Quick AnswerIn August, the City of Miami ordered a 643-unit Brickell condominium to stop short-term rentals after an investigation found more than 300 vacation rental listings in a building approved for 30. The board disputes the claim. Listings were still live nearly two weeks later. Now the City Commission is weighing legislation that would have the city manager scrutinize short-term rentals and report regularly on condo buildings with repeat violations. That phrase is the part that should get every STR operator's attention: under Fla. Stat. §162.04(5), a repeat violation carries no cure period, double the daily fine ceiling, and it follows the operator across addresses for five years. If you rent short-term anywhere in the City of Miami, call The Code Clinic at (305) 396-1495 for a free review.
Every real estate account in South Florida has shared the headline this week. The building has been called "Animal House" in print. What almost nobody is explaining is the legal machinery underneath it — why the City can act at all, what it actually threatened, and what the Commission's next move would mean for an owner with two units in a different building who has never had a complaint.
The Code Clinic, PLLC defends property owners in code enforcement matters across South Florida, including short-term rental cases. Here is the part of this story that matters if you own one.
What the City actually did
On August 11, 2026, Assistant City Manager Barbie Hernandez sent a cease-and-desist letter to the condominium association at The Club at Brickell Bay, a 43-story, 643-unit tower. According to the City's letter as reported by Local 10 and CBS News Miami, the building holds City approval for 30 short-term rental units. The City's investigation found more than 300 vacation rental listings. The letter described "a serious life safety concern" — a residential building without the fire, life-safety, and accessibility features required for transient lodging — and said units were "crowding guests into rooms that are fit for three to four occupants." It ordered the rentals to cease immediately and warned of revocation of certificates and tax receipts, and possible legal action. City inspectors, per CBS, had been denied access to the property.
The association's response, through its newly elected board, denied "operating a lodging or hotel establishment," acknowledged the City's concerns, and said it intended to work cooperatively. Residents have told reporters they believe as much as 85 percent of the building is now short-term rental — a resident estimate, not a City finding. Twelve days after the letter, WLRN reported the listings were still up.
That is where the facts stand. The building is the headline. The rules are the story.
The number that matters is not 300. It is 30.
Thirty is the number of units the City says it approved for transient use. Everything above it is the City's leverage, and the letter shows exactly which levers it intends to pull.
Notice what the letter, as reported, does not mention: a daily fine. What it threatens is the Certificate of Use and the Business Tax Receipt — the documents that make a short-term rental lawful in the City of Miami in the first place. Revoke those and there is no fine to argue about, because there is no lawful operation left. For an owner who bought a unit on the assumption it could be rented nightly, that is not a code violation. It is the business model.
That is the first thing to understand about short-term rental enforcement in Miami: the fine under Chapter 162 is one tool. The certificate is the other, and it is the one that ends things.
Why Miami can do this when many Florida cities cannot
Florida preempts most local regulation of vacation rentals. Under Fla. Stat. §509.032(7)(b), a local ordinance "may not prohibit vacation rentals or regulate the duration or frequency of rental of vacation rentals." A city that tries to write a new rule saying "no rentals under 30 days" is preempted.
The same paragraph carries the exception that decides this case: it "does not apply to any local law, ordinance, or regulation adopted on or before June 1, 2011."
Miami's zoning code, Miami 21, was adopted in October 2009. Its use restrictions — which zones permit transient lodging and which do not — predate the cutoff. That is why the City of Miami can tell a residential tower in Brickell that nightly rentals are not a permitted use, while a city that adopted its rules in 2015 generally cannot. It is the same footing Miami Beach stands on for its own short-term rental rules.
If you own in the City of Miami, this is the sentence to remember: the preemption argument that works in much of Florida does not work here. The rules are grandfathered, and the City knows it.
Short-term rental notice in Miami?
Attorney Ari Pregen reviews it free — flat fee, no hourly billing, no surprises.
What the Commission is considering now
On September 9, The Real Deal reported that the City Commission is weighing legislation sponsored by District 2 Commissioner Damian Pardo, whose district includes Brickell. As described, it would require the city manager to scrutinize short-term rentals and to provide regular updates on condo buildings with repeat violations, on top of the existing restrictions.
It has not passed. It may change. But the direction is clear, and one phrase in it is doing more work than the rest combined: repeat violations.
Most people read that as "a building that has been cited more than once." In Florida code enforcement, it means something narrower and considerably more expensive.
"Repeat violation" is a defined term, and it costs money
Chapter 162 defines a repeat violation as a violation of a code provision by a person who has previously been found — through a code enforcement board or any other quasi-judicial or judicial process — to have violated, or who has admitted violating, the same provision within the prior five years. Three consequences follow from that definition, and each one is written into the statute.
No cure period. On a first violation, the inspector gives you a reasonable time to correct the problem before anything accrues. On a repeat violation, §162.06(3) says the inspector "is not required to give the violator a reasonable time to correct the violation." Notice, then hearing. The window in which most first-time cases get quietly resolved does not exist.
Double the ceiling, and the clock starts earlier. Under §162.09(2)(a), the daily fine for a first violation is capped at $250. For a repeat violation, $500. And under §162.09(1), a repeat-violation fine runs "beginning with the date the repeat violation is found to have occurred by the code inspector" — not from the hearing, not from a compliance deadline. At the ceiling, that is up to $15,000 a month, per unit, accruing while you wait for a hearing date.
It follows the operator, not the building. This is the one almost nobody knows, and it is the reason the Brickell story should worry owners in other buildings. The statutory definition ends with the words "notwithstanding the violations occur at different locations." A finding against you on one unit makes your next violation on a different unit — a different building, a different neighborhood — a repeat violation, for five years. An operator with units in three towers carries the first finding into all three.
Put those together with a City ordinance that has the manager tracking repeat-violation buildings, and the exposure is not any one citation. It is the label. An operator with three units who takes one finding in Brickell is, for the next five years, a repeat violator in every other building — and the next notice at any of them arrives with no cure period and a fine that started running the day the inspector found it.
The association got the letter. The owners get the fines.
The Brickell cease-and-desist went to the condominium association. Here is why. When a city cannot easily determine who is operating what — when its inspectors are turned away, as they were here — it proceeds against the entity it can find. The association is the entity with the building-level approval. The association gets the letter.
That does not insulate individual owners. It adds a layer. An owner renting a unit nightly in that building now faces the association's problem and their own: a City citation against the unit, the building-level approval at risk, and whatever the association decides to do internally under Chapter 718 once it is under City pressure. We have seen this pattern repeatedly in the last year in community-wide enforcement sweeps, where the association and the owners end up fighting each other over responsibility while the fines accrue against both.
If you are an owner in a building where this is happening, the question is not whether the board is handling it. It is whether your unit is going to be cited, and what the record will say when it is.
If you rent short-term in the City of Miami, do this this week
Confirm the use is permitted where your unit is. Not "everyone in the building does it." Look at the transect zone and the permitted uses under Miami 21 for that specific address, and at your building's condominium documents. If the answer is that transient lodging is not a permitted use, the fact that 300 other units are listed is not a defense. It is a queue.
Confirm your Certificate of Use and Business Tax Receipt are current, in your name, for that unit. Those are what the City’s Brickell letter threatened, and they are the documents an inspector checks first.
Pull your own history. If you have ever been found in violation of an STR-related provision anywhere in the City — or admitted one to close a case quickly — you may already be inside the five-year repeat window. That changes how the next notice should be handled from the first day.
Read the notice, not the summary. The section number on a Miami notice tells you whether the City is proceeding on zoning, on the certificate, on Chapter 162, or on more than one. They are different tracks with different defenses and different deadlines.
Do not let the association be your only response. The board is answering for the building. Nobody is answering for your unit unless you do.
Frequently asked questions
Can the City of Miami really ban short-term rentals in my building?
The City cannot adopt a new ban — Florida law preempts that. But Miami's zoning code was adopted before the June 1, 2011 grandfather date in §509.032(7)(b), so its existing use restrictions stand. Where transient lodging is not a permitted use for your address, the City can enforce that, and the preemption argument generally does not help.
What is a "repeat violation" in Florida code enforcement?
A violation of the same code provision by a person previously found, or who admitted, to have violated it within the prior five years, regardless of whether the violations occurred at different locations. It carries no required cure period, a $500 daily fine ceiling instead of $250, and it attaches to the person, not the property.
I own one unit. The association is dealing with the City. Am I covered?
No. The association is responding to a letter directed at the association. A citation against your unit is a separate matter, with your name on it and its own hearing. The association's cooperation with the City does not resolve it and may not even mention it.
Has the Commission's short-term rental legislation passed?
As of this writing, no. It has been reported as under consideration. The provisions described — city manager scrutiny and regular reporting on buildings with repeat violations — may change before any vote. The repeat-violation consequences described in this article are current Florida law and apply regardless.
What happens if the City revokes the Certificate of Use?
The short-term rental stops being lawful, independent of any fine. That is why the City’s Brickell letter threatened it. Reinstatement, where available, is its own process, and operating without the certificate in the meantime generates new violations — potentially repeat violations.
Renting short-term in Miami and worried about what comes next? Call The Code Clinic at (305) 396-1495 for a free review. We handle the notice, the hearing, and the certificate. Flat fee. No hourly billing. No surprises.