Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Blasting Monitoring And Advocacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Miami Lakes advisory board presses for written municipal support as pilot monitors show higher blasting readings
Summary
The Miami Lakes Advisory Board on Oct. 27 reviewed pilot-monitoring data that the board says shows higher peak readings than miner-provided monitors, discussed a likely town lawsuit, and agreed to create a simple intake form to record municipal commitments for financial, legal or public support ahead of the legislative session.
Members of the Miami Lakes Advisory Board on Oct. 27 focused the majority of their meeting on community response to quarry/mining blasting that residents say is damaging homes and infrastructure.
Rudy Blancos, Advisory Board member, outlined recent outreach and said the town attorney has retained outside counsel in Tallahassee to advise on possible legal steps. Board members discussed the possibility of a special meeting in November and said some stakeholders expect a lawsuit to be filed before the start of the legislative session in December.
The board reviewed statistics from a county pilot monitoring program that, according to members, reports peak particle velocity (PPV) readings higher than those the mining companies submit as the official, legally recognized readings. Board members noted the pilot program’s maximum reported PPV of approximately 0.76 — above the cited legal threshold of 0.5 — and said the pilot network includes multiple monitors spread around sites while miners report from a single official monitor located per statute.
Edwin, an advisory board member who presented the pilot dashboard, told the board the pilot program has recorded thousands of complaints and that the program’s readings and complaint counts provide evidence the board believes regulators should consider. Board members emphasized that the statutory approach — which relies on a single miner-provided official monitor — limits enforcement under current law.
To translate concern into action, the board agreed to develop a short intake and commitment form to offer to neighboring municipalities, chambers and elected officials. The proposed form would let a city or official check off how it will assist — for example, financial support, legal assistance, or public advocacy — and would create a record the board could publicize if an official later declines to follow through.
Board members said they have already approached Miramar and Doral informally and that Miramar has been especially active in filing complaints. The board asked staff and volunteers to circulate a draft template from chamber partners for review, to solicit signatures from elected officials and to publicize who formally commits to concrete support.
Other items included logistics for the Nov. 5 business expo (the board requested 50 double-sided flyers and determined setup needs, including locating a tablecloth/banner), Veterans Day and parade participation, and scheduling a short special-call/subcommittee meeting to finalize the pilot-program reports and the intake form. The prior meeting minutes were approved by voice vote earlier in the meeting.
The board did not take a formal vote to endorse litigation; members described steps the town attorney and outside counsel are taking and said the town itself is considering filing a suit. Members directed staff to distribute the pilot-program dashboard and draft intake form in advance of the special call so members — including Councilman Steven Herzberg if available — can provide immediate feedback.
The advisory board plans follow-up outreach to neighboring municipalities and the Greater Miami Chamber, aims to increase resident complaint filings to strengthen the record, and will reconvene by special call to finalize reports and the public commitment template.
