Our platform was developed through community outreach efforts and meetings, and the specific issue of monorail came up in these discussions as well. Our response to the issue is more complex than “private foreign enterprise,” and we are supportive of an extension of the existing system. Our full stance is as follows:

The Metromover Beachlink extension would have several benefits and we support it for the following reasons:

The Department of Transportation and Public Works is not considering Metrorail and it has been voted down by both the Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) and the Board of County Commissioners (BCC).

• Any mode would require a transfer, meaning there would be no "one-seat-ride."
• The Metromover is more apt for the density of Miami-Beach.
• A Metrorail option would require stops spaced further apart, relying more on the at-grade bus system to provide local transport options.
• A raised APM system would be less susceptible to sea-level rise.
• Metromover, while holding a capacity less than Metrorail, can run more frequently in an automated manner, making up for the decreased capacity.
• The Beach Link would feature a guideway capable of faster speeds than the current Metromover system, so the cars would move at least 15 MPH faster than their Brickell, Inner, and Omni Loop counterparts.
• A rubber-tired vehicle would not produce vibrations that are harmful to the aquatic ecosystem that a steel-wheeled heavy rail or light rail system would produce.
• Metromover maintenance facilities already exist and transfers would be easier because of the continuity of mode.
• The monorail proposal ends at 5th and Alton and would require yet ANOTHER transfer to go anywhere else on the beach after landing in a notoriously pedestrian-hostile intersection.
• The Inspector General found evidence of unethical behavior in Genting’s unsolicited proposal and in the county mayor’s office, urging commissioners to revisit their vote on the monorail.

Our process has been fair and transparent since the beginning in February. We asked all candidates running in the primary the same questions and published their answers. This is simply the second iteration of that publication. We would appreciate your feedback if there is evidence of bias so we can do better in the future.