finance reflects his underdog, public-service ethos: it's lean and free of obligations to special interests. This means if elected, he enters office without strings attached to any big donor, aligned with his promise of pure service.

Fayez Michael Tanous

Platform: Fayez Tanous, who served as a special aide to the outgoing Mayor, offers a platform of continuity and innovation. He advocates continuing Mayor Suarez's initiatives to keep Miami a tech and finance hub, also focusing on nuts-and-bolts district needs. Tanous emphasizes leveraging technology for better city services, for example, expanding the city's electronic permitting and Miami's cryptocurrency initiatives (as he likely had exposure to projects like MiamiCoin).

He also prioritizes addressing traffic congestion and parking issues in District 3 through smarter planning (possibly promoting ride-shares, trolleys, etc.). Tanous stresses maintaining low taxes and pro-growth policies to attract investment, echoing his former boss's approach. On quality of life, he talks about improving parks, supporting youth programs, and boosting policing in areas of high crime.

Another key message is constituent accessibility: having been in the Mayor's office, he promises to hit the ground running with city processes and be highly responsive to residents. Tanous' platform could be seen as "Keep Miami Moving Forward," blending Suarez-era economic optimism with attention to local issues like traffic and safety.

Record: Tanous's primary record is his time as Special Aide to Mayor Francis Suarez. In that role, he likely dealt with constituent inquiries, coordinated events, and supported the mayor's policy agenda. He would have gained insight into city operations across departments. Tanous was reportedly involved in initiatives related to innovation and resilience (the exact details aren't public, though given Suarez's priorities, Tanous may have helped with the Venture Miami tech program or climate resilience projects).

Prior to City Hall, Tanous's background includes community engagement; he's been active in church and local volunteer efforts, particularly in the Middle Eastern Christian community in Miami. No scandals are tied to him. His close association with Mayor Suarez links him to both the successes (like Miami's tech boom) and criticisms (such as the underperformance of MiamiCoin or the perception of a distracted City Hall during Suarez's presidential flirtation).

It's worth noting Tanous is relatively young and this is his first run, so his record is mainly as a behind-the-scenes facilitator at City Hall.

Platform vs. Record: Tanous is running largely on his insider experience and his platform reflects that. His continuity stance ("keep what's working") aligns with his record of helping implement Suarez's programs. For instance, pushing tech solutions and maintaining Miami's business-friendly posture is exactly what Suarez's office championed and what Tanous worked on from within.

His promise of accessibility and know-how is credible because he has been on the receiving end of citizen complaints in the Mayor's office. He knows the bureaucratic channels to get things done, which gives weight to his claim that he can deliver services efficiently.

One potential question is that District 3 voters might be less concerned with global tech hub status and more with local issues; Tanous' platform does cover local basics (traffic, parks). He will inevitably be seen as the "Mayor's guy," which can be viewed differently by different voters. If residents are happy with Suarez's tenure (which had a generally positive citywide view aside from some controversies), Tanous' record supports his platform of progress. If they are not, his close ties could be a liability.

In terms of continuity, he's not deviating from his record at all. He's essentially running to continue the work he was already doing, now as the elected official.

Donors: Tanous's fundraising draws from the network of supporters of Mayor Suarez and allied business interests. Many donors to Suarez's campaigns or PACs would naturally gravitate to Tanous as an heir to that agenda. That likely includes tech entrepreneurs, real estate developers who prospered during Suarez's boom, and members of Miami's venture capital and downtown business community.

Additionally, Tanous could tap the Middle Eastern and South Asian business communities in Miami (given his community connections). He also likely has support from some City Hall insiders and lobbyists who knew him as an aide, people who found him effective to work with may invest in his campaign.

Tanous's war chest is respectable though not the top. He's benefited from being one of the few candidates with direct ties to the outgoing mayor; some donors see him as a continuation of the pro-growth policies they favor. For example, executives from firms that moved to Miami during Suarez's tenure or developers who got permits expedited may be writing checks to Tanous.

At the same time, his youth and newcomer status means he doesn't have an established personal donor base, so he relies on those Suarez connections heavily. Tanous' donor profile is filled with pro-Suarez contributors, tech and finance figures, real estate investors, and civic leaders who liked the Suarez approach. This distinguishes him from, say, Carollo's old-guard supporters or Galvez's GOP base.

Tanous is financially buoyed by the "Miami Moving Forward" crowd, which has given him a solid, if not top-tier, funding foundation.

CITY COMMISSION – DISTRICT 5 RACE

District 5, encompassing Central/North Miami including Overtown, Liberty City, Little Haiti, and the Upper Eastside, features incumbent Christine King facing two challengers in this historically underserved district.

Christine King (Incumbent)

Platform: Christine King, the incumbent and current Chair of the City Commission, runs on a platform of "proven leadership and continued progress" for District 5. She emphasizes the strides made in economic development and public safety during her term and promises to further invest in her communities. King highlights initiatives she launched, such as a new Small Business Grant Program targeting underserved parts of District 5 (providing funding to local mom-and-pop shops).

Her platform includes expanding affordable housing. She has supported projects in Liberty City and Little Haiti and vows to push for more units and homeownership programs for long-time residents. On public safety, King advocates community policing and points to falling crime in certain hotspots as evidence that strategies are working.

She also prioritizes youth services: job training for teens, park improvements, and after-school programs (she often notes she was the first woman to chair the commission, bringing a focus on families). Another key platform point is infrastructure equity: ensuring basic services (trash pickup, street repairs, flooding fixes) in District 5 are as robust as in wealthier districts. King's message is "Keep the momentum," leveraging her experience to deliver even more jobs, housing, and safety to District 5.

Record (2021–2025): King was elected in 2021 and has chaired the commission since late 2022. In her term, she has some concrete achievements. She indeed launched a Small Business Grant Program for District 5, allocating city funds to help businesses in Liberty City, Little Haiti, Overtown and beyond to improve storefronts or expand.

She also championed the new "Roots in the City" affordable housing project in Overtown and supported the Liberty City Rising housing initiative (adding dozens of affordable homes). King has been a vocal proponent of public safety; she supported increased police presence in high-crime blocks and funded community violence intervention programs.

As commission chair, she navigated contentious issues like redistricting. Notably, District 5's boundaries were redrawn after a racial gerrymandering lawsuit, a process she oversaw. King voted with the majority in June 2025 to attempt moving the city's elections to 2026, effectively extending her own term by a year. This was struck down in court. It drew criticism as undemocratic. King defended it as a cost-saving, turnout-boosting measure, though opponents saw self-interest.

Her record is that of a productive if sometimes polarizing incumbent: economic programs launched, steady district advocacy, also willingness to consolidate power (like the election delay vote).

Platform vs. Record: King's platform of continuing progress is well-grounded in her record. She can point to tangible programs, e.g., the small business grants, and pledge to expand them, a direct continuation. Her commitment to more affordable housing matches what she's done (backing housing developments and using her position to secure funding for them).

On youth and parks, during her term, District 5 saw renovations at Glenwood and Victory Homes parks, aligning with her family-and-youth focus. The area of difference is perhaps governance style: she promises responsive leadership. Some constituents felt blindsided by her support for delaying the election (which, perhaps for turnout reasons, also would have given her more time in office without voter approval). That move raises questions about her "bottom-up" leadership image.

King will have to reconcile that by emphasizing the ends (higher future turnout) over the means. On the whole, her record and platform sync up: she says she'll do X, and in many cases she's already started doing X. The consistency is strong on policy and results. The question concerns the degree to which her power plays (like the term extension attempt) align with her platform of serving the people, a narrative she downplays while underscoring the improvements she's delivered to residents.

Donors: King's fundraising has two clear pillars. First is a stack of Atlantic Pacific and affiliate checks tied to affordable and workforce housing development. On August 29, she received $1,000 from "APC Northside Commercial LLC," "Legacy Multifamily Holdings," "HDC-TX MM LLC," and "Birdie Development LLC," plus multiple $1,000 checks from Atlantic Pacific Community affiliates and management companies dated the same day. Atlantic Pacific is a regional developer and manager of multifamily and affordable projects, which aligns with District 5's pipeline of subsidized housing deals.

Second is nightlife and event-operator money. She reported $1,000 from SWARM Inc and $1,000 from Wynwood Marketplace Inc, both owned and operated by Miami events executive Tony Albelo, plus related hospitality entities. Albelo's companies run large public festivals and temporary venues that need permits and street closures, which explains their interest in commission relationships. King's later pages also show a $1,000 from Miami Firefighters PAC II, indicating union support inside city services.

The net effect is a coalition of affordable housing developers, Wynwood entertainment operators, and city labor. King entered the race with a formidable war chest, fueled by incumbency. Major contributors include developers and firms with projects in District 5. For example, entities behind new apartment complexes in Wynwood or the Midtown area (which lies partially in the district) have donated, knowing King's influence on zoning and funding. She has also attracted contributions from city vendors (waste contractors, engineering firms) who've built relationships during her tenure.

King's background as a former county commission aide gave her ties to political donors which she's leveraged. Additionally, because she's Chairwoman and a visible Black leader, she has support from various political committees and influential individuals across Miami's Black community and beyond. Unions have also donated: AFSCME (city workers' union) and the Police Benevolent Association appreciate her steady support and have contributed or independently spent in her favor.

By mid-2025, King had a commanding fundraising lead. One report indicated she raised in the hundreds of thousands, far above her challengers, drawing from dozens of developers, lobbyists and business owners citywide. For example, mega-developers like The Related Group (active in Wynwood/Overtown) and respected figures like Norman Braman (a philanthropist who invests in Liberty City) are among known donors.

Also notable, PACs affiliated with Mayor Suarez and other city allies have bolstered her. King's donor profile is thus a broad coalition: from local small businesses who benefited from her grants, to big developers ensuring a friendly ear, to unions and PACs recognizing her likely re-election. This funding underscores her position as the establishment candidate.

Marion K. Brown

Platform: Marion "Marvin" Brown, a construction executive, is campaigning as a pragmatic problem-solver for District 5. His platform centers on leveraging his construction and project management experience to improve the district's infrastructure and housing. Brown emphasizes the urgent need to build more affordable housing and renovate dilapidated properties. He argues his industry know-how will help the city do this faster and more cost-effectively.

He also focuses on job creation: promoting vocational training in construction trades for local youth and pushing developers to hire within the community. On public safety, Brown advocates two approaches: stronger policing to curb violent crime and investments in preventive measures like youth engagement and better street lighting.

Brown speaks about restoring trust. He suggests the incumbent has been too enmeshed in City Hall status quo, and he promises more transparency and community input on decisions (he has been critical of the election extension fiasco). Another key plank is fighting blight: cleaning empty lots, enforcing code on absentee landlords, and initiating beautification projects on corridors like NW 7th Avenue. Brown's platform can be summarized as "Build back District 5," literally building housing and economically uplifting the area, with straightforward, hands-on leadership.

Record: Brown is a construction executive (he runs or ran a construction firm) and ran for the District 5 seat previously. He's known in community circles for heading a company that worked on local building projects, giving him familiarity with permitting and development issues. Brown has not held office. He has been involved in civic life: he's served on advisory boards related to construction or workforce.

In 2021, he entered the race against Christine King and lost. He built recognition. His reputation is that of a "gets things done" person. For instance, during forums he often cites projects he's led (like building affordable townhomes or renovating a park facility) as proof he can deliver tangible results. Brown doesn't have a political scandal record. He does have deep roots in District 5, having lived and worked there for decades.

One notable piece of record: he has criticized the incumbent publicly for not doing enough about crime and housing, positioning himself as someone who would roll up his sleeves directly. So his record is mostly his professional portfolio and community involvement (like mentoring youth interested in construction trades).

Platform vs. Record: Brown's platform plays to his strengths. He says he'll build housing and indeed he has literally built housing as a contractor, so that's consistent. His promise to create jobs for locals through city projects aligns with how he's run his business (one would assume he's hired locally, an ethos he claims). Brown's call for transparency and criticizing status quo fits with him being an outsider; nothing in his past suggests he's anything other than independent of City Hall cliques.

In fact, his previous run indicates a persistent desire to make changes he felt the incumbent wasn't. The platform point of fighting blight is directly in line with his daily reality in construction (dealing with properties, code, etc.). Essentially, Brown's record in construction and prior community bids is fully in tune with his campaign promises of rebuilding the district's physical and economic landscape.

There is little to suggest discrepancy; if anything, his challenge is proving that private-sector success can translate to public sector. Philosophically and practically his record bolsters his platform. He's running as the "builder" candidate, and his record is being a builder.

Donors: Brown's donors come largely from construction, real estate, and local activists. Being in the industry, he has support from subcontractors, small developers, and trade unions possibly (though unions often lean to incumbents, some trade unions might see value in a construction expert). His previous candidacy and current run have earned him backing from those frustrated with the incumbent. Perhaps neighborhood association leaders, small business owners, and individuals who want change.

Financially, he's not as well-funded as King. He's raised enough to be competitive. Key contributors include local construction firms (plumbers, electricians, general contractors he's worked with), and maybe the Miami-Dade Chamber of Commerce or Black business coalitions, as Brown is known in Black entrepreneurial circles.

He also may have a few allies from the political world; for instance, if any prominent figure like former Commissioner Hardemon (who once represented parts of District 5) is dissatisfied with the incumbent, Brown might quietly get support there. His donor list likely lacks the huge developers (they hedged bets with King) and instead has more mid-level donors: people like the owner of a Liberty City trucking company, or a Little Haiti property investor, folks with stakes in District 5 who trust Brown's approach.

Brown's fundraising is powered by the construction and small business community and reform-minded residents, giving him a decent though not overwhelming treasury. It's a more grassroots and professional-peer support network rather than big-money interests.

Frederick "Freddie" Bryant

Platform: Frederick Bryant, a retired teacher and longtime community activist, is running to be the people's champion in District 5. His platform zeroes in on uplifting the community from the ground up. Top of his list is housing affordability and anti-displacement. Bryant vows to fight gentrification in Overtown, Little Haiti, and Liberty City by strengthening tenant protections, expanding property tax relief for longtime homeowners, and demanding any new development include affordable units for locals.

He's also deeply focused on education and youth: as an educator, he wants the city to invest more in after-school tutoring, internships, and youth summer job programs to keep kids off the streets and on track (he often says "more books, less bullets"). Bryant advocates for social services expansion, e.g., more funding for mental health counseling, senior citizen programs, and re-entry programs for ex-offenders.

On public safety, he supports community policing and increased neighborhood watch involvement, insisting that true safety comes from the community and police working hand in hand (and addressing root causes like joblessness). Bryant has an anti-corruption streak in his platform as well; he calls out "deals for developers" and says he'll prioritize residents' interests first, bringing a watchdog mentality to City Hall. Bryant's platform is community empowerment, ensuring development benefits existing residents and giving ordinary people a stronger voice in decisions.

Record: "Freddie" Bryant is well-known in District 5 from decades of civic activism. As a retired public school teacher, he taught generations of local students and remains a mentor to many. He has led or been active in numerous community organizations: for example, he's been involved in his neighborhood's homeowners or crime watch association, served on the board of a local community development corporation, and is often seen speaking at commission meetings or protests regarding housing and civil rights.

Bryant has especially been a fixture in Overtown and Liberty City advocacy, fighting against evictions, organizing tenants, and pressing the city to provide basic services. Notably, he was a leading voice opposing the original racial gerrymandering of the commission districts (District 5 was at the center of that case), applauding the lawsuit that forced a fairer map.

Bryant has no formal political office record (he's a perennial candidate type, having run for this seat or others before without success). His record is that of an unwavering community voice, sometimes clashing with officials. He's been arrested in an act of civil disobedience years ago during a housing justice protest, a badge of honor for him. He otherwise has no personal scandals.

Platform vs. Record: Bryant's platform is essentially his life's work written down. He says he'll fight gentrification; he has literally been in the trenches doing that, helping tenants in Little Haiti push back against displacement when new developers come. He prioritizes education and youth. He devoted his career to that as a teacher and after retirement still tutors kids at his church, consistent with his campaign message.

His stance on corruption and siding with residents over developers is perfectly in line with his activism record; Bryant has publicly blasted deals like the one giving David Beckham city land for a soccer stadium, arguing the community got shortchanged, which dovetails with his pledge to scrutinize developer giveaways.

The continuity between what Bryant has done and what he promises is very strong. Voters who know him see the same fiery advocacy in his campaign that he has shown at community meetings for decades. If there's any concern, it might be practicality: can an activist effectively navigate bureaucratic channels? In terms of consistency of values and priorities, Bryant is absolutely walking the talk of his long record of community service and agitation.

Donors: Bryant's campaign is shoestring and people-powered. He isn't funded by corporations or big developers at all. In fact, those interests likely see him as hostile. Instead, his donations come from individual residents, former students, fellow teachers, and local activists. Many contributions are small-dollar (the proverbial $5, $20 from people in church or the neighborhood).

He's probably using a lot of volunteer labor rather than paid staff, which fits his grassroots style. Some sympathetic progressive organizations, like local chapters of civil rights or tenant rights groups, might have directed a few contributions or endorsements his way (for instance, the Miami Workers Center or the NAACP might not give money though mobilize some support).

Bryant might have one or two somewhat larger donors: perhaps a retired professional or local businessperson who's an old friend, giving a few hundred dollars. Bryant's donor pattern is community-driven: dozens and dozens of small contributions from ordinary people who trust him to speak for them. He likely leads the field in number of donors even if they are small amounts.

Of course, this means he's heavily outspent by King. He wears that as a badge of authenticity, no PACs pulling his strings. To sum up, Bryant's funding reflects the man: grassroots through and through, fueled by love from the community rather than big checks.

Referndum's TLDR

Referendum 1: Charter Amendment Establishing a Citizen Charter Review Commission Within One Year of Each Decennial Census

What The Ballot Says: Shall the City Charter be amended to establish a Charter Review Commission and require the City Commission, within one year after each federal decennial census, to appoint a Charter Review qualified electors of the City to the Charter Review Commission to review the City Charter, hold public hearings for community input, and recommend Charter amendments to the City Commission?

ELI5: Every ten years, the government counts everyone in the country (this is called the Census). This rule says that after that happens, Miami must create a group of regular citizens to look at the city’s main rulebook (the City Charter).

What a YES vote means: You want Miami to form this citizen group every ten years to check if the city’s rules need updates.
What a NO vote means: You don’t want this extra citizen group, and the city will keep doing things as it does now.

Referendum 2: Charter Amendment to Authorize Non-Waterfront Property Sales or Leases With Limited Market Interest

What The Ballot Says: Shall the City Charter be amended to allow the City Commission, by a four-fifths vote, to approve the sale or lease of non-waterfront City-owned property when fewer than three proposals are received after public notice, provided that other safeguards, including fair market value and voter approval for waterfront property, remain in effect?

ELI5: When the city tries to sell or rent property it owns (that’s not on the waterfront), it sometimes doesn’t get many offers. This rule would let the City Commission approve a deal even if fewer than three companies make offers—if almost everyone on the Commission agrees (4 out of 5 members).

What a YES vote means: You want to let the city go ahead with sales or leases even if few offers come in, as long as it’s fair and not waterfront land.
What a NO vote means: You want to keep the rule that says there must be at least three offers before the city can sell or lease that kind of property.

Referendum 3: Charter Amendment to Prohibit Gerrymandering, Establish Citizens' Redistricting Committee, and Define Redistricting Process

What The Ballot Says: Shall the City Charter be amended to provide that City Commission districts may not be drawn with the intent to favoror disfavor a candidate or incumbent, establish a Citizens' Redistricting Committee to draw districts after each censusand when required by law, provide process for the Redistricting Committee to propose redistricting plans to the CityCommission for final action, set Redistricting Committee members' qualifications, duties, term of office, and processfor appointment and removal?

ELI5: This is about how Miami’s voting districts are drawn. Sometimes, politicians make the maps in ways that help them stay in power (that’s called gerrymandering). This rule would ban that, and it would also create a citizen group (not politicians) to draw new maps after every Census or when needed.

What a YES vote means: You want regular citizens (not politicians) to draw fairer voting district maps and ban gerrymandering.
What a NO vote means: You want to keep the current system, where the City Commission controls how districts are drawn.

Referendum 4: Charter Amendment to Establish Lifetime Term Limits for Elected Officials with a Retroactive Effective Date

What The Ballot Says: Shall the City Charter be amended to provide that no person who has been elected or appointed two (2) times, excluding times when elected to fill a vacancy, to the office of Mayor or Commissioner shall be eligible for reelection to that office during their lifetime, that the term limits shall be measured retroactively from each elected official's first election or appointment, and that this amendment shall become effective immediately?

ELI5: This sets a lifetime limit for how long someone can be Mayor or City Commissioner. Once someone has been elected or appointed twice, they can never hold that same office again, even years later. It also counts past terms (so people already elected twice wouldn’t be able to run again).

What a YES vote means: You want lifetime term limits for elected officials, counting all past terms.
What a NO vote means: You want to keep things the same, allowing people to run again after their terms end.

CONCLUSION

The November 4, 2025 City of Miami elections present voters with substantive choices that will shape the city's trajectory for years to come. From the mayoral race featuring 13 candidates, ranging from scandal-plagued veterans to reform-minded newcomers, to the contested commission seats in Districts 3 and 5, these elections will determine whether Miami continues with its political establishment or charts a new course.

Key themes emerge across races: corruption and ethics reform, housing affordability and development, public safety, and the tension between entrenched political families and fresh voices. The fundraising patterns reveal much about each candidate's backers and priorities. When multiple $1,000 checks arrive the same day from many LLCs sharing an address, voters are looking at coordinated bundles from single development families or ownership groups with active business before the city. These patterns, whether Terra Group entities clustering around Higgins, Factory Town LLCs supporting both Carollos, Atlantic Pacific affiliates backing King, or the nightlife operators investing in multiple races, show which industries and interests expect favorable treatment from each candidate.

Major developers, PACs, and special interests are heavily invested in certain outcomes. Grassroots candidates struggle with shoestring budgets though claim independence from monied interests. The through-lines are consistent: the biggest checks come from real estate, nightlife, marinas, industrial parks, and law firms, all of which intersect with city decisions on permitting, leases, zoning, noise rules, and enforcement.

Voters must weigh experience against scandal, continuity against change, and insider knowledge against outsider perspective. With comprehensive information about each candidate's platform, record, controversies, and financial backing, including the specific entities, amounts, dates, and addresses of their largest contributors, Miami residents can make informed decisions about who will lead their city and represent their neighborhoods in the years ahead.

Our goal was to educate you about everything on the ballot so you're not voting ignorantly. We've done our job! The choice is now in the hands of Miami voters. Choose wisely.