MIAMI, FL – In a pivotal decision just days before voters head to the polls, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Beatrice Butchko Sanchez has ruled that **Rolando Escalona residency** will remain on the ballot for the Miami Commission District 3 race. The decision comes after a legal challenge filed by his opponent, Denise Galvez Turros, which sought to disqualify Escalona based on allegations that he did not meet the district’s residency requirements. This news marks a significant development in a closely watched local election.
The Rolando Escalona Residency Challenge Unpacked
The legal battle centered on a core requirement for Miami City Commission candidates: continuous residency within their district for at least one year prior to qualifying for the election. Rolando Escalona, a restaurant manager and real estate broker, asserted he has been renting and living in an apartment within District 3 since June 2024, a timeframe that comfortably exceeds the mandated one-year period before the qualifying deadline. The importance of establishing proper Rolando Escalona residency for his candidacy was at the heart of this legal dispute.
However, Denise Galvez Turros, a fellow Republican and co-founder of “Latinas for Trump,” contested this claim. Her lawsuit argued that Escalona’s residency in District 3 was a “sham.” Galvez Turros presented evidence, including a mortgage refinance agreement signed in February 2025, which she contended showed Escalona and his wife were residing at a duplex they own in the neighboring District 4. Her legal team argued that Escalona could not simultaneously swear to his bank that his primary residence was outside the district while affirming to the city clerk that it was within, deeming this a contradiction fatal to his candidacy and raising serious questions about his Rolando Escalona residency claim.
Escalona, meanwhile, characterized the lawsuit as an “eleventh-hour” political maneuver by “longtime insiders” aiming to disrupt the democratic process. He maintained that he had always been truthful about his place of residence and his reasons for running. His defense highlighted that his previous primary residence, a duplex in West Little Havana, was drawn into District 4 due to recent redistricting, prompting his move to establish Rolando Escalona residency in District 3 to fulfill his campaign aspirations there.
Evidence Presented in Court on Rolando Escalona Residency
During a roughly three-hour hearing on Wednesday, Escalona presented a variety of documents to substantiate his claim of Rolando Escalona residency in District 3. These included his signed lease for the apartment, dated June 4, 2024, his driver’s license, a voter information card, and online purchase records for furniture and a television, all listing the District 3 apartment as his home address. His legal team, led by Juan-Carlos Planas, emphasized that Escalona had no homestead exemption on the District 4 property, differentiating his situation from other residency disputes in the Miami Commission race.
Conversely, Galvez Turros’s attorney, Reid Levin, presented documents such as Escalona’s 2024 tax return, his broker’s license, and property tax assessments, alongside the aforementioned mortgage refinance agreement from February 2025, which listed the District 4 duplex as the residence. A particular point of contention was a homestead exemption on the District 4 duplex, claimed by Escalona’s wife. Judge Butchko Sanchez noted the legal presumption that a married couple shares a residence and that only one homestead exemption is permissible per couple, questioning how the two could coexist with sworn statements pointing to different primary residences, impacting the validation of Rolando Escalona residency.
Escalona’s attorney countered that the homestead exemption issue was separate and a matter for the property appraiser to address, and that couples can maintain separate residences for political purposes. Escalona himself testified that he had indeed lived in the District 3 apartment continuously since June 2024, even while acknowledging his wife and mother were at the duplex at times. He attributed the differing addresses on some financial and business documents to honest mistakes or the complexities of updating information, especially after a significant move, all while aiming to solidify his Rolando Escalona residency status.
The Judge’s Ruling on the Rolando Escalona Residency
Ultimately, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Beatrice Butchko Sanchez found that the evidence presented by Galvez Turros was insufficient to definitively disqualify Escalona from the Miami Commission race. The judge stated that removing a candidate from the ballot with early voting already underway and Election Day imminent would create undue “confusion” and “mayhem.” She noted that to disqualify him, she would have to declare him a “liar,” and that the evidence did not reach that threshold for invalidating his Rolando Escalona residency claim.
“The court saw this lawsuit for exactly what it was, a politically motivated and orchestrated effort by the same insiders to silence voters and distort the democratic process,” Escalona stated following the ruling, calling it a “decisive victory for truth, integrity and the voters of District 3.” He reiterated his commitment to being an honest resident of District 3, emphasizing the successful defense of his Rolando Escalona residency.
Galvez Turros’s attorney, Reid Levin, acknowledged the technical win for Escalona, stating, “Mr. Escalona may have met the technical residency requirement, but only by contradicting the sworn information on his tax, mortgage, and business filings. He saved his candidacy by creating a public record of deep inconsistency and possible illegality.” The ongoing scrutiny of Rolando Escalona residency highlights the complexities of Miami’s residency requirements Miami.
The ruling means that voters in District 3 will have the final say on who represents them on the Miami Commission. This election season in Miami has seen its share of address-related scrutiny, a recurring theme in local politics where residency questions often arise. The outcome of this particular residency dispute ensures that the Rolando Escalona ballot race will proceed with both candidates on the ballot, as voters decide between them and other contenders for the seat being vacated by term-limited Commissioner Joe Carollo.
With early voting already underway, the focus now shifts back to the campaign trail, where Escalona and Galvez Turros will continue to make their case to the electorate. This news serves as a crucial update for anyone following this trending local political headline, underscoring the importance of residency laws in Miami elections and the judicial process that upholds them, particularly in relation to the Rolando Escalona residency. This Miami election news is a significant development for the district.
