Circumstances surrounding the 1997 city dissolution vote in Miami were idea
l for establishing a metropolitan government, based on arguments from the t
raditional urban politics literature. Yet it did not happen. How did the is
sue make it onto the public agenda but fail to be adopted? The author argue
s that changes in metropolitan governance need to be understood as the outc
omes of an agenda-setting process and not solely based on the distribution
of winners and losers, as suggested by the public-choice/metropolitan refor
m literature. The Miami case clearly illustrates the importance of focusing
events, a skilled policy entrepreneur, and timing of events as interest fa
des and the window of opportunity closes. It also illustrates the power of
a policy image to trigger emotional attachments that can mobilize inattenti
ve publics.