By Coral Gables Gazette staff
“I have been left with no resort, after the circus we had before… I will have no other choice but to conduct the meeting in a way that follows parliamentary rules to a ‘T.’”
Those were the words of Mayor Vince Lago during a chaotic and twice-delayed Jan. 13 Coral Gables City Commission meeting, one that reignited questions about how much authority the mayor, as chair, has to unilaterally call recesses and whether proper parliamentary procedure was followed.
The nearly eight-hour meeting was marked by escalating arguments, personal insults among commissioners, and two hour-long recesses ordered by Lago, each of which abruptly halted proceedings and left commissioners and the public unclear about what rules were being applied and why.
Following the first recess, Lago asked Deputy City Attorney Stephanie Throckmorton to place a brief overview of the commission’s rules of debate on the record. Throckmorton emphasized that commissioners must address remarks to the chair, speak only when recognized, and refrain from interrupting one another.
“The rules of debate set forth that every commissioner desiring to speak should address the chairperson and, upon recognition, should confine discussion to the question under debate,” she said. “A member once recognized shouldn’t be interrupted unless being called to order.”
She also referenced points of order and points of personal privilege, explaining that a point of privilege may be used to request something specific, such as time to speak or a brief recess, and does not require a second. “A point of privilege is generally to ask for something specific, perhaps a time to speak, a time to get a copy of something, or a time for a brief recess -there is no second needed,” she said, although none of those parameters were present during the mayor’s two recess orders.
That uncertainty surfaced even before the first break. Commissioner Richard Lara, not Lago, offered Commissioner Melissa Castro the opportunity to apologize for referencing the mayor’s family. Lago initially allowed Castro to speak, then cut her off mid-sentence and called the recess.
After the meeting resumed, confusion continued. A dispute over sponsorship and motions led Castro to speak out of turn, prompting Lago to call a second hour-long pause. “You cannot run the meeting,” Lago told her before announcing, “Another hour.”
As the mayor left the dais, both Castro and Commissioner Ariel Fernandez attempted to adjourn the meeting. They were stopped by the city attorney, who explained that once the chair has called a recess, no motions may be made or entertained without the chair present and recognizing them.
In a statement to the Gazette, the city attorney’s office defended Lago’s actions, writing: “The City Code provides that the Mayor, as chairperson of the City Commission, has the authority to procedurally manage and administer commission meetings which, consistent with past practice, has included the ability to call for recesses.”
Fernandez says Robert’s Rules not followed; harsh words for city attorney
In an interview with the Gazette, Fernandez said the mayor and city attorney repeatedly failed to follow Robert’s Rules of Order, the parliamentary authority adopted by the city. He argued that the second recess was never formally called at all.
“If you watch the video, he never actually calls a recess,” Fernandez said. “He just says, ‘Another hour.’ The word ‘recess’ was never used. When I made a motion to adjourn, the meeting was still going, yet the city attorney said it was in recess. That shows a misunderstanding of Robert’s Rules.”
Fernandez also took issue with the handling of his attempt to raise a point of personal privilege, saying he was told he did not have standing. “My understanding of a point of personal privilege is different from how it was applied that night,” he said.
According to Fernandez, recesses were used selectively. “When the mayor didn’t like where the conversation was going, he called a recess,” he said. “But the rules only seem to matter when it’s convenient for him.”
Fernandez was also sharply critical of the city attorney, calling her role as parliamentarian a “serious problem.”
“She’s supposed to know the rules by heart,” he said. “This isn’t the first time her interpretations have shifted based on convenience.”
Fernandez added that he is still awaiting records related to the editing of the meeting video, alleging portions were cut and that a camera focused on residents rather than the full commission at times. He said those concerns, combined with the mayor’s unwillingness to sit through difficult conversations, were why he sought adjournment.
“If the chair isn’t willing to allow open dialogue, the meeting should be adjourned and continued on another date,” Fernandez said.
What does Robert’s Rules say?
Under the original version of Robert’s Rules of Order, the chair generally does not have unilateral authority to call a recess unless one is already provided for in the agenda or adopted rules. Outside of that framework, a recess is typically an action of the body, not the chair alone.
However, parliamentary expert Jim Slaughter, a past president of the American College of Parliamentary Lawyers, cautioned that Robert’s Rules rarely operate in isolation.
“Presiding officers are often able to do quite a bit if the body allows it,” Slaughter wrote in response to Gazette questions. Questioned actions, he added, usually must be challenged through a point of order or appeal so the body itself can decide. He also noted that local ordinances, state law, and established past practice may carry greater weight than Robert’s Rules alone.
A meeting marred by discord
The Jan. 13 meeting mirrored the contentious final meetings of 2025, continuing a pattern of dysfunction and procedural uncertainty on the Coral Gables dais. Media outlets across the spectrum took note, with Miami New Times questioning the editing of the meeting video and Miami Today focusing on the commission’s struggle to maintain order, issues that may resurface when commissioners reconvene.
Blogs, on both sides of the city’s political spectrum, also took aim at the meeting, often giving a timeline and play-by-play of how the meeting unfolded.
This Post Has 5 Comments
What a little baby this mayor is. When he didn’t like what Castro was saying he called for a recess. He only abides by Robert’s Rules when it’s convenient. What about him making motions or promoting items as Chair – both violations. Pathetic
Mayor Lago and his LAL voting pact (Vice Mayor Anderson and Commissioner Lara) are in total control of the City and can pass any ordinance they want to change the City Code. Robert’s Rules of Order govern Commission meetings per Section 2-77(a)(1) of the City Code. Rule 18 provides that a recess is only made per motion that is seconded and a majority vote. The rules for a motion are set forth in Section 2-81(b) of the City Code. If Mayor Lago makes a motion for recess, he must pass the gavel (no longer serve as the chair) per Section 2-78(a)(7) of the City Code. To quote Mayor Lago, “it is pretty simple” and either “you do understand or it is reckless.” Mayor Lago and his voting pact consistently show that they do not care about civility, how a meeting should be run, preserving decorum and order or complying with laws. Perhaps most disturbing and disappointing is Mayor Lago’s complete disregard of Rule 48 as to decorum of debate that prohibit him from using disorderly words that attack the personality or arraign the motives of a Commissioner or resident. He is required to keep his comments only to the question under debate – and there is NO perpetual debate about Commissioner salaries or whether he contributed his salary increase to a charity (still wondering about that). Mayor Lago recognizes that he has issues which is why he needs a minority of voters in November who do not understand his inability to run a meeting, be civil or follow the law to elect him by plurality vote based on the outrageous money he will raise from real estate developers and PACs that he will spend on his campaign smearing competitors. He is very afraid of INFORMED VOTERS – and he should be!
I have been a proprietor and resident in this city longer than most members of this dais have been alive. I first got involved in the political process during the election of the honorable and Gables favorite Dame, Dorothy Thomson, and most elections since.
I was appalled and genuinely alarmed about what I saw at the meeting on January 13, 2026. It was very discouraging. To feel the discord and deep dislike between the members of this board was sorrowful. I do not believe that you can serve this city with so much negativity and punt.
I want to make it clear that I fully support Mayor Lago and Vice Mayor Anderson. My support is not questionable. I also judge that any board meeting must carried with strict adherence to Robert’s Rule of Order. But civility is pivotal. The mayor needs to stop referring to what Commissioner Fernandez or Castro said, did or did not do, or not supported. We the voters know and we will remember all of it at the ballot box, for or against them. I also find the constant “one hour recess” a bit bullying.
Commissioner Castro interactions were infantile and immature. Very unbecoming of a lady of her stature and offensive to the residents of the city. I personally do not support her nor commissioner Fernandez. As a super voter that I am, I will remember her childish conduct and contempt at the proper time, with my vote when I get my mail in ballot, which I strongly back.
I agree with much that has been said in this last letter and want to remind other long time residents and voters of earlier, more civil times in Commission deliberations. I’ve lived here for over five decades and our government has nearly always behaved in a community minded way. In the past few years, things have changed markedly. During the tenure of the immediate past Commission, the attitude seemed to change to a more tense interaction. Three Commissioners basically took over the operation of the City with their voting block controlling much of the turmoil going on at that time, including unilateral salary raises. They voted in tandem on many crucial issues, basically holding the body as a whole from critical debate. Thankfully, one of those in control did not get realected and the control came back to the Council as a whole. This is a great improvement from the past, but there is a lot of room for improvement. I hope our governing body can get their act together to work as a team for the good of the City and its’ constituents. We deserve calm and cordial debate over the important issues facing our City related to density, scale, beauty, openness, design excellence and demeanor.
I agree with much that has been said in this last letter and want to remind other long time residents and voters of earlier, more civil times in Commission deliberations. I’ve lived here for over five decades and our government has nearly always behaved in a community minded way. In the past few years, things have changed markedly. During the tenure of the immediate past Commission, the attitude seemed to change to a more tense interaction. Three Commissioners basically took over the operation of the City with their voting block controlling much of the turmoil going on at that time, including unilateral salary raises. They voted in tandem on many crucial issues, basically holding the body as a whole from critical debate. Thankfully, one of those in control did not get realected and the control came back to the Council as a whole. This is a great improvement from the past, but there is a lot of room for improvement. I hope our governing body can get their act together to work as a team for the good of the City and its’ constituents. We deserve calm and cordial debate over the important issues facing our City related to density, scale, beauty, openness, design excellence and demeanor.