MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS

3 April 2011
Mariano Fernandez
Director & Building Official
Building Department
City of Miami Beach
Subject: Half-Assed Compliance and Section 138-1(c) Removal of Signs
Sir:
As you know very well, our streets are plagued by scores if not hundreds of unpermitted
temporary real estate and construction signs, because the Code Compliance Division of your
Building Department does not enforce the signage code unless someone risks retaliation and
complains.
Mayor Philip Levine, when questioned at a Tuesday Breakfast Club meeting on this egregious
policy that encourages scofflaws, said that the signage laws should be enforced. However, it
appears that little or nothing has been done in that regard, as is evident by the proliferation of
unpermitted signs as well as permitted signs that do not conform to code.
City Manager Jimmy Morales and former City Manager Jorge Gonzalez have denied that they
issued any pragma to ignore unpermitted signs unless someone complains.
It appears that Section 138-11(c) authorizes you to remove unpermitted signs: The building
official may initiate proceedings that result in the removal of any sign erected or maintained
without a permit.
The gross negligence of the city manager and compliance administrators is absolutely shameful.
Attached you will find a partial record of my communications on the subject, entitled Half-
Assed Compliance with City Code. I offer my lay opinion therein that many real estate signs on
apartments are not temporary but permanent, are often used as bait-and-switch
advertisement, hence are not permissible and should be wiped from the face of the earth until
the law is changed.
Please initiate proceedings forthwith. I know that all one has to do in South Beach is to proceed
down nearly any street to discover unpermitted signs on nearly every block. Compliance
officers pass them by regularly. If you need assistance, I shall be glad to document each one for
a fee of $25 each.
Sincerely,
David Arthur Walters


MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS


City Attorney Confirms Building Officials Discretion Over Signage

April 14, 2014
Mr. Walters:
Please be advised that Section 138-11(c) of the Miami Beach City Code merely authorizes the
building official to initiate those proceedings that would result in the removal of a sign that
was erected or maintained without a permit from the City of Miami Beach. Please be further
advised that the authority set forth in Section 138-11(c) is discretionary, and the Citys
Administration sets forth and establishes those policies and directives for the enforcement of
the Citys various codes and ordinances.
Thank you.
MIAMIBEACH
Aleksandr Boksner, Senior Assistant City Attorney
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY

Building Official's Evasive Response to Request to Remove Unpermitted Signs April 3, 2014

Mr. Walters:
There is no regulation for temporary real estate signs under the Florida Building Code which is
my responsibility. Furthermore, the Building Department has only jurisdiction in the properties
and structures between property lines. This Code Enforcement of City Ordinances and Zoning
Code is the jurisdiction of the Code Compliance Department. I will forward your concern to the
Director,
MIAMIBEACH
Mariano V. Fernandez, P.E., Director/Building Official
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, FL 33139
Tel: 305-673-7610 ext 6288/ Fax: 786-394-4455
marianofernandez@miamibeachfl.gov

MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS

Thank you very much, Mr. Mariano.
Requests to the Code Compliance Division of the Building Department to take the initiative and
enforce the code have been to no avail.
I imagined that you as the Director of the Building Department are responsible for its division,
the Code Compliance Division. The 2012-2013 Departmental Work Plan of the City of Miami
Beach states that, "The Code Compliance division was incorporated as part of the Building
Department in January 2010 in an effort to improve organizational efficiency and take
advantage of the administrative support structure in the Building Department."
I do not quite understand your statement about property lines. Temporary real estate as well as
construction signs are placed inside property lines. Perhaps City Attorney Jose Smith can clarify
Section 138 which seems to apply to signs generally.
Furthermore, I was informed during a visit to Planning that temporary construction signs are
often not permitted simply because Code Compliance does not care about them unless
someone complains, in which it is difficult to check whether they have been permitted because
no permit decals are required and Planning, I was told, "is in a mess."
In my opinion, whomever is responsible for this outrageous scoffing at the people's legislation
should be replaced by officials who have the courage to do their jobs instead of passing the
buck and shirking their official duties. I hope you can be of some assistance in that endeavor
regardless of the artificial partitions.
David Arthur Walters

Mr. Walters: the Code Enforcement is a separate department now

Mr. Fernandez: Well pardon me then for being out of date. So the untouchables are walled in
now. I wonder who sponsored that wall. I suppose the cause is lost then. I wonder what the city
attorney makes of Section 138-11(c) in respect to the duties of the Building Official.


MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS


Sample of David Muhlrads many expired permits Muhlrad was the citys first Code Compliance head

HALF-ASSED COMPLIANCE WITH CITY CODE
Why Comply With Unenforced Codes?
30 December 2013
by David Arthur Walters
MIAMI MIRROR
MIAMI BEACHThe City of Miami Beach requires each temporary real estate sign to
receive a permit. The signs must be removed within seven days from the time the premises
advertised are sold or leased. Officers of the Code Compliance Division of the Building
Department pretend to enforce the code. Code Compliance Administrator George S. Castell
interprets receive to mean that the permit, in the form of a decal, must be stuck to each sign. It
follows that any sign without a decal is not permitted until a permit decal is actually affixed to it.
It is obvious to anyone walking around South Beach that half the signs are begging to receive
permits, but the permits cannot hear their pleas. Half the signs that do have decals on them have
expired permits. A reasonable person might induce from the phenomena that the officers of the
real estate companies in obvious violation of city code, and the city officials who wink at those
obvious violations, are half-assed administrators of private or public business, and that the
appearance of impropriety without is a sign of impropriety within.
Another induction that might be made from age of the signs, and the expired dates of the permits
on some of the signs, is that the ordinance on temporary signs, many of them which are actually
permanent, was enforced only temporarily, during the latest scandal associated with the arrest of
several compliance officers by the F.B.I.
MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS

That is not to say that George Castell, for example, or his superior, Robert Santos-Alborn,
Director of the Code Compliance Division, are personally responsible for what apparently
signifies a widespread regulatory culture of noncompliance. In fact Castell, who has expressed
pride in his service as a U.S. Marine, is regarded as a faithful and honest public servant. No
doubt Castell would have everything on his watch shipshape. But he would also be good at
following orders from above. Santos-Alborn was reportedly under investigation by the F.B.I. in
regards to the quashing of citations for hotel violations, but that investigation did not bear fruit
(Miami New Times 9 April 2013). He must also be following orders. It would appear that top
city officials are responsible for the disorder by way of condonation if not actually directing it.
Castell has repeatedly referred my questions regarding the apparent moratorium on sign code
enforcement, unless someone makes a formal complaint at the risk of retaliation, to the citys
public spokesperson or spin doctor. But I prefer to have straight answers from the persons who
know exactly what they are doing and not from sophists who profess to know everything beyond
their personal experience and are bound to follow the first rule of rhetoric, to never criticize the
organization you work for. Castell does not seem to get my point that my complaint is not
against the individuals whose violations are ignored but against officials who are made to look
like ignoramuses for not taking the initiative.
I suggested to Castell on 4 December 2013 that he call David Muhlrad and prompt Muhlrad to
have someone renew the permits for his scores of temporary real estate signs, most of them
having expired July 2013. New signs for buildings he controls have no permits at all.
On 23 December 2013, I pointed out to Castell that the code he sent me (Article IV.Temporary
Signs, Section 138-135,136) regulating temporary signs for real estate signage does not even
apply to the signs realtors place in front of apartment buildings, because those signs are
permanent and not temporary signs. Most of those signs are installed on the properties
indefinitely, many of them for many years, without regard to vacancies, and often serve as bait-
and-switch advertising. That is, they are general advertising signs not specific to any particular
property. In fact, general advertising signs are prohibited by the signage code: Sec. 138-73. -
General advertising signs. No general advertising sign shall be constructed, erected, used,
operated or maintained in the city.

634 Euclid Avenue
MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS

In some instances, such as the one I wrote to your compliance officer about (see below email re
Income Real Estate sign at 634 Euclid), the realtor said he has nothing to do with the property on
which the sign is placed, that he just pays a small rental fee. Since I spoke to that realtor,
however, I was informed by a tenant residing in that property that I may have been put off
because I am an Americano, and it is a cash-and-carry rental property for paperless tenants
only. That realtor eventually placed a permit decal on the sign, now expired.
12 May 2012
Emmanuel Bastos
Code Compliance Officer II
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH
Re: 634 Euclid Avenue
. Speaking of permit numbers, as I mentioned, there is a sign in front of 634
Euclid Avenue that has been there for many years: Income Real Estate, 305-673-
9999, For Rent. The apartments there are rented primarily for cash to paperless
residents, which presented no problem to the community, but about two years ago
a criminal fringe from Guatemala and Honduras began arriving, and there were
drug issues. As I mentioned, Income Real Estate was called to see if it was
responsible, and the broker denied all connection with the property, insisting it is
a sort of come-on to induce people to call the number, and that the property owner
pays some sort of rent for the sign. So the question arises is there a permit for
that sign?

I followed up with Castell on 21 December 2013: 21 December 2013: Dear Mr. Castell, As I
mentioned on 4 December, permits for old signs on scores of properties owned or controlled by
David Muhlrad, whom I understand was our citys first Code Compliance chief, have expired,
and no permits at all have been affixed to several new signs. I suppose this is in accord with your
divisions moratorium on sign permit enforcement unless someone lodges a complaint. I am not
going to lodge complaints for what is likely to be dozens of violations, but I renew my previous
suggestion that someone give Mr. Muhlrad a call so he can have his boy obtain the necessary
permits. You might do the same with the manager of THE RESIDENCES company since many
of its permits have expired, and new signs appear to be unpermitted as per the moratorium on
enforcement. Another suggestion: amend the ordinance to authorize legal notice to be pasted in
MIAMI MIRROR TRUE REFLECTIONS

the form of a huge SIGN CODE VIOLATION sticker across the signs in violation. Best
Regards, David Arthur Walters
Theoretically, all the permanent temporary signs should come down permanently, or the real
estate management companies can employ easily available tracking systems to make sure all
temporary signs are really temporary, in compliance with code. But why should they comply
when regulators do not regulate? Answer: to appear as law abiding, well managed companies.