‘I have not seen this level of ugliness.’ Pinecrest divided over special election

Simmering tensions in an affluent South Miami-Dade community on the coastal side of U.S. 1 have culminated in reports of sign stealing, accusations of fear-mongering and some voter confusion in a special election that could affect zoning.

Next week, the village of Pinecrest will learn the results of a vote-by-mail referendum on whether to require future changes to the zoning code to get 60% voter approval. So far, nearly 5,200 — or about 40% — of the 13,158 eligible voters have cast ballots, which must be in the hands of county election officials by Tuesday at 7 p.m.. Voters can also deliver their ballot directly to the elections office in Doral by the deadline.

The election’s conclusion — regardless of outcome — will be a welcome relief for some of the 17,000-plus residents, who have witnessed battle lines drawn between neighbors and an erosion of trust toward public officials.

“I have not seen this level of ugliness in any election in Pinecrest,” said Evelyn Greer, the village’s first mayor.

Greer, who opposes the charter change, said the “rancor” she has seen is reminiscent of 1996, when the village voted to incorporate.

“I am pained that it has gotten this divisive, and I am hoping that once it’s over and people can calm down, and they’re not in the heat of battle, that some of this will recede,” Greer said. “Almost everyone I talk to — and I’m talking to and calling a lot of people — would like this to be over and go back to the peaceful way that Pinecrest has always been.”

‘It’s like a huge, horrible divorce’

Two political committees represent the opposing factions: Concerned Citizens of Pinecrest, which leads the “yes” campaign and gathered over 1,700 petition signatures last year to get their initiative on the ballot, and Pinecrest Friends, which formed in opposition to the petitioners.

Generally, the groups claim a common goal: to protect the village’s lush tree canopy, and the single-family homes that lie in its shade. But they diverge on the means to achieving that end.

“Both the messages are the same: preserve Pinecrest. Some people say that we can preserve it by voting no, some people say that you can preserve it by voting yes,” said Mayor Joe Corradino, who is a vocal opponent of the charter change. “I think it’s confused the voters significantly.”

Resident Kristine Boyett said she’s heard compelling — and convoluted — arguments from both sides, and that she will likely wait until the last minute to mail her ballot because she hasn’t made up her mind yet.

“It’s like a huge, horrible divorce,” Boyett said. Speaking in her living room, she likened the election experience to parents splitting up. “And then they go, ‘well, who do you want to live with?’ And I’m like, ‘I don’t want to live with either one of you. You guys both make me sick.’ I really feel that way.”

Corradino, who predicts the referendum will fail 75% to 25%, has on multiple occasions accused Concerned Citizens of Pinecrest of spreading misinformation, and has said the group convinced residents that “the sky is falling” by stoking fears that high-rises are coming to Pinecrest. (The village restricted building heights on U.S. 1 to four stories.)

That wasn’t the case for Angie Diaz Alvarez. She said she was initially leaning toward a “no” vote after someone on the opposition side explained their position. But when she went online and did her own research, she said, she realized the person was actually explaining the “yes” position.

“The people who have the ‘no’ are the people who don’t know,” Diaz Alvarez said.

Several residents who plan to vote “yes” told the Miami Herald they have lost faith in the Village Council to watch out for their best interests by protecting the village from developers.

The mayor disagreed. “Every single decision we’ve ever made has been predicated on maintaining the character and enhancing the quality of life,” Corradino said.

On several streets in Pinecrest, nearly every home has a yard sign in front of it — to the point of annoyance for some neighbors. That’s why Mark Levine has two signs in front of his house in the exact font and design of the “vote no” signs. Except his are red instead of blue and state, “Preserve Pinecrest’s Wildest Dreams Vote for Pedro by March 7” — an apparent nod to the 2004 film “Napoleon Dynamite.”

Speaking to reporters through his Ring doorbell camera, Levine chuckled and acknowledged he made the signs.

“My opinion is that both options are horrendous,” he said.

Longtime resident Billy Smith plans to vote no, in part because the current and former mayors oppose the referendum.

“I follow the powers that be,” Smith said. “They said no, and that’s enough for us.”

Police investigating sign theft

Tension in the community reached a new peak in late February when video emerged of a woman driving what appears to be a white BMW SUV and grabbing “vote no” signs from people’s yards in broad daylight.

Surveillance footage from five separate homes — most recorded on Ring and Nest cameras on Feb. 20 — shows the unknown woman pull up to a yard with her trunk already open, grab a “vote no” yard sign, toss it in the back of her vehicle and drive off.

The Pinecrest Police Department has received the footage, and at least three additional neighbors reported that their signs were stolen, but that their cameras did not capture the incident, according to a police report. Village spokeswoman Michelle Hammontree said the investigation is ongoing.

Laura McNaughton, founder of Concerned Citizens in Pinecrest, denied any involvement from the “vote yes” side.

“There is absolutely no truth to this rumor and accusation. Our volunteer residents have never been involved in any way with this type of crime,” McNaughton said.

She said “yes” signs have also been stolen, but that her team has not reported it to the police because “the most important part of our grassroots campaign has been face to face communications with our neighbors.”

“To be clear,” McNaughton added, “we do not condone the stealing of yard signs and the person caught on video is not known to us.”

Greer, the former mayor, said there are plans underway to offer a reward for information about the woman’s identity.

“It’s the big mystery of this election, who is this woman and why is she stealing these signs?” Greer said. “Or, essentially, who is paying her to steal the signs?”

READ MORE: Power struggle between politicians, activists boils over at heated Pinecrest meeting

Election costs

If the proposed charter amendment passes, 60% voter approval will be required to change the zoning code and land development regulations. That would extend to changing definitions of terms, creating a new zoning district and increasing limits on building height and density.

Those changes — typically made by the Village Council — would have to go to a voter referendum each time, although multiple proposals could be included on the same ballot.

According to Village Manager Yocelin Galiano, previous changes the village has made to land development regulations since incorporation would have triggered a special election 35 times — or about once a year — had the proposed charter language already been in effect. Galiano also said that each future referendum could cost around $63,000, with $28,000 for a vote-by-mail election and $35,000 for an “education campaign” to inform the residents.

For the current special election, the village so far has spent $210,410. The costs include nearly $65,000 in legal fees incurred from litigation with Concerned Citizens of Pinecrest, $86,509 for “legal charter revision” costs, $2,000 for social media, $3,000 for Community News ads, over $3,300 for legal advertising and about $2,200 for postcards with voting information.