Miami voters will decide next week whether they think a proposed marina redevelopment would deliver better public access and a stronger financial return — or commit valuable waterfront to an agreement opponents say no longer reflects its worth.
City of Miami Referendum 3 concerns approximately 27 acres on Virginia Key, including the privately operated Rickenbacker Marina and city-operated Marine Stadium Marina. Virginia Key LLC, a Suntex Marinas and RCI Group joint venture, would receive a 45-year lease with two tenant-controlled, 15-year renewal options.
Supporters promise improved infrastructure, environmental protections and access for more than just boat owners.
“The goal is to make it open to everyone, and you don’t have to spend a penny,” said David Filler, Suntex’s chief development officer and a Virginia Key LLC representative. “This is how to build the most environmentally friendly, open-to-the-public, world-class facility, with amenities to support not only the boaters, but open to the entire public.”
Opponents, however, question the financial return, ecological risks and future for existing businesses.
“If the city is trying to capture the highest value for itself, as a municipality or for its taxpayers, it’s clearly not going to get it from this deal,” said Aabad Melwani, Rickenbacker Marina’s president and aPreserve & Protect Miami opposition coalition member.
Near the would-be affected land is Historic Virginia Key Beach Park, Miami's historic "colored-only" beach and a vital cultural sanctuary for African Americans during the Jim Crow era. The park falls outside of the redevelopment area, but the referendum’s significance to Black Miamians and questions about misleading campaign messaging have nevertheless entered the debate.
A court-ordered vote
Virginia Key LLC won the original bid in 2016, but the city later canceled it without submitting the lease to voters, whose approval is required for such waterfront agreements. The company sued, and in 2023 Circuit Judge Alan Fine ruled that the city had acted “arbitrarily and capriciously.” An appeals court upheld that outcome in 2025.
In June, as commissioners questioned current property values, City Attorney George Wysong told them they had to place the agreement on the ballot or risk contempt.
City of Miami Commissioner Christine King said she will be voting against the measure.
“The contract was issued before I even became commissioner for District 5, and I think that it is dated and the city won’t be getting the best deal possible,” she told The Miami Times.
She said the court order left commissioners without discretion to amend the deal before sending it to voters.
On the other hand, Miami-Dade County Commissioner Keon Hardemon, a former City of Miami District 5 commissioner, has been vocal in his support for the measure. His face appears on several ads by the Save Virginia Key campaign, run by Virginia Key LLC. Hardemon canceled an interview with The Miami Times regarding this story and did not respond to requests to reschedule by the time of this publication.
In 2021, votersrejected a separate proposal that would have waived competitive bidding and given Melwani’s company a 45-year lease. Virginia Key LLC sued to block that referendum while seeking its own ballot vote.
What Miami would receive
The proposed lease covers the two marinas and land occupied by restaurants The Rusty Pelican and Gramps Getaway. Its renewal options could extend the agreement to 75 years without commission approval.
David Ralph is a municipal marina customer who chairs the opposing Miami Residents for Public Waterfront Access political committee. He questions whether voters understand the provision in the ballot language.
“At the end of 45 years, the city doesn't get to say, ‘Sorry, we don't want to do the next [lease],’ so it's not optional. It's like the tenant decides on their own to renew,” Ralph said. “We don't get to produce more land once we give it away. It's gone forever.”
Filler said the ballot language followed city protocol and underwent legal review.
The financial dispute centers on whether decade-old terms remain appropriate. Melwani estimates the existing marinas generate about $3 million annually for Miami, compared with approximately $2.2 million in proposed base rent.
“If you take a look at the 75-year lease, and you measure the $2.2 million in guaranteed rent versus the $3 million that the city's receiving today, project that out. The city is losing $800,000 a year for up to 75 years,” he said.
The lease also requires an annual payment of 6% of gross revenues from operations including boat storage, slips, commercial space and fuel sales. Beginning in the second year, base rent would increase annually with inflation, subject to a 3% minimum and 5% maximum.
Filler projected annual payments closer to $4 million.
“When you have a percentage rent structure, it’s designed to withstand the test of time, so it doesn't matter when you hop in to start paying because your overall rent as a percentage of your gross revenues grows at the same time,” Filler said, adding that the company would pay more rent here than at any marina in its 100-marina portfolio.
The Save Virginia Key campaign cites two city-commissioned 2026 appraisals concluding that payments would meet or exceed market rent. Joseph J. Blake and Associates estimated market rent at about $3.35 million, compared with projected contract payments of $3.52 million. CRE Valuation Services projected approximately $3.86 million annually once operations stabilize, also above its benchmark.
Both acknowledged data limitations: Blake lacked a current boat-storage rent roll, while CRE noted limited marina revenue information.
Appraiser Charles Badell challenged those findings in reviews for attorneys representing opponents of the referendum, including Rickenbacker Marina, Biscayne Marine Partners and Gramps Getaway owner Adam Gersten.
In a July 17 sworn declaration and reports, Badell questioned revenue estimates, missing documents and limited details on improvements and comparable properties. He also found some existing Rickenbacker boat-storage rates exceeded those projected for the redevelopment. He concluded that market rent was higher than either city appraisal estimated.
Public access, businesses and the bay
The redevelopment would consolidate the marinas into one privately operated facility. Filler described a roughly 1,200-foot waterfront promenade, restaurants, retail, upgraded infrastructure, 750 dry-storage spaces and 202 wet slips. His campaign advertises more than $80 million in private investment.
Residents could walk, bike or picnic in the space, he said. He also pledged to remove barriers and an abandoned vessel that he said obstruct public boat-ramp access.
But Ralph disputes campaign messaging describing the current waterfront as closed, noting that residents already kayak and paddle board in the basin.
“I have my boat in the marina, and because it’s affordable, I can still get my kids out to hang out with me,” he said.
Filler said there is no intention to raise rates beyond current levels.
Still, Melwani warned that marine services, charter operators and other businesses could face displacement or higher costs as redevelopment caters to larger vessels and wealthier customers.
“Gentrification has now gone from just residential to now reaching public spaces and reaching the waterfront, and this proposal, this referendum, is a prime example of that,” he said.
Filler said existing businesses, including Gramps Getaway, would have opportunities to remain. The lease permits subleasing but does not guarantee current businesses their locations or terms.
The campaigns also disagree over environmental effects. Filler alleged that inadequate stormwater infrastructure presently allows chemicals, fuel and oil to wash into Biscayne Bay. He said redevelopment would capture and treat runoff, restore mangroves and benefit wildlife.
“The infrastructure is old, and as a result, one of the most important things you can do with any site is bring it up to code and implement the proper stormwater protections that are necessary to preserve the environment,” Filler said.
Melwani said those pollution allegations came from a private consultant for Virginia Key LLC. He pointed to Miami-Dade County’s recent renewal of his marina’s operating permit.
“Had there been any issue or any infraction or citation, or anything that went uncured, we would not have gotten our marina operator’s permit renewed,” he said.
He also warned that dredging could cause “irreversible harm” to the basin and surrounding wetlands.
Suntex recently had to stop operations at sections of the Miami Beach Marina after city inspectors deemed them unsafe. According to WLRN, the inspection revealed that parts of the concrete docks had collapsed into the water, raising concerns about the company's management of the facility.
Black beach falls outside of the plan
Asked whether the agreement would affect Historic Virginia Key Beach Park, King answered, “Not at all.”
But opponents question whether the Save Virginia Key campaign makes that distinction clear.
The Miami Times asked both campaigns about criticism that its name and colors resemble the historic park’s branding and could manipulate voters into believing the referendum would benefit the beach. Filler did not specifically address the colors, instead arguing that opponents sought to protect the current operator’s financial interests.
Melwani connected his opposition to the island’s history.
“There’s a cruel irony to all of this happening on Virginia Key, which has had a history of displacement, especially amongst African American and Caribbean folks that have been fighting to preserve and protect their cultural landmark, which is right next door to us,” Melwani said.
He called the campaign title “deceitful” and noted that his company’s separate 2021 proposal included a contribution to the beach trust.
Asked how the redevelopment could impact the historic beach, Filler pledged financial contributions and parking assistance.
“We will be avid supporters of Virginia Key Beach Park,” he said.
Those pledges are not identified in the lease agreement.
Dinizulu Gene Tinnie, a community activist, resident and former trustee of the Virginia Key Beach Park Board, said he had not yet researched every project detail, but that his opposition centers on public ownership and residents’ ability to shape the island’s future.
“I think the basic question of public land being reserved for public use and public ownership is just very important,” he said.
Although the historic beach is outside the lease, Tinnie worries decisions elsewhere on the island could establish a precedent favoring private development over residents’ vision for public land.
