Miami-Dade finds $46 million for FIFA, but not $3 million to halt evictions
Mayor Daniella Levine Cava's proposed 2025-2026 budget dishonors a commitment she made in April to fully fund Miami-Dade's Eviction Diversion Program designed to help at-risk tenants facing eviction by providing free legal assistance and support.
The program aims to keep families in their homes, allowing them to relocate on their own time frame, avoid eviction judgments and prevent homelessness.
These are difficult times for residents of Miami-Dade. As faith leaders, we advocate for vulnerable residents who are already losing benefits and access to services. That's why this county program is more important than ever.
How we spend public dollars reflects our values. It is disappointing to see the county has found $46 million for FIFA, but not the full $3 million to keep residents in their homes.
The mayor had personally committed to fully fund the pilot program once again. She made the promise in person to more than 850 constituents while attending the People Acting for Community Together (PACT) Nehemiah Action Assembly, a direct action organization that hosts community assemblies where public officials are held accountable. And that's where the mayor made her promise.
But after pledging that amount three months ago, the mayor's proposed budget of $12.7 billion falls short. Funding for the program has been decreased by $1 million.
The county's Eviction Diversion Program, with its 98% success rate, offers an efficient solution to a major crisis in our housing system.
It helps fill a critical gap and protects families from displacement.
Without adequate funding, the Miami-Dade Sheriff's Office will show up to evict children, seniors and other vulnerable residents from their homes. This program is a matter of life and death for many in our community.
Not only does the Eviction Diversion Program save the county $3–$6 per dollar invested, but $3 million is the bare minimum needed. To fully fund the program, Miami-Dade would need an estimated $12.1 million.
More than 26 jurisdictions around the country already fully fund Right to Counsel programs to ensure tenants don't have to face the complicated eviction process alone.
We have all heard that Miami is ranked the most cost-burdened rental market in the country. And to make matters worse, jurisdictions across South Florida are gaining national attention for criminalizing homelessness.
Cutting this county program's funding increases the risk of homelessness while criminalizing those left behind. We are speaking out because as people of faith, we are guided by sacred texts like Deuteronomy 15:8–11, which commands us to care for those in need.
It's not too late to save lives and livelihoods. We urge Levine Cava and the county commission to honor their promise.
We ask them to restore the $3 million for the Eviction Diversion Program — and help those in need in our community.
Rev. Sherlain Stevens is the president of the People Acting for Community Together (PACT)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
6 hours ago
- Axios
Amid budget deficit, Miami activists again call for divestment of Israeli bonds
With Miami-Dade's budget season underway, calls for the county to liquidate its Israeli bonds are again ramping up. Why it matters: Activists, including members of the Break the Bonds Miami campaign, argue the county is sending resident taxpayer dollars to support an ongoing war and what critics describe as genocide. Continuing such investments, they argue, is not only immoral but a poor economic decision. Last month, Moody's maintained its rating and negative outlook for Israel bonds, Reuters reported. Catch up quick: The county began investing in Israeli bonds in 2016, after it amended its policies to allow investments in the foreign government, purchasing two bonds for a combined $50 million. Today, it has multiple bond investments totaling more than $151 million, including a $25 million bond it purchased Feb. 1. The big picture: The calls to divest come as the county weighs a budget that calls for cuts between 10% and 35% for some departments to offset a more than $400 million deficit. Activists have argued the budget gaps further underscore the need to divest from what they say is an irresponsible and immoral investment and reinvest in county programs. The latest: During Mayor Daniella Levine Cava's first budget town hall last week, community members called on her to recommend that commissioners change the county's investment policy to exclude Israel and not reinvest the bonds once they mature. While commissioners approve the investment policy, the board doesn't direct which specific investments are made. What they're saying: "The purpose of our county's investments is to increase liquidity," one speaker said. "Israel bonds do the opposite." Even outside of the war against Gaza, activists claim better economic investments would be in local funds, such as housing bonds. The other side: At the hearing, Levine Cava touted the county's 2023 investment and said the operating budget and investment portfolio were separate funds, according to multiple people at the meeting.
Newsweek
20 hours ago
- Newsweek
Democrat Edges Out Incumbent Florida Republican in New Poll
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new poll from Kaplan Strategies regarding Florida's 27th Congressional District showed GOP Representative Maria Elvira Salazar trailing a potential Democratic rival ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Why It Matters Democrats are hoping to retake control of the U.S. House of Representatives in next year's midterm elections. Historically, the party outside of the White House performs well in the midterms, fueling Democratic optimism about a 2018-style blue wave. Florida's 27th Congressional District, which Salazar represents, has not been viewed as particularly competitive, but the latest survey of the race suggests Miami Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava could put the congresswoman in a close race if she chooses to run. The district contains areas around Miami. It's one of the heavily Latino districts that has shifted rightward in recent elections. Democrats' performance in the district and others like it will be a key test about whether they are able to win back support from Latino voters who once backed Democrats but supported President Donald Trump last November. What To Know The Kaplan Strategies poll published on Monday showed Levine Cava with an early, but narrow, lead over Salazar. Forty-four percent of respondents said they would back Levine Cava, while 42 percent said they plan to cast their ballot for Salazar, according to the poll. Meanwhile, 14 percent remained undecided. Newsweek reached out to Salazar and Levine Cava's offices for comment via email. Salazar polled better against other potential Democrats. Against former Key Biscayne Mayor Mike Davey, Salazar led by seven points (45 to 38 percent). She led Democrat Alexander Fornino by 10 points (45 to 35 percent) and businessman Richard Lamondin by 11 points (45 to 34 percent). The poll surveyed 804 likely general election voters in July and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) lists FL-27 as one of its red-to-blue "districts in play," but forecasters view Republicans as the favorites. Both the Cook Political Report and Sabato's Crystal Ball view the race as being "Safe Republican." Trump carried the seat by about 15 points last November, while Salazar won reelection by about 20 points. The district was more competitive in 2020, with Trump carrying it by less than a point over former President Joe Biden. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also handily carried the seat in 2016. Salazar has faced criticism from conservatives for embracing a more moderate, bipartisan approach to immigration issues than many in the party. She introduced the Dignity Act, which would provide an "updated compromise" addressing legal status and protections for undocumented immigrants, border security, asylum reform, and visa reform in July, drawing scrutiny from immigration hardliners like Steve Bannon. How competitive the district becomes could also depend on whether Florida redraws its congressional map ahead of the midterms. Some Republicans want to draw out some South Florida Democrats, but doing so could mean giving Republican incumbents like Salazar some more Democratic voters. Representative Maria Elvira Salazar, a Florida Republican, speaks at the Latino Wall Street CPAC Latino Conference in Hollywood, Florida, on June 28. Representative Maria Elvira Salazar, a Florida Republican, speaks at the Latino Wall Street CPAC Latino Conference in Hollywood, Florida, on June Latino Wall Street What People Are Saying Doug Kaplan wrote in the polling memo reported by Florida Politics: "This polling suggests national and local operatives should take Florida CD 27 seriously as a competitive swing district, especially given the underlying issues driving voter decisions: inflation, immigration, and crime." Representative Maria Elvira Salazar previously told Newsweek: "Since I come from the Hispanic community, and my district understands very well what this topic is about, I found something that is right in the middle, that can satisfy both sides of the aisle — and that's called dignity. What Happens Next? Levine Cava has not said for sure she plans to challenge Salazar next November. She has also been floated as a potential gubernatorial candidate.
Business Wire
a day ago
- Business Wire
Class Action Against FIFA and EU Football Associations on Behalf of Football Players Launched Today by 'Justice for Players', a Dutch Foundation
AMSTERDAM--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Justice for Players Foundation ('JfP'), a Dutch Foundation has today launched a class action on behalf of professional football players who have been affected by the FIFA Regulations. The claim against FIFA and several national football associations, including the KNVB, the Football Association of the Netherlands, will be filed at the District Court of Midden-Nederland. JfP intends to represent all professional footballers who are playing or who have played in clubs in the European member states and the United Kingdom and who have been adversely affected by FIFA's unlawful rules from 2002 to the present. Preliminary estimates indicate that the number of affected footballers may comprise approximately 100,000 players. This case is being brought in the Netherlands under the Dutch Act on the Settlement of Mass Damages in Collective Action (WAMCA), which allows this legal action to be launched by JfP on behalf of a large group of professional footballers. The case has been launched following the CJEU judgment in October 2024 in the case brought by football player Lassana Diarra and FIFPRO Europe/FIFPRO World against FIFA, which found that the FIFA Regulations seriously infringed EU competition law and the right to free movement of workers, making it extremely challenging for a player to terminate their employment contract without just cause. In short, the CJEU ruled that the FIFA Regulations violated two core principles of European law: free movement of workers and fair competition. By stating unequivocally that FIFA's rules were unlawful and that those rules caused all players to suffer a financial loss, the CJEU in its judgement gave the green light to a Europe-wide class action. This is a classic follow-on claim, in line with the EU Representative Action Directive, that seeks to ensure that the rule of law is upheld, that FIFA is held to account and that all players receive the compensation that is owed to them. In particular, the CJEU noted that the FIFA Regulations had the effect of restricting the free movement of workers and competition by: establishing unlawful criteria for determining the severance 'compensation' a player must pay to their former club; allowing the national federation of the former club to withhold the issuance of an International Transfer Certificate (ITC), without which a player cannot play for a new club; making the player's new club automatically jointly and severally liable for the compensation to be paid to the former club and allowing FIFA to impose disciplinary sanctions on the player and their new club. The unlawful FIFA Regulations granted FIFA complete control over how and when players leave their current football clubs and under what conditions, effectively enforcing an extremely restrictive 'no-poaching agreement'. A preliminary analysis by economists at Compass Lexecon has estimated that affected professional footballers have earned approximately 8% less over the course of their career than they would have if the FIFA Regulations had not been unlawfully restrictive. Lucia Melcherts, Chair of the Board Member of Justice for Players, said: ' All professional football players have lost a significant amount of earnings due to the unlawful FIFA Regulations. 'Justice for Players' is bringing this claim to help achieve justice for footballers and fairness. The past and even current system unduly favours FIFA who has far too much unilateral power. In any other profession, people are allowed to change jobs voluntarily. The same should be true in football, particularly as the average career span of a professional footballer according to a FIFPro study is only 8 years long.' Franco Baldini, Board Member of Justice for Players, said: ' As a former professional footballer, agent and someone who has worked in football in various managerial capacities, I have had first hand experience, in particular with the Mexes case in 2004, of how much control and power FIFA has over the players. So I am very proud to be part of the Foundation 'Justice for Players' and to be part of something that could help change the existing system and make football more inclusive and more sustainable. ' Dolf Segaar, Board Member for Justice for Players said: ' This claim against FIFA brought by 'Justice for Players' is an important and necessary next step that will allow footballers to assert their rights as EU workers and receive compensation from an organisation that for far too long has willingly ignored the rule of EU law. The CJEU ruled in a crystal-clear manner that the FIFA Rules on termination of contracts and transfer were blatant violations of EU competition law and free movement of workers. And the CJEU also made clear that such unlawful rules had caused players to suffer financial losses. Under EU law, victims of such violations are entitled to compensation for the losses they have suffered and that is an important part of what this class action is about.' Koen Rutten, Partner at Finch Dispute Resolution, said: ' For over 20 years, FIFA has enforced unlawful rules at the expense of professional footballers. Finch is supporting 'Justice for Players' so that FIFA can be held accountable and ordered to compensate footballers whose earnings have been impacted by these unfair and illegal rules. Not only are we seeking damages for footballers who have been disadvantaged by the rules that mainly benefit FIFA and the football associations, but through this legal action we are seeking changes to the FIFA Rules so that professional players can finally have greater control over their careers.' For further information please visit: Notes to Editors About Justice for Players Justice for Players was founded to advocate for the interests of professional footballers across Europe. The board comprises of three members: Lucia Melcherts, Dolf Segaar and Franco Baldini. Lucia Melcherts has been the chair of Stichting Massaschade & Consument (Foundation for Mass Damages & Consumers) since 2021. She also holds the position of Coordinating Specialist Advisor at the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security. Dolf Segaar founded his own law firm Segaar Law in July 2021, specialising in governance and litigation, with a strong focus on sports law. Franco Baldini is a former professional footballer and agent and spent over 20 years in different senior management roles at top international clubs and organizations, including AS Roma, Real Madrid, Tottenham Hotspur and the England National Team. He currently runs his own consulting firm IC20 Ltd. About Finch Finch Dispute Resolution is an independent Dutch litigation boutique law firm, founded in 2022. With a team of around 18 specialised litigators and 5 partners based in Utrecht, the firm handles corporate, commercial, financial, and class-action disputes—domestically and internationally. About Dupont-Hissel Jean-Louis DUPONT and Martin HISSEL are specialists in European law, particularly as applied to the sports sector. Together they have defended hundreds of cases, acting on behalf of all stakeholders in the professional sports sector, before the CJEU, the European Commission, the European Court of Human Rights, national competition authorities, national courts, international (including CAS) and national arbitration tribunals, and the internal judicial bodies of national and international sports associations. In particular, they have led and co-managed cases that resulted in landmark judgements of the CJEU regarding sports governance in the EU and beyond: Bosman (1995), Meca-Medina (2006), Royal Antwerp FC (2023), European Super League (2023), Lassana Diarra (2024) and RFC Seraing (2025). About Deminor Founded in 1990, Deminor is a leading international litigation funder with offices in Brussels, London, Hamburg, New York, Hong Kong, Madrid, Milan, Stockholm and Luxembourg. Combining skill sets from 19 different nationalities and 22 languages, Deminor possesses a highly respected and diverse team of legal and financial specialists across a range of specialisms including arbitration, enforcement, intellectual property, competition, investments & tax, corporate & post-M&A.
