By the Coral Gables Gazette Editorial Board

If the Coral Gables Commission no longer values its boards, it should say so—then explain why.

In Coral Gables, civic service is often called an honor. But lately, it’s starting to seem more like a formality. On the morning of October 9, two advisory groups—composed of engaged residents volunteering their time—voiced a shared frustration: What’s the point of our work if no one at City Hall is listening?

Members of the Charter Review Committee arrived at City Hall expecting to evaluate proposed changes to the city’s governing document. Instead, they learned that several key charter amendments had already been placed on the ballot for a special election next April—before the committee had a chance to weigh in. Former Mayor Don Slesnick, now serving as committee chair, put it plainly: “The committee has been given a certain charge, and a lot of what is most important has been taken from us.”

Just blocks away and less than an hour earlier, members of the Parks and Recreation Board were echoing a similar concern. They had learned that a new park naming—an action historically routed through their board—had been decided by the mayor and commission without advance notice or consultation. Board Chair Kirk Menendez, attending the meeting remotely, remarked, “All of a sudden we are bypassing the rules and procedures of this board.” He emphasized his support for the honoree, erstwhile Miami Herald Publisher David Lawrence Jr., but questioned why the board’s role had been bypassed.

A consistent message is emerging across Coral Gables advisory boards: they feel unheard. Earlier this year, the Historic Preservation Board and the Parking Advisory Board both raised concerns that their recommendations were being ignored. Whether it was the replacement of City Hall’s windows, the location of the Gondola Building reconstruction, or priorities for new parking infrastructure, the pattern has become increasingly familiar: city staff and elected officials moving ahead without board input, or disregarding it altogether.

This publication called attention to the problem months ago. In a July 3 editorial, we asked why the city maintains a Planning and Zoning Board if its guidance is so frequently overridden. That question now applies to nearly every advisory body in Coral Gables.

Of course, the City Commission has every right—legally and procedurally—to accept or reject the advice of its boards. But there is a difference between oversight and dismissal. For the advisory process to have meaning, board members must be given relevant documents, included in early-stage deliberations, and invited to offer input before decisions are made. It is no longer collaborative. It is performative.

Advisory boards are essential to Coral Gables’ civic process—and their guidance deserves to be taken seriously. They are civic instruments designed to broaden perspective, tap into community expertise, and ensure that public policy is shaped not solely by politics, but by deliberation. They are, in effect, the city’s civic compass—pointing toward long-term interests that may be overlooked in the rush of day-to-day governance.

If the commission no longer believes in that model of governance, it should explain why. Don’t praise public engagement in speeches and proclamations, only to undercut it in practice. If certain boards are outdated or ineffective, make that case. But don’t pretend they matter while ignoring them behind closed doors.

There are simple ways to begin restoring trust. Include boards in early policy discussions. Share information in a timely, transparent manner. Acknowledge board input—even when diverging from it—with respect and rationale. These steps cost nothing but offer something invaluable in return: civic credibility.

The residents of Coral Gables who serve on these boards do not volunteer for prestige. They do so because they care deeply about the direction of their city. When they ask, “Are we wasting our time?” that should not be a rhetorical question. It should be a wake-up call.

Because if this city loses its advisory boards, or simply renders them irrelevant, it will have lost something far more important: its ability to govern by listening.