Castro disputes ethics allegations as January case resurfaces during campaign season

A seven-month-old probable-cause finding in the state ethics case against Coral Gables Commissioner Melissa Castro is back in public debate after new reporting this week disclosed details of the investigation into her permit-expediting business.

The Florida Commission on Ethics found Jan. 23 that there was probable cause to believe Castro had a prohibited conflicting contractual relationship because her private business continued to pull permits in Coral Gables after her April 2023 election. But when the commission announced its decision five days later, it emphasized that probable cause is not a determination that a violation occurred.

Castro, who is seeking a second term in the Nov. 3 municipal election, is pushing back on how the case is now being portrayed. No final determination has been made, and no hearing date has been set.

Probable cause, not a final finding

A probable-cause finding is an intermediate step in Florida’s ethics process.

After a legally sufficient complaint is investigated, a Commission Advocate reviews the investigative report and recommends whether probable cause exists. If the commission finds probable cause, the complaint becomes public and ordinarily proceeds to a public evidentiary hearing before an administrative law judge unless the parties reach a settlement. The judge’s findings or any stipulated agreement then return to the Ethics Commission for final action.

Castro’s response to the Gazette centers on that distinction.

“I have not” been found to have violated Florida ethics law, she wrote, quoting the commission’s January release. “There has been no final determination that I violated Florida ethics law.”

What investigators found

The case centers on M.E.D. Expediters, the permit-expediting company Castro owns, and whether that private work created the kind of continuing or frequently recurring conflict prohibited by state law.

Florida law bars a public officer from holding employment or a contractual relationship that creates a continuing or frequently recurring conflict between private interests and public duties, or that impedes the full and faithful discharge of those duties.

Castro and her attorney have acknowledged that she continued performing permit-expediting work in Coral Gables after taking office and stopped personally handling Gables permitting work in June 2024.

During the commission’s January probable-cause proceeding, Commission Advocate Melody Hadley said that period itself presented a conflict. According to audio obtained by the Miami Herald, Hadley told commissioners that Castro’s employment created the type of continuing conflict contemplated by state law and recommended a finding of probable cause.

Investigators also examined what happened after June 2024.

A supplemental investigative report found that 132 permit applications were submitted or processed between June 5, 2024, and July 30, 2025, using an email address associated with Madeline Perez, a former Castro employee who operates a separate company called M.E.D. Expeditors of Coral Gables.

For a time, Perez’s company and Castro’s company shared an address and telephone number. Investigators said they could not independently confirm Castro’s assertion that she and her company had stopped doing Coral Gables permitting work.

Castro’s answer

Castro says Perez’s company is independently owned and that she has no ownership interest, management role or financial stake in its Coral Gables work.

She told the Herald that she gave Perez the Coral Gables side of the business and allowed her to use the M.E.D. Expeditors name, which originated with the company founded by Castro’s late mother. Castro says she has received no direct or indirect compensation, referral fees or other economic benefit from permits handled by Perez’s company.

Perez’s company later changed its registered address. Castro said she sought the change because the shared address could create confusion about whether the businesses were independent.

In her response to the Gazette, Castro also emphasized that she had voluntarily sought ethics guidance after taking office.

“I asked for the scrutiny. I asked for the rules,” she wrote. “I asked for guidance because I wanted to comply with them.”

What Miami-Dade’s ethics opinion actually said

Castro sought an advisory opinion from the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics and Public Trust after her election.

The county commission ultimately concluded in June 2024 that Castro could remain owner and chief executive of a permit-expediting company representing clients in Coral Gables. It also allowed Castro and her employees to interact with the city on ministerial matters or simple informational requests.

But the opinion drew a line at advocacy requiring city officials or employees to exercise discretion. It specifically warned against such activities as seeking zoning modifications, permit changes, reinstatement of expired permits or efforts to persuade city staff that a permit or inspection was unnecessary.

The county opinion interpreted Miami-Dade’s ethics code. The state complaint proceeded separately under Florida law.

Who filed the complaints

Attorney Matthew Sarelson filed a Miami-Dade ethics complaint against Castro on Oct. 31, 2023, concerning M.E.D. Expediters’ business in the city. The county commission dismissed it Dec. 13 for lack of legal sufficiency. Sarelson later filed the state complaint that produced the January probable-cause finding.

Sarelson had previously filed an election complaint against Ariel Fernandez during the 2023 Coral Gables campaign.

A 2021 campaign treasurer’s report reviewed by the Gazette also shows that Mayor Vince Lago’s campaign paid Sarelson $1,250 for canvassing-board coverage.

Castro says she has no personal, professional or business relationship with Sarelson. She argues that the origins and timing of the complaints deserve scrutiny, while acknowledging that she has no firsthand knowledge of private communications involving Sarelson and Lago.

A January finding returns during campaign season

The probable-cause finding itself has been public since January. What changed this week was new reporting based on investigative records and audio from the commission’s closed probable-cause proceeding.

Aesop’s Gables, an anonymous blog sympathetic to Lago, published a report Wednesday based on the state case file. The Herald followed Thursday after obtaining investigative documents and audio through a public-records request. The Herald reported additional details about the 132 permit applications, the relationship between the two M.E.D. companies and Hadley’s reasoning in recommending probable cause.

The issue has also surfaced repeatedly at City Commission meetings. On Jan. 13, Lago questioned Castro publicly about the relationship between her company and M.E.D. Expeditors of Coral Gables.

Lago declined to comment for this story. He told the Herald that Castro had shown a “stunning failure of responsibility and transparency” and has called for her resignation. Castro has rejected that demand and says she will not resign.

Castro says the renewed attention weeks before the election is political.

“Now, in September, weeks before I face voters, that January preliminary determination has become the basis for calls for my resignation and a political narrative portraying it as a finding of guilt,” she wrote. “It is not.”

Where the case stands

There has been no final finding that Castro violated state ethics law.

If the case is not resolved through a stipulated agreement, the next stage is a public evidentiary proceeding before an administrative law judge. The judge’s recommended findings would then return to the Florida Commission on Ethics for final action.

No hearing date has been set, according to Castro attorney David Winker.

For now, the state’s action remains what the commission called it in January: a finding of probable cause to believe a violation occurred — serious enough for the case to proceed, but not a final determination that Castro violated the law.