LTC 127-2010 Noise Report: July-September, 2009 Quarter 3-09m MIAMIBEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NO. LTC # 127-2010
LETTER TO COMMISSION
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the Cit ommission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager /~'"~"
DATE: April 26, 2010
SUBJECT: Noise Report: July -September, 2 (Quarter 3-09)
This Letter to Commission is intended to provide the quarterly report on the implementation of the City's
Noise Ordinance, as amended in July, 2008, and as required pursuant to the Administrative Guidelines
adopted via resolution on that date. Data for noise reports is collected by calendar year quarters, and
includes information as required by the Administrative Guidelines as approved on October 7, 2008. This
report includes data from July through September, 2009 (Q3-09).
Historically, commercial noise has been the main concern and was the impetus for revisions to the noise
ordinance. Beginning with this report and moving forward, the quarterly report will continue to include
data on all cases (commercial, residential and other), but the summary will focus on commercial cases.
All of the reporting data required by the Administrative Guidelines is presented in table form in
Aftachmenf A for commercial cases, and in Attachment B for all cases. Additional data has also been
included to provide further information in some areas, as has been requested. Comparable data for
commercial cases is available back to and including Q4-07 and is utilized in this report as appropriate.
Prior to October, 2007, the classification of cases as commercial versus residential was not consistent
enough to provide comparables. For example, prior to October, 2007, cases were grouped as
commercial or residential, with nosub-categories. In spot reviews of case files, itwas noted that in some
cases for apartments were listed as commercial instead of residential. It would require a manual review
of case notes for cases prior to October 2007 to determine if cases were properly classified as
residential or commercial. Since October, 2007, the same criteria for commercial cases have been
utilized, providing us with a good indication of trends relating to commercial noise complaints.
4(l/HK / CK 3/ JUIV'JCp[6I--UCI, LVV.7 - vv[rnncR wr~~ ~ww~. ~.r+JLJ
Complaint/violations history for Q3-09:
Quarter three is historically the lowest quarter of the year for the total number of noise complaints
opened and that held true through this reporting quarter. For the reporting period of July 1, 2009 to
September 30, 2009, the Division opened a total of 599 noise cases. Eleven of the cases were voided.
Of the 588 cases with dispositions, 36 of those calls were cancelled by the complainant; as such, their
disposition is "cancelled." Since those 36 cases had a disposition of "cancelled," that leaves 552 cases
where the disposition was valid/non-valid.
The following chart demonstrates the current trends of cases opened, by quarter, since the noise
ordinance was approved (total number of cases opened reflects the 11 cases subsequently voided). As
you will note, Q3-09 is following previous trends as being the calendar quarter with the fewest cases
opened, and reflects fewer cases opened than in the same quarter in 2008 (632), and is the third lowest
quarter since Q2/06 when noise reporting began.
Page 2 of 5
Noise report -Quarter 3, 2009
Total Cases Opened (by Quarter)
1200 I 1089
1100
1072
1000 j
900 873
800 '
700
600 '
500
400
300
200 `-
Q1
662
784
637
Q2
1000
739 t 2008'
632
726 f 2007
599 -~ 2008
485 f 2009
434
Q3 Q4
Commercial vs. Residential and Other Cases
For purposes of this report, residential cases are those cases of noise occurring in a single family home,
condo or apartment and commercial cases are those occurring in a Hotel, bar, restaurant, retail,
condo/hotel, or club. "Other" cases are those that do not fall into one of those categories, such as public
parks, public right of ways, or waterways. The majority of noise cases continue to be in residential
areas. The total number of noise cases opened in residential areas this quarter was 339, or 61.4%, of
the 552 valid/non-valid noise cases opened.
TOTAL CASES Residential vs. Commercial (Valid /Non-Valid)
OF TOTAL CASES
RESIDENTIAL 339 61.4%
COMMERCIAL 118 21.4%
OTHER 95 17.2%
TOTAL 552
Commercial Noise Cases:
In 03/09, Commercial cases accounted for 118 of these remaining 552 cases opened (21 % of all noise
cases opened). This is the fewest numberof commercial noise cases opened since Q4/07. Complaints
were received for 116 of those commercial noise cases and two cases were opened as a result of
officers witnessing a violation while on patrol. As noted in the following chart, during the same quarter
last year (03-08), there were 133 commercial noise cases, while for the last quarter (02-09) there were
141 commercial noise cases.
Page 3 of 5
Noise report- Quarter 3, 2009
aoo
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 _. _ - - __. - ____
D4-2007 Qi-2008 Q2-2008 Q3-2008 Q4-2008 Q1-2009 D2-2009 Q3.2009
Cases by Establishment Type:
Of commercial establishments, hotels continue to have the most noise cases opened, with 35.6% of all
of the commercial cases opened (42 of 118); 12 of those cases were deemed valid (29%). The second
highest number of commercial cases opened was for restaurants (31 of 118); 6 of those cases were
deemed valid. The following chart demonstrates the breakdown between establishment types.
COMMERCIAL CASES Q3/09 BY TYPE
Retail, 5.1% Bar, 10.2%
Restaurant, 26.3%
Hotel-Condo, 12.7% Hotel, 35.6%
Club, 10.2%
Cases by Noise Type:
Loud Music remains the primary reason for noise calls, with 84% of ALL noise cases opened the result
of loud music complaints; that number is higher, 89%, for commercial only noise cases.
Valid vs. non-valid
As previously noted in other reports, valid cases are those cases whereby "noise" meeting the definition
of the noise ordinance is occurring at the time of a Code Compliance Officer's (or Police Officer's)
arrival. Anon-valid case disposition is not intended to demonstrate that noise did not occur, only that
COMMERCIAL CASES OPENED BY QUARTER (SINCE Q4/07)
Page 4 of 5
Noise report -Quarter 3, 2009
noise meeting the standard of the ordinance, and thus a valid violation, was not occurring and could not
be witnessed by the Code Compliance Officer (or Police Officer) as would be necessary for a violation
to be issued.
Of the 118 commercial cases, 23 (19%) of those were deemed valid and 95 (81 %) were closed as non-
valid. Of the 23 valid cases 2 resulted in verbal warnings, 10 or the cases resulted in a written warning
and 11 were violations that carry fines. As can be seen in the chart below reflecting what percentage of
commercial cases is valid vs. non-valid, the percentage of valid cases this quarter is lower than the
previous quarter.
As requested by the stakeholders, a chart depicting "reasons why non-valid" has been added to the
report. These reasons have been used by code officers to explain why the non-valid disposition was
concluded. This chart no longer includes cancelled cases, as that has been added as a separate
disposition, along with valid and non-valid. This chart depicting the reasons why cases were closed
non-valid for commercial cases is attached as Attachment C.
Time to arrive
Data on "time to arrive" is compiled to assist in determining whether the time between the receipt of a
complaint by dispatch and the arrival of a Code Compliance Officer may affect the percentage of cases
closed asnon-valid. Of particular interest is whether traffic congestion or multiple calls for various code-
related issues may also affect the arrival time at the location of the reported violation, which may
determine whether noise that would constitute a violation is still occurring at the officer's time of arrival.
The numbers below are for commercial cases and reflect that the time of arrival was actually longer for
cases deemed valid. During this quarter, the time from when a call was received by dispatch and the
time the code officer arrived at the location of the complaint for a commercial case averaged 22:39 for
valid cases, and 20:34 for cases deemed "non-valid."
Major Event Periods /Special Events/Special Circumstances
There were no major events during this reporting period. However, there was a special circumstance in
the form of an ongoing union protest on public property. There were 49 noise complaints for these
protests and 6 were deemed valid. These cases were categorized as "other" as opposed to residential
or commercial since they occurred on public property.
Page 5 of 5
Noise report -Quarter 3, 2009
Another special circumstance was a noise issue with Monument Island. Eleven complaints were
received regarding loud music from boats or from people on the island itself. One was deemed valid.
These cases were also categorized as "other".
Anonymous vs. Known-complainant(s)
The report captures whether or not a complainant was anonymous or identified themselves. However,
we have found that even on occasions where the complainant is anonymous when the call is made to
the dispatcher, the complainant will often speak with the code compliance officer on site. There were 58
anonymous commercial complaints, 2 anonymous complaints with contact made on site and 56 cases
with contact information provided. The anonymous complaints represent 49.2% of total commercial
cases and represent 53.7% of all commercial non valid cases
Time/date of violation
As noted in the attachment, fewer commercial cases were opened for noise occurring from 7a to 11 p
(44.9 % of all commercial valid/non-valid cases), than from 11 p to 7a (55.1 %). The most number of
cases were opened on Sundays in the quarter (24%).
Totals lam - 11pm 11p - 7a
Valid 23 12 11
Commercial
Non-Valid
95
41
54
Appeals
Twelve appeals were filed for violations issued during this reporting period. Five were commercial
cases and two were residential. Five were classified as "other" and all five of those were from the
Carpenter's Union protests at the Loew's Hotel. The outcome is reflected in Attachment D, along with
updates that occurred this quarter on appeals filed previously.
RECOMMENDATIONSIISSUES/CONCLUSION:
The quarter reflects the third lowest number of noise cases opened since the adoption of the new noise
ordinance. As in previous quarters, residential noise cases continue to represent the largest percentage
of cases opened, with hotel noise cases representing the largest number of commercial noise cases
opened. The quarter also had a lower rate of valid closures as compared to previous quarters. The
percentage of valid/non-valid varies between residential and commercial cases, with a higher
percentage of valid case dispositions for commercial cases.
This quarter included two unique circumstances that added additional noise complaints listed under
"Other." These two unique circumstances (Carpenter Union Protest and Monument Island noise)
represent 60 noise cases opened and listed under "other."
ATTACHMENTS
JMG/HMF/gt
Q
Z
W
U
ti
Q
.~
N
M
O~
Q
N
O
M
61
O
O
0
N
r
O_
ti
f6
a~
f6
D
W
Q
U
W
~_
Z
J
U
CW
LC
G
0
U
Q
Z
N I ~ I ~
II
d
Ul ~
v m U
U a
H ~
~ a m
U ~ ~
C
a ~
~ Z Z
a
e
m
a
0
ti
m
U v
v
c ? to
m ~
6 N
E ~
0
U
0
a
O ~p
d W
~ ~ N
O
U 'c
N
N
d
J
v
.~
c
O
Z
v
c
m
y T aD
~~ C
~ O
d
U
O
F-
0 0 0 0 g o e
m ~ ° co ° ~ aD
,~
.
~
O
2
o
O ~n
~ in
N
M o ~n
M~
0 0 0 0 0 o e
r N O 0 0 N~
a
N M O (O O N N
9
~ o 0 0 0 o a
O O t7 N ~ M
O
0
N
A
O N
~ ~ N M O V~
r
r
ti
a
O
V
°
J J
o
z
2
rn O Q ~
~
Q W
R p Z I
-- ~
Q J O w w 0
~ ¢] U U ~ ~ 2
r
L
a
I
.,
E
F
0 0 0 0 o o
~ ~ o o ~ o o~
n
.
~
c
O
Z
~ m o o r o o~
0 0 0 0 o o
m
v
.~ N O O N 0 0~
N ~ O O N O O N
5
0
r
~
o
e
o
o
o
o
O ~ M O O N O O
0
N
g
O
V
O
O
W
0
0~
O
w
m
F
~ w
d
.~-'
Z
Z
`"
Z U ~ p c~ o
r Q
N w p O U U
7
~ H
z C7
z Z
p a' C7
z
p W Y 3 ~ W Y
~ p W ~ O Z = Z
p
J >
~ Q
m ~
U O
U ~
O O
S
~~
O L Y
O O d
N m 3
~ ° o 0 0 0 0 o m m
C
~ Q
~ .Q, r m ~
N O
N Q
N L
U T
U O~ C
O
°
° o
O
°
° 0
r 0
M 0
~IJ o a
o 0
~a
0 ~
O o
o
co 0
r
co 0
~
r 0
M
co 0
N
~n 0
~
r o e
o n
M ~n
at ~
~°'
c in <o Q r Q E
~°'
c
3
_a 3
0 _a
0
' ~ ~ o
~
c
. o
M 0
O 0
N 0
Q 0
N 0
~(J o e
N N
W
O
~
O
N
M
M
N ~
N
L
m
N
f0
~fJ
O
N
r N
3 N M r fD ~IJ r M h r ,
,,,
O
p~
C
O
O
,r
~ ~C
0
a ~
~
;
rn
M
m
r
"~
~
rn ~ °
o
O o
o
°
O 0
M 0
r o
~n a o
o N ° 0
o 0
M 0
~n 0
M 0
Q 0
~n 0 0
o M
o. ~ M N N (O N Q M N M Q N r O
a a
m
n m
n
0
r 0
0 0
~(l
N 0
(O
M 0
N
Q 0
to
N o e
O
c0
~
Q
N
~
O
~
Q
.-
M
N
t0
~
N
M
00
N
O
Q
Q Q
a
m
n
M
N
N
Q
N
p
O
N
m
O
O
0
M
0
O
0
r
0
N
0
(O
M
M
M
0
m
0
~
0
Q
M A N A N N
A A
f H
p r N O ~ N N N W N N O M r Q N N O M W CO N O
N M
N N
Of
f
N V+ ~
w N m
II
I
~
~
F
i
i
1
m
m
^
J
m
~ m a ~ a -moo m ~ 10 -moo c N ° m > ~ ° d -moN -moo` m
a ~ ~ j ~ j ~ J O N ~ j ~ ] ~ Z C ~ ~ ] ~ c ~
~ o a °
O o o a
d O
m m W
~
o N
r
o
0
U
v_
.
~
c
O
2~
N
N
~
O
O
0 0 0 0 0 0
0
O N O N O O
• N
m
m
U
9
.
~
N r o Q o N
o ° 0 0
~ N ~ O M
VI
d
N
N
U
m
O
F
~ N N ~ O M
N
~
l0 ~
C
m
L U
m
~ ~
a`
~ m o
U c
o
v ~ t
. ry
iJ 3 E
U y
~ N
E O
U
a
~
~
~
C
O
C
O
~
C O
Z
0 t0
~
~
~~ O
H c
Q c
Q 0
U Z ~
Q1 ~
O
O
M
M
01
O
O
N
O
(n M
W 01
~ O
a ' a
~
U _
= '°
~ `° n
O
J N U O
Q ~
r
O ~ c a
y
O ' n i0 u ~
E v v
w U ~
f~
~ a
a
d
° '
y
.O ° <
m '«
Z ~ o -
U
N
r
«
~
N [O
N O N
O O.
H ~
~ a y
~ 9 N
~
J
> U
a
m
d
O
N N
F
U
O
y
c
0
0
N
D
3
N
d
N
N
U
N
O
ti
m
h
m
U
a
O
Z
a
G
m
a
m
1~-
O
U
C
U
G
U
~ m
N ~
~ C
n°
Ua
i a
o a
2 c
.u
°' v
2 m
3 C
U
m
m m
u E
m ~,
~ O
~ t
UO
0
H v
m w
~ d
o
0
o
a
°
0
0
0
°
a o
m
~ c '^
V r
m m
m u
r »
m °
° m
r r
m
m °
° a
~ m
U u
a as
C `o
Z N
E u°1i
cNO
O
m
rn
m
~n
~
v
M
N
m
~n
N
m
o ~
(")
~
~U ~
Z
0
v a
~O~EEI N
.a d
c~
o
n
0
r
0
~n
0
r
0
o
0
e
0
'
0
rn
o
o
e o
rn m
~ u U ~ N ~ N N ~
u
a i
j `v v
E i0 N N m m O ~ N m ° N m
2 O
~ C
y ~ O
Or w Z
~ ry .~ a \° \° o \° a ° 0 0 0
w dUaj ~ N N ~' n m ~ m ~ m
U Q
`
~ w
j
a -
o w W
`v a
F D~ U p 9
m m N
~ N
~ ~ ~(J
~ V OI (7 m V ~
n
~ U m z
z o ~ ~ ~
ti
W
H
Z
O ~
N O p W W a J J
m 0 0 0 O
a 0 0 ~ ~
~ a o v o a O ee
~
U
a °m ~ ° m pm ° ° m
c
0
z
m
c~
o
p
~
o
o v
y e
m o
~ 0
O 0
~ 0
~ 0
0 0 0
0 m
~ ~
~ ~ N
w
~
~
O
t0
(D
O
O ~
m 0
o
O 0
m
m
~
o 0
0
O
~
p
O
~
M
0 N
0~
m
H
Z
Z
Q
C7
w Z
O
U
~
U
y
o. ~
p ~
F p
O O
Z ~ ~
F
w ~
p Z
W Z
Y p
~ ~
~ ~
W ?
Y
y
'o O
o w
? ~
a O
~ z
o =
~ Z
o
Z ~ W ~] U U O =
o c „
v o 0
m~L TY
~ d 9
C
`
M
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
~
3
N O m N K ~
m ~ u s o
z
a ° 0
z
a
c r'
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
z o
z
m
c
3
O
o
O
~O
e
N
h
o
N
V
v
tD
e
M
~O
o
m
O
0 o
V
N N m
c
~+
O
a
F
o
M
M
0
LL'1
N
o
O
1~
v
<O
e
m
N
o o
O V
V N m
E
E
O
o
01
O
0
(O
O
0
O
O
0
01
~
0
M
t0
o
ro
~(J
v
O
N
o
O
h
c_ ~ c ~ E
m
`o ` `o ~ a c
~ E ~ E ~ o
4 N
M N
N N
N M
V 1~
i0 V
F t0 m
N H
6
~
N
~
1~ ~
~ V
~ M
M< W r
N O
N V
N t0
M t0
O O
tD OJ
~
H
~ O
a
O o
OJ 0
W 0
T 0
I~ o
N v
(O 0 a
1 o
OI 0
n o
h a
O o
A 0
N o a
O 1
0 Q o
~ 0
V 0
<O o a
1~ o
N 0
O 0
O
d V V ~ M M < 1~ R d N t0 r M M V tD V d O O h < M V OJ h
Q
~ ~
~ z
O r
N
O
N
V
M
OJ
N
V
M
M
N
M
OJ
M
H
N
O
M
M
1~
O
~
N
~~ z
OI
(O
~-
M
N
N
f`
N
M
V
n
N
H
J
1
0 0 o e e e o D o e ° 0
O 0
F 0
N o
O v o
N 0
M 0
(O 0
N 0
QI
O
~ M ~
~ M t0
A M
N O
N O r Q ~
~ N N N ro ~ ~ N
H O H
M
4n N
O m
In ~
1~
m N
'- O ~
~ 1 [l
n r t0 O O m V
N O O
N f
O (O
O (O
CJ N
4]
(O M
r ~
i O~
m ~
a
N N
N
~ N
~ r
N
N
a
N N
a
N
~ N
a
N
s
E
~
o
o
c
d N
w
°
o
m
<°
o
a
~
c
~ N
° N
n
' T
m
~ ~
~
o ` N
o
~
c
°'
9
r
° N
p T
m
~
~ ~
F 3 r
r- ~i m
v, ~
u~ ~ r ~ L
r °
~ m
~n ~n ~ r ~ F -
ii m
m ~
ATTACHMENT C
/oN ~ /e a/9~pna
Wd~l ~a,,, . N o
ssi epos
a~~ssaok ~
as/oN~~~pn~
J
,,blb
O as~ON
J
Q
~ ssa°oyapoo
~ s
W sao°b
Q /U~U~~,
/e,~/JJ/o
a
o
Z Pa
a
°
ou
MO/ as/oN
io/S W
O
Z
= s~ylol
fn C~~C •~8
S~
O
Q fib/ ~~
Sb~
Ol~y~,
ON0
W N
6
N
Flo
0
0
N
R
d
L
N
10
3
d
h
R
U
d
C
0
ATTACHMENT D
Date of Special
Master Case Code Case
Address
Name
Status
Violation Number Number
12/07/2008 JC09000333 CE09001609 224 Meridian Ave Jairo Franco Adjudicated guilty of 2nd offense, fine of $1,000 to be paid by
6/12/09 (fine not paid)
01/25/2009 JC09000365 CE09002634 960 Ocean Dr SOBE USA LLC 3/12/09 - SM Adjudicated guilty of 3rd offense, payment of fine
dba Ocean's Ten $2,000 is stayed for 30 days to allow petitioner to appeal this order.
(4/10/09 Notice of appeal filed) [Fine of $2,000 paid 11/17/09]
02/20/2009 JC09000493 CE09003357 1144 Ocean Dr Hotel Victor SM scheduled for 4/24/09 (4/24/09 joint motion to continue is
granted)(?/30/09 Nolle Prosse by Debbie Turner)
03/14/2009 JC0900495 CE09003925 323 23rd St Acqua LLC SM scheduled for 5/14/09, continued to 6/25/09.) 6/25/09 vio
proven, adjudicated guilty of 2nd offense. (7/6/09 Motion for
reconsideration and rehearing filed. Motion denied on 7/10/09.
Fine of $2,000 not et aid)
03/21/2009 JC09000554 CE09004144 323 23rd St Acqua LLC dba SM scheduled for 5/14/09, continued to 6/25/09.) 6/25/09 vio
Rain proven, adjudicated guilty of 3rd offense. (7/6/09 Motion for
reconsideration and rehearing filed. Motion denied on 7/10/09.
(Fine of $2,000 not yet paid)
03/25/2009 JC09000590 CE09004241 1235 Washington Star Island SM scheduled 5/14/09, continued to 6/11/09. Petitioner and
Ave Entertainment respondant shall submit a memo outlining their respective position
by 6/22/09.
04/26/2009 JC09000738 CE09005361 100 Lincoln Road Brian Wilson 6/11/09-Matter scheduled for 6pm. No one present at 8:06pm.
Petitioner's request to appeal the vio is denied. Petitioner is
adjudicated guilty of 2nd offense. (Payment $1,000 received
7/7/09
05/02/2009 JC09000740 CE09005627 1100 West Ave Morgan Hotel 6/11/09 continued to 7/9/09 to allow Petitioner and respondent to
Group, dba reach global setlement agreement. 7/9/09 consent order
Mondrian submitted, appeal granted and 2nd offense noise violation is
dismissed with re'udice. No fine
04/04/2009 JC09000911 CE09004617 1100 West Ave Mondrian South 7/9/09 consent order submitted. Appeal denied.
Beach
05/09/2009 JC09000912 CE09005905 928 Euclid Ave Eirelan Manning NOT TIMELY. Snolle Prosse by Alek Boksner at hearing. Viola fee
refunded at hearing 8/13/09
06/14/2009 JC09000913 CE09007280 1801 Collins Ave Shelborne Beach 9/24/09 -Agreed Order -Petitioner's appeal of
Resort CE09007280/JC09000913denled as to the 1st offense violation
issued 6/14/09, and the written warinding dated 3/29/09. The $75
a eal fee shall be returned.
06/21/2009 JC09000968 CE09007532 1801 Collins Ave Shelborne Beach 9/24/09 Special Master Hearing -Agreed Order -Petitioner's
Resort appeal of underlying Code Violation CE09007532/JC090000968 is
granted as to the 2nd offense dated 6/21/09. Code violation
CE09007532/JC090000968 is dismissed with predjudice. The $75
appeal fe
07/12/2009 JC09000966 CE09008099 912 71st Street Mediterraneo Azul 9/24/09 City's request for continuance granted to 10/22/09.
Inn 10/22/09 scheduled for 6pm, no one present at 7pm. 10/29/09
Owner requested new hearing claims was not given notice of
hearing until after hearing date. Scheduled for new hearing on
12/10/09.
07/24/2009 JC09000970 CE09008493 1200 Washington Tuto Pazzo dba 9/24/09 Special Master Hearing -Appeal filed 1 day late -
Ave Hed Kandi Lounge determination of timeliness - No Service 10/22/09 Special
Master Hearing, Appeal filed 1 day late -determination of
timeliness - No Service
08/01 /2009 JC09000971 CE09008701 323 23rd Street Aqua LLC dba 9/24/09 Special Master Hearing -City will submit Order for Special
Rain Master si nature.
08/23/2009 JC09001047 CE09009228 2377 Collins Ave WSA South Beach 10/8/09 Hearing canceled. 11/12/09 Rescheduled for 01/14/2010
LLC
09/10/2009 JC09001175 CE09009695 1720 Collins Ave Catalina Dorset 10/8/09 Hearing canceled. 11/12/09 Appeal withdrawn.
LLC
09/22/2009 JC10000016 CE09009973 540 West Ave Grant Nachman 11/12/09 Petitioner adjudicated guilty of 1st offense. Fine to be
aid b 11/23/09
09/27/2009 JC10000064 CE09010067 8060 Hawthorne Marlene Gonzalez Scheduled for hearing 12/10/09
Ave
ATTACHMENT D
Date of Special
Master Case Code Case
Address
Name
Status
Violation Number Number
07/01/2009 JC09000965 CE09007837 11/13/2009 Special Master Hearing Citation/Violation #
CE09007793 (Written Warning),
CE09007837 (1st Offense),
CE09005829 (2nd Offense),
CE09008642 (3rd Offense),
CE09009403 (4th Offense), and
CE09009754 (5th Offense)
Description: Notice of Violation and Fines issued to Florida
07/26/2009 JC09000967 CE09008529 Carpenters Regional Council
Address: 1601 COLLINS AV MBCH
After hearing testimony and viewing evidence presented in the
above-stated cause, a ruling in favor of the Respondent is made.
ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
08/29/2009 JC09001041 CE09009403 1. The Written Warning issued under Case Number CE09007793
was proven through clear and convincing evidence to be valid.
1601 Collins Florida
' 2. The Notice of Violation and Fine issued under Case Number
Avenue Carpenter
s CE09007837 was not proven through clear and convincing
Regional Council evidence. This case is dismissed.
3. The Notice of Violation and Fine issued under Case Number
CE09005829 was proven through clear and convincing evidence
07/30/2009 JC09000969 CE09008642 to
be valid. Petitioner is adjudicated guilty of a First Offense.
4. The Notice of Violation and Fine issued under Case Number
CE09008642 was proven through clear and convincing evidence t
be valid. Petitioner is adjudicated guilty of a Second Offense.
5. The Notice of Violation and Fine issued under Case Number
CE09009403 was proven through clear and convincing evidence t
be valid. Petitoner is adjudicated guilty of a Third Offense.
09/13/2009 JC09001169 CE09009754 6. The Notice of Violation and Fine issued under Case Number
CE09009754 was proven through clear and convincing evidence t
be valid. Petitioner is adjudicated guilty of a Fourth Offense.
7. The fines which total $6,250 shall be paid to the City of Miami
Beach by February 15, 2010.