Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine sics leaal beagles on Miami Herald. He does not like criticism of his messianic mission to save the city from global warming,
Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine sics leaal beagles on Miami Herald. He does not like criticism of his messianic mission to save the city from global warming,
Miami Beach Mayor Philip Levine sics leaal beagles on Miami Herald. He does not like criticism of his messianic mission to save the city from global warming,
MIAMIBEACH
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Dive, Miami Beach, Florida 33139 ww miamibecchf.gov
RAULJ. AGUILA, City Atoney
JIMMY MORALES, City Manager
Tel: 3054673:7000, Fox: 305.673.7002
VIA: Courier / Email
May 25, 2016
Aminda Marqués Gonzalez
Executive Editor
Miami Herald
2000 NW 150th Ave
Pembroke Pines, FL 33028
rques@miamiherald.com
RE: “Miami Beach king tides flush human waste into the bay, study finds” (Article of May 16,
2016)
Dear Ms. Gonzalez:
The Mayor and City Commission of the City of Miami Beach directed us to respond to
the Herald’s damaging, misleading depiction of the City in its article of May 16, 2016, titled
above. The clear mental picture presented recklessly and incorrectly depicts vile, unsafe water
conditions surrounding the City, where swimming or other contact with the water is unsafe for
residents and visitors and thereby insinuates that the City is neglecting its environmental duties.
This letter outlines the article’s misconstructions. In short, the Herald bases sweeping
accusations upon an inadequate “study,” one that ignores deliberate, calculated observations, and
shows the City in a false light that is inaccurate and undeserved. We conclude by suggesting a
course of action for future cooperation in the interest of a just portrayal of the City.
The City’s waters remain swimmable and meet the requirements of our National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit as set forth by the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The article is an
unfair indictment of the City’s approach to combatting sea level rise, which consists of
converting an existing gravity-based drainage system to one based on pumps, By falsely
drawing a connection between pumps and levels of bacteria, the Herald’s article diminishes the
hard work the City has done on behalf of its citizens and visitors to ensure rising sea levels do
not overwhelm the thriving community, while preserving and enhancing our local ecosystem.
‘The damage the publication of this article has caused grows as undeservedly unpleasant
images of Miami Beach cross the minds of all who would otherwise visit to enjoy its iconic and
clean atmosphere,Letter tothe Executive Ector, Mar Herald
May 25, 2016.
Page 2016
The Article in its Own Words
“Miami Beach king tides flush human waste into the bay, study finds
Water contained levels of waste well above state levels for swimming
Massive pumps that flush floodwater from Miami Beach into Biscayne Bay during
seasonal king tides are dumping something else into the bay: human waste
A study that looked at tidal floodwater and water discharged from the island's
new pumps during the 2014 and 2015 king tides found live fecal bacteria well
above state limits, In one case, levels were more than 600 times the limit. While
some of the fecal matter was dog waste, scientists found higher levels of human
waste that likely enter floodwaters from leaky old sewer lines or septic tanks.”
There is no question as to the damaging image this lede conjures. “Human waste.”
“Fecal matter.” Did your writers realize fecal coliform bacteria is not human-specific and can
also come from warm-blooded animals including dogs, cats, birds, and many other species?
Extensive genetic testing not performed in this “study” would be required before any such
shocking conclusions could be drawn, Furthermore, any such bacteria very quickly dies once
exposed to the sun after hitting open water. Any impact is temporary.
Under your headline, there was an old photograph of Taste Bakery, surrounded by
flooding, with the following caption:
“Miami Beach Officials installed massive pumps to address flooding, pictured
here at Flooded Alton Road Ninth Street. But scientists now say pumping
stormwater is dumping water laced with high amounts of human waste into the
bay.”
The article’s photo is from years ago, Because of the City’s new pumps, flooding like
this no longer occurs, and nowhere does your writer inform readers of that success or even of the
outdated nature of the picture, which, in context, is viewed as showing the City’s streets coated
in “high amounts of human waste.”
Unfortunately, this article’s report on this “study” casts in the falsest possible light the
true scientific status of Miami Beach’s impact on its surrounding waters, an impact that has onlyLater tothe Execute Ectr, Miami Herald
May 25,2078
Page Sof
improved with the presence of the City’s pumps. The article portrays a situation of heightened
human contamination as a condition uniquely or most prominently caused by the stormwater
pumps installed by Miami Beach. However, the only real truth revealed by the story reflects that
the Herald did not vet the “study” that serves as its foundation.
“The “Study”
This official-sounding language confuses for readers the actual state of affairs in the bay
“At the time, Bricefio and a team of scientists from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and the University of Miami began sampling water to
determine if the pumped untreated urban water had any impact on the bay. That
first year, they found elevated levels of phosphorus, nitrogen and other pollutants
that can trigger algae blooms toxic to marine life. To confirm the findings, they
returned last year.”
Is the Herald aware that Dr, Bricefio tested only on a single day each in 2014 and 2015?
Did writer Jenny Staletovich know that Briceiio took samples directly from the mouth of the
pumped outfall pipe but not from even 10 feet away? Was it not clear that he did not test any
other areas, at any outfalls without pumps, at any locations across the bay, or at any other times
or under any other conditions, to serve as controls? Did the reporter reach out to the FIU faculty
to see if this data had been peer-reviewed, as would be the best practice?
Would the article have been different with this information: Dr. Bricefio solicited over
$669,000 from the City of Miami Beach to continue this very “study” after its first year.
His proposal was not accepted.
The truth is much simpler: there are no known pollutant concentrations coming from
Miami Beach beyond those which are found surrounding the outfalls of any major city. In
accordance with our NPDES permit, Miami-Dade County’s Division of Environmental
Resources Management conducts monthly sampling of Biscayne Bay to monitor physical
parameters and pollutant levels. Furthermore, the Department of Health conducts weekly
bacteriological sampling offshore from the beaches as part of the Florida Healthy Beaches
Program. Both sampling programs track long-term trends through consistent data collection
across different seasonal, meteorological, and varied conditions, allowing them to draw
scientifically sound conclusions regarding the status of their subject waterbodies. Based on the
latest results of these programs, the waters surrounding Miami Beach are suitable for public use,Ltr tothe Executve Etor, Mim Herald
May 25, 2016
Poge 4016
including swimming, and there is no evidence that the pumps are contributing to or aggravating
the nutrient and bacteria levels in the stormwater.
With such an array of information, the City is able to make adjustments with an eye
toward prevention that would not be possible with the two-day, single-source attempt at data
collection that was inexplicably presented to the Herald's readers, Foundationless “studies” like
Dr. Bricefio’s—those that do not take time to deliberately gather evidence and evaluate the
truth—should be caught in an editorial filter long before misleading “scientific” information is
disseminated to readers. And the City should certainly have been given a true opportunity to
refute Dr. Bricefio’s findings beyond a courtesy call the afternoon the article was being written.
Given that this data was nearly seven months old, why not give the City a fair opportunity to
present the truth?
Stormwater does and has always conveyed a variety of contaminants from land to sea.
Stormwater pollution is a universal issue, This is a mainstay issue when urban centers are near
to any waterway, whether those contaminants flow through runoff or through pumps.
“The recent report took a closer look at the water's contents, breaking down
findings into fecal matter measured by water regulators and identifying both
human and dog waste.
At four sites tested in 2015, which included outfall pipes, portable pump
discharges and street water, every site had fecal levels above state limits. Along
Indian Creek Drive, levels were 622 times as high. In 2014, a storm drain ousfall
at 14th Street measured 630 times allowed limits.”
We don’t dispute what was found in the water at the mouth of the outflows, but that data,
in and of itself, does not provide any proof that the newly installed pumps are contributing to
pollution. They simply move water from land to sea, removing what would otherwise be
disseminated broadly as runoff through gravity into controlled, concentrated output points. Of
course, it is possible to collect data manipulatively to show higher-than-usual levels of
contaminants at pumped discharge points, as Dr. Bricefio has done by testing only near pumped
outfalls, But there is no factual or even logical basis to blame the pumps simply because they
move the water faster. In fact, one could argue that by removing the water more quickly fromLtr tthe Exooutve Ear, Mian Herald
May 25, 2016
Pago 5018
our roads and rights-of-way, the water is actually cleaner than if it was left to stagnate in an
urban setting surrounded by automobiles.
The stormwater runoff coming from Miami Beach is no different from its pre-pump
levels. It is likely no different than that which can be found in other coastal communities as far
away as San Diego and, importantly, as near as the City of Miami, each of which are responsible
for nearly identical contaminant levels, and neither of which represent any current health dangers
or breach of environmental standards.
If the “study” that formed the basis for this article were thorough enough to test the
waters even a few feet away from the mouths of the City’s pumps, the result would have likely
been very different. Pollutant concentrations dissipate quickly, and bacteria die when exposed to
sunlight—therefore, levels are not at an inflammatory “630 times as high.”
Miami Beach's Actual Present and Future
The images the article invokes are most offensive to the tireless efforts the City continues
to put in on a daily basis to set the pace for cleaner shores and lower ecological impact.
he waters of Miami Beach are far from unsafe. From the recent Styrofoam ban and
grease trap program to the rigid dumping standards and comprehensive public education
programs, the pumps the City is installing to keep it afloat are nothing but the latest in a long line
of environmentally forward initiatives that clearly demonstrate a conscious attitude to keep
pollutants from entering our waterways. In fact, the City constantly looks to upgrade its system
and improve its outputs; the newer pumps, for example, are equipped with vortex structures that
help to remove sediment and fine particles before they can make it out into the bay.
In short, because of reckless reliance on faulty “science,” this publication has reported a
solution as if it were a problem, which unfairly mars the excellent standard the City has reached.
This same City has created an aggressive maintenance plan to spend more than $1 million
annually cleaning the streets, catch basins, piping, vortexes, and pumping stations to avoid
environmental disasters and brace for remarkable storms. This same City continues to reach out
to the residents, businesses, and visitors further to help it protect its coastal waters by practicing
healthy household habits that keep common pollutants like pesticides, pet waste, food grease,
cleaning chemicals, grass clippings, and automotive fluids off the ground and out of stormwater.
This same City leads by example and continues to challenge other coastal cities around Miami-Lotter tothe Execute Edltor, Mai Heald
May 25, 2016
Page 6of 6
Dade County that also discharge their stormwater into Biscayne Bay to do their part in reducing
stormwater pollution to protect this precious resource for generations to come.
Because of this misrepresentative article, the City must now expend an incredible amount
of time and resources undoing the damage the misleading statements contained within have
caused to its reputation. Because of these words, would-be visitors could mistakenly avoid what
are some of the most enjoyable swimming waters in the country.
Moving Forward
This matter is likely to come again before the City Commission at its June 8th meeting.
Therefore, we believe it will be in all of our best interests to discuss, as soon as possible in
advance of that date, what we believe to be the defi s of the May 16, 2016 article, The
City asks to meet with the Herald to have a meaningful discussion for purposes of reconciling
our differences on this topic. Hopefully, we can agree on what steps the City and the Herald
might take to put City’s situation into a proper context, avoid misleading content in the future,
and point the way forward for the Herald, its readers, and the City to cooperatively present the
real issues that affect our City and environment. For now, and for the reasons presented above, a
retraction of this article is also necessary to alleviate the damage inflicted.
These issues affect the bay, South Florida’s waterways, and, in fact, coastal and riparian
metropolitan areas across the country, and we want nothing more than to place our shared
community in the best possible position to receive information, to act, and to lead by example for
the benefit of all for the future.
We look forward to hearing from you on this urgent matter.
Sincerely,
AC
Raut J. AGUILA
Cry ATTORNEY
(805) 673-7470 Ex. 6475
RAULAGUILA@MIAMIBEACHFL.GOV {MY MORALES@MIAMIBEACHEL.Gov