DeFede says that Florida Senator George LeMieux's law firm, Gunster Yoakley, arranged for visa's for foreign sheet metal workers to work in Sunny Isles because they possessed "special skills". Not so say construction workers on the job site. See the video which includeds a room full of angry out of work construction workers. George can't say he didn't know what his law firm was doing, he is on the Corporate papers as a director. That shoots Rep. Illeanna Ros-Lehtinen's defense of him full of holes.Monday, September 07, 2009
Jim DeFede takes on U.S. Senator's Law Firm. By Geniusofdespair
DeFede says that Florida Senator George LeMieux's law firm, Gunster Yoakley, arranged for visa's for foreign sheet metal workers to work in Sunny Isles because they possessed "special skills". Not so say construction workers on the job site. See the video which includeds a room full of angry out of work construction workers. George can't say he didn't know what his law firm was doing, he is on the Corporate papers as a director. That shoots Rep. Illeanna Ros-Lehtinen's defense of him full of holes.
This Labor Day: the difference between honest labor and fraud ... by gimleteye
There is something positive and joyful about labor, getting paid for a hard day's work. What has considerably added to the national cycnicism is that there seems to be a dismal, almost institutionalized lack of accountability in many sectors of the economy-- like finance and banking, for instance-- and enough parts of government to make the whole, suspect. Today, wage inflation is rampant. It manifests in the scandal of local government pay hikes in the face of the worst budget crisis in a century.
A specific example: the performance of managers of the Florida State Board of Administration. The SBA is the non-descript agency that manages the pension fund of over 1 million Floridians who work or retired from state or local government; from firemen to educators to office workers. The St. Pete Times published a report of an investment in Manhattan real estate at the top of the market, that resulted in a $266 million write down. This fiasco adds to billions of dollars in risky investments-- like buying Enron as the stock was swirling down the drain, or, untold billions in derivative debt sold by Lehman Brothers to Florida tied to the same crappy housing developments that are killing Florida's economy.
What is so remarkable is that no one at SBA has lost their job over the latest loss; in fact, the managers have been rewarded with bonuses. In the entire financial sector where hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars have bailed out banking executives/laborers; name a single instance of accountability besides Bernie Madoff. The Sunday New York Times reported that taxpayers are backstopping more than $6 million in legal fees generated by the former Fannie Mae CEO who took down hundreds of millions in compensation by cooking the Fannie Mae books.
In the City of Miami, a political hack with a no-show job is allowed to retire with a full pension-- after her lazy schedule was documented by a private investigator hired by a union leader. City managers surely knew she was exploiting government, and getting well paid: they did nothing to stop her.
When accountability of labor vanishes in a cloud of cynicism, there is lots of trouble. Conservatives love to blame labor unions for all manner of affliction to the national spirit. The Democrats deserve their share of blame, but the worst result of nearly a decade of Republican control of the White House and Congress was the imposition of a false reality -- "we're history's actors"-- that created serial financial and economic bubbles whose results plunged the nation into a near Depression.
This Labor Day, don't forget where we have come from. I pray conservatives find their footing and that voters and taxpayers can discern the difference between honest labor and fraud.
State pension fund's $266 million investment disappeared in 2 years
By Sydney P. Freedberg l St. Petersburg Times
Sunday, September 6, 2009
TALLAHASSEE — This is the story of how the Florida board that invests public money bet $250 million on a huge Manhattan real estate deal and lost every last penny of it.
A number of others didn't do too badly, however. On top of the money lost, Florida paid $16 million in fees to real estate developers, bankers and Wall Street money managers who persuaded the state to make the deal.
State elected leaders with potential influence over the pension funds' investments received campaign contributions from some of those same corporate giants. And state pension managers in the real estate unit got performance bonuses.
The big loser was the State Board of Administration, which invests more than $105 billion for 1 million current and future retirees. On the Manhattan real estate deal, its $266 million is now worth a grand total of $0.00.
How the Florida agency wound up in the ill-fated real estate gamble is also a story of lessons learned, as the pension agency's executive director, Ash Williams, put it when he informed the state's top officials of the loss.
"To the extent we have failures, we will be honest with ourselves, our beneficiaries, and constituencies,'' Williams said. "We will identify mistakes made, learn our lessons, and move on.''
The St. Petersburg Times asked Williams what mistakes were made, what lessons were learned.
His key lesson: Good processes can produce bad results.
The backstory
Between 2000 and early 2007, four SBA internal reports and a watchdog group identified problems with the real estate investment process — including a lack of risk control.
Nonetheless, the managers shifted assets into higher-risk real estate deals, often by joining private partnerships that used borrowed money.
Investing borrowed money, known as leverage, boosts returns in boom times, but amplifies losses in bust times.
In August 2006, at the height of the real estate bubble, a senior acquisitions manager in the SBA's real estate unit, Steve Spook, received two overtures to join investment firms bidding for adjoining apartment complexes in Manhattan.
The complexes — Peter Cooper Village and Stuyvesant Town — were iconic housing communities, a "city within a city'' on 80 prime acres overlooking the East River. Metropolitan Life built the apartments for returning WWII veterans in the 1940s. They became an oasis for teachers, nurses and retirees on small pensions, one of the last refuges for the middle class in Manhattan.
In 2006, an average rent-controlled apartment in Peter Cooper Village went for about $1,340 a month, about 40 percent of the average rent in the surrounding area.
New York's rent-control rules limited increases to 7.25 percent over two years, with some exceptions. Tenants could be ousted if their primary residences were elsewhere or if they illegally sublet their unit at market rates.
About a quarter of the apartments paid market rate rents when MetLife put the complex up for sale in August 2006.
The insurer's whopping asking price — $5 billion — made clear that to make a profit, the buyer would have to convert most of the remaining rent-stabilized apartments into market-rate units.
A raft of debt
On Oct. 17, 2006, MetLife announced the winning bid, an eye-popping $5.4 billion — $400 million more than the asking price — by Tishman Speyer Properties and BlackRock Realty.
The buyers put in $225 million of their own money, then passed much of the risk to others.
Enter Florida.
Tishman Speyer and BlackRock each had business and political friends in the state.
Tishman Speyer had vast real estate holdings in South Florida in the 1980s and early '90s and was looking to get back into the market. The company contributed $5,000 to the Florida Republican Party in 2002. Two of its executives donated the maximum $500 to the 2006 political campaign of Gov. Charlie Crist.
BlackRock, which is 49 percent owned by Bank of America/Merrill Lynch, gave $500 to Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink during her 2006 campaign.
Crist and Sink, who serve as pension fund trustees, declined to be interviewed for this story. Their aides said there was no connection between political contributions and the investment in the Peter Cooper Village venture.
BlackRock already managed more than $300 million in Florida pension money. They wanted more business.
On Jan. 9, 2007, five BlackRock executives visited Tallahassee to make their case. Among those they met with were Steve Spook; Doug Bennett, the senior investment officer in the SBA's real estate unit; and Kevin SigRist, the agency's deputy executive director.
A few weeks later, BlackRock sent the real estate unit a confidential document outlining the strategy for achieving double-digit returns on the Peter Cooper Village project.
The 92-page memo revealed that Tishman Speyer and BlackRock planned to weed out rent-regulated tenants and turn the units into a "market-based environment'' in seven years. They would woo young, affluent renters and "position the asset for a value-maximizing sale.''
Ash Williams, who took over as the SBA's executive director in October 2008, concedes that in hindsight, the projections made by Tishman Speyer and BlackRock may have been "overly aggressive.''
But the documents provided to the SBA show that the agency's managers were made aware of the risks all along.
Line by line across 13 pages, the confidential memo lays out the risks. They included the possibility that Tishman and BlackRock could fall short of cash to pay off debt.
"Unless net operating income from the property increases materially,'' the memo said, "the partnership will not be able to meet its interest payment obligations in which event it would default.''
Due diligence?
Spook evaluated the Peter Cooper Village deal for the SBA. The analysis relied heavily on the owners' statements.
• The report stressed the apartment complex's "excellent physical condition'' and "competitive advantages.'' But some prospective renters were turned off by the plain brick buildings that looked like a low-income public housing project.
• The report spoke of the "favorable fundamentals'' in the Manhattan apartment market. But some experts were predicting a weakening market.
• The report noted the owners' "extensive experience'' in managing rent-regulated apartments. Tishman Speyer had limited experience managing multi-family rental properties. Its expertise was in office towers like Rockefeller Center in New York City.
Spook's report also highlighted "issues'' with the investment, including possible cash flow problems, contaminated soil beneath the property and concerns about "liquidity,'' meaning Florida could have trouble unloading the investment if it declined in value.
Spook also noted a "lack of full Townsend due diligence.'' Townsend is the Townsend Group, a firm that Florida paid $200,000 a year for real estate advice.
SBA spokesman Dennis MacKee said that Townsend doesn't normally do due diligence. He said the SBA thoroughly vetted the investment.
On March 12, 2007, Spook recommended investing $250 million. Two weeks later, Doug Bennett concurred. In a three-paragraph memo, Bennett acknowledged that the deal could be a "risky proposition'' but said Florida would benefit from increasing its New York City exposure.
Kevin SigRist concurred with Bennett, and then-executive director Coleman Stipanovich approved the deal.
The real world
The Peter Cooper Village sale fueled a political uproar in New York City over the future of affordable middle class housing.
New York City Council member Dan Garodnick said the high selling price put pressure on the owners.
"They started sending legal notices to many perfectly legitimate longtime tenants claiming they were not using their apartment as their primary residence,'' said Garodnick, himself a resident of Peter Cooper Village.
Garodnick helped tenants fight eviction and supported a lawsuit. It contended that the owners had improperly raised rents after getting special tax breaks. The tenants sought $215 million in rent they overpaid.
BlackRock and Tishman Speyer's confidential memo to Florida's pension fund had warned that a lawsuit could cripple the deal.
The owners said they thought the tenants' claims were without merit. But if the residents were to prevail, the memo said, the owners would "suffer an immediate and very substantial loss of revenues and would be unable to carry out a significant part of its plan to convert rent-stabilized units to market rate.''
Lawrence Longua, a real estate professor at New York University, said the Manhattan gamble reveals some investment mistakes and truths about pension plans.
They are driven to make "goofy investments'' like the Manhattan deal, Longua said, because with low interest rates and aging baby boomers, it's getting harder for states to meet their pension promises.
"So public pension funds now have to go up the risk curve to meet those obligations.''
Running out of money
On June 7, 2007, with the real estate market about to head south, the SBA sank $266,780,948 into the Peter Cooper Village partnership with other investors: $250 million for the investment plus $16,780,948 in fees.
By September 2008, the investment was in deep trouble. BlackRock and Tishman Speyer were having trouble converting the rent-regulated apartments to market-rate units. Expenses were higher than expected, income,lower. The new owners were running low on cash to cover payments on their $3 billion mortgage.
On Dec. 4, 2008, at a meeting of the group that advises the Florida pension fund on investments, a member questioned why nobody at the SBA had mentioned the troubled Peter Cooper Village investment.
"I think this should have been on the agenda,'' said Jim Dahl, a Jacksonville investor. "Let's make sure we talk about 'em so we don't repeat mistakes. … This is a serious, serious problem and we almost went through the meeting without discussing it.''
Dahl said many investors thought the deal was based on "pie-in-the-sky'' assumptions and was "going to have a bad ending.''
The SBA said otherwise.
"This is a long-term investment,'' SigRist said in an interview a few weeks later. "The view here is, as a long-term investor, we're uniquely qualified to hold these investments.'' He blamed problems not on inadequate vetting but on the changing financial world.
For months, the SBA did not respond to information requests from the Times about the Peter Cooper Village deal. They did not disclose documents the newspaper requested in December 2008, again in January 2009 and again in March.
Prompted by a fourth request, in April the agency released copies of appraisals and two redacted reports. Information about fees, expenses and investment issues was blacked out. The agency is still withholding documents about the deal, saying the legal department is reviewing them to determine if they can be released.
Worth zero
After a New York court ruled for the tenants, SBA managers exchanged e-mails and acknowledged their investment had been "wiped out.''
On July 28, Doug Bennett authorized the SBA's director of accounting to write off the entire $266,780,948.
In a memo last month to the three trustees who oversee the SBA — Gov. Crist, CFO Sink and Attorney General Bill McCollum — Williams blamed the loss on the recession, slow income growth and leverage.
In an interview, he deflected questions about whether the SBA needed to change policies or add checks and balances to property investment decisions.
"I don't want to be overly sunny,'' Williams said of Peter Cooper Village. But when the economy comes back, the rents could go up and the property could regain its value. "That's what America is all about.''
Damage control
As SBA trustees, Crist, Sink and McCollum have had a mostly hands-off style of oversight. Under their watch, the agency has been bruised by risky investments tied to the subprime mortgage crisis.
None of the trustees agreed to be interviewed about the Peter Cooper Village problem.
Last Tuesday, however, Sink brought up the real estate deal at a public meeting in Tallahassee. It was the first of the quarterly meetings they ordered after a Times investigation found deceptive and misleading practices by some SBA officials.
Williams told the trustees that investors besides Florida got hurt. He said the SBA staff followed all procedures. "To the extent we had a bad experience,'' he said, "that's unfortunate; we regret it, and we've endeavored with all our hearts to make sure we don't do that again and we understand how it happened.''
But overall, Williams said, the agency's real estate holdings are doing well. Worth $9.7 billion last year, their values tumbled to $7.8 billion for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2009.
With stocks starting to rebound, Williams emphasized the uptick in the value of the entire pension fund. It hit $138 billion in September 2007, dropped to $83 billion in March 2009 and now is up to $106 billion.
Meantime, the SBA managers are bracing for additional real estate hits, especially in their higher-risk, commercial property holdings, like hotels and office buildings. Tanking values are making it tough for their owners to refinance mortgages.
For Doug Bennett's performance during the peak of the market in 2006-07, on top of his $135,000 annual salary, the SBA last year awarded him an $11,000 bonus.
Spook, who analyzed the Manhattan investment and last year made about $87,000, received a $7,000 bonus.
Two other real-estate employees who had a role in the Peter Cooper Village investment also got bonuses last year for their work in 2006-07.
The SBA said the bonuses were reward for good performance of the entire pension fund.
Times computer assisted reporting specialist Connie Humburg and researcher Shirl Kennedy contributed to this report.
[Last modified: Sep 06, 2009 03:48 AM]
A specific example: the performance of managers of the Florida State Board of Administration. The SBA is the non-descript agency that manages the pension fund of over 1 million Floridians who work or retired from state or local government; from firemen to educators to office workers. The St. Pete Times published a report of an investment in Manhattan real estate at the top of the market, that resulted in a $266 million write down. This fiasco adds to billions of dollars in risky investments-- like buying Enron as the stock was swirling down the drain, or, untold billions in derivative debt sold by Lehman Brothers to Florida tied to the same crappy housing developments that are killing Florida's economy.
What is so remarkable is that no one at SBA has lost their job over the latest loss; in fact, the managers have been rewarded with bonuses. In the entire financial sector where hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars have bailed out banking executives/laborers; name a single instance of accountability besides Bernie Madoff. The Sunday New York Times reported that taxpayers are backstopping more than $6 million in legal fees generated by the former Fannie Mae CEO who took down hundreds of millions in compensation by cooking the Fannie Mae books.
In the City of Miami, a political hack with a no-show job is allowed to retire with a full pension-- after her lazy schedule was documented by a private investigator hired by a union leader. City managers surely knew she was exploiting government, and getting well paid: they did nothing to stop her.
When accountability of labor vanishes in a cloud of cynicism, there is lots of trouble. Conservatives love to blame labor unions for all manner of affliction to the national spirit. The Democrats deserve their share of blame, but the worst result of nearly a decade of Republican control of the White House and Congress was the imposition of a false reality -- "we're history's actors"-- that created serial financial and economic bubbles whose results plunged the nation into a near Depression.
This Labor Day, don't forget where we have come from. I pray conservatives find their footing and that voters and taxpayers can discern the difference between honest labor and fraud.
State pension fund's $266 million investment disappeared in 2 years
By Sydney P. Freedberg l St. Petersburg Times
Sunday, September 6, 2009
TALLAHASSEE — This is the story of how the Florida board that invests public money bet $250 million on a huge Manhattan real estate deal and lost every last penny of it.
A number of others didn't do too badly, however. On top of the money lost, Florida paid $16 million in fees to real estate developers, bankers and Wall Street money managers who persuaded the state to make the deal.
State elected leaders with potential influence over the pension funds' investments received campaign contributions from some of those same corporate giants. And state pension managers in the real estate unit got performance bonuses.
The big loser was the State Board of Administration, which invests more than $105 billion for 1 million current and future retirees. On the Manhattan real estate deal, its $266 million is now worth a grand total of $0.00.
How the Florida agency wound up in the ill-fated real estate gamble is also a story of lessons learned, as the pension agency's executive director, Ash Williams, put it when he informed the state's top officials of the loss.
"To the extent we have failures, we will be honest with ourselves, our beneficiaries, and constituencies,'' Williams said. "We will identify mistakes made, learn our lessons, and move on.''
The St. Petersburg Times asked Williams what mistakes were made, what lessons were learned.
His key lesson: Good processes can produce bad results.
The backstory
Between 2000 and early 2007, four SBA internal reports and a watchdog group identified problems with the real estate investment process — including a lack of risk control.
Nonetheless, the managers shifted assets into higher-risk real estate deals, often by joining private partnerships that used borrowed money.
Investing borrowed money, known as leverage, boosts returns in boom times, but amplifies losses in bust times.
In August 2006, at the height of the real estate bubble, a senior acquisitions manager in the SBA's real estate unit, Steve Spook, received two overtures to join investment firms bidding for adjoining apartment complexes in Manhattan.
The complexes — Peter Cooper Village and Stuyvesant Town — were iconic housing communities, a "city within a city'' on 80 prime acres overlooking the East River. Metropolitan Life built the apartments for returning WWII veterans in the 1940s. They became an oasis for teachers, nurses and retirees on small pensions, one of the last refuges for the middle class in Manhattan.
In 2006, an average rent-controlled apartment in Peter Cooper Village went for about $1,340 a month, about 40 percent of the average rent in the surrounding area.
New York's rent-control rules limited increases to 7.25 percent over two years, with some exceptions. Tenants could be ousted if their primary residences were elsewhere or if they illegally sublet their unit at market rates.
About a quarter of the apartments paid market rate rents when MetLife put the complex up for sale in August 2006.
The insurer's whopping asking price — $5 billion — made clear that to make a profit, the buyer would have to convert most of the remaining rent-stabilized apartments into market-rate units.
A raft of debt
On Oct. 17, 2006, MetLife announced the winning bid, an eye-popping $5.4 billion — $400 million more than the asking price — by Tishman Speyer Properties and BlackRock Realty.
The buyers put in $225 million of their own money, then passed much of the risk to others.
Enter Florida.
Tishman Speyer and BlackRock each had business and political friends in the state.
Tishman Speyer had vast real estate holdings in South Florida in the 1980s and early '90s and was looking to get back into the market. The company contributed $5,000 to the Florida Republican Party in 2002. Two of its executives donated the maximum $500 to the 2006 political campaign of Gov. Charlie Crist.
BlackRock, which is 49 percent owned by Bank of America/Merrill Lynch, gave $500 to Chief Financial Officer Alex Sink during her 2006 campaign.
Crist and Sink, who serve as pension fund trustees, declined to be interviewed for this story. Their aides said there was no connection between political contributions and the investment in the Peter Cooper Village venture.
BlackRock already managed more than $300 million in Florida pension money. They wanted more business.
On Jan. 9, 2007, five BlackRock executives visited Tallahassee to make their case. Among those they met with were Steve Spook; Doug Bennett, the senior investment officer in the SBA's real estate unit; and Kevin SigRist, the agency's deputy executive director.
A few weeks later, BlackRock sent the real estate unit a confidential document outlining the strategy for achieving double-digit returns on the Peter Cooper Village project.
The 92-page memo revealed that Tishman Speyer and BlackRock planned to weed out rent-regulated tenants and turn the units into a "market-based environment'' in seven years. They would woo young, affluent renters and "position the asset for a value-maximizing sale.''
Ash Williams, who took over as the SBA's executive director in October 2008, concedes that in hindsight, the projections made by Tishman Speyer and BlackRock may have been "overly aggressive.''
But the documents provided to the SBA show that the agency's managers were made aware of the risks all along.
Line by line across 13 pages, the confidential memo lays out the risks. They included the possibility that Tishman and BlackRock could fall short of cash to pay off debt.
"Unless net operating income from the property increases materially,'' the memo said, "the partnership will not be able to meet its interest payment obligations in which event it would default.''
Due diligence?
Spook evaluated the Peter Cooper Village deal for the SBA. The analysis relied heavily on the owners' statements.
• The report stressed the apartment complex's "excellent physical condition'' and "competitive advantages.'' But some prospective renters were turned off by the plain brick buildings that looked like a low-income public housing project.
• The report spoke of the "favorable fundamentals'' in the Manhattan apartment market. But some experts were predicting a weakening market.
• The report noted the owners' "extensive experience'' in managing rent-regulated apartments. Tishman Speyer had limited experience managing multi-family rental properties. Its expertise was in office towers like Rockefeller Center in New York City.
Spook's report also highlighted "issues'' with the investment, including possible cash flow problems, contaminated soil beneath the property and concerns about "liquidity,'' meaning Florida could have trouble unloading the investment if it declined in value.
Spook also noted a "lack of full Townsend due diligence.'' Townsend is the Townsend Group, a firm that Florida paid $200,000 a year for real estate advice.
SBA spokesman Dennis MacKee said that Townsend doesn't normally do due diligence. He said the SBA thoroughly vetted the investment.
On March 12, 2007, Spook recommended investing $250 million. Two weeks later, Doug Bennett concurred. In a three-paragraph memo, Bennett acknowledged that the deal could be a "risky proposition'' but said Florida would benefit from increasing its New York City exposure.
Kevin SigRist concurred with Bennett, and then-executive director Coleman Stipanovich approved the deal.
The real world
The Peter Cooper Village sale fueled a political uproar in New York City over the future of affordable middle class housing.
New York City Council member Dan Garodnick said the high selling price put pressure on the owners.
"They started sending legal notices to many perfectly legitimate longtime tenants claiming they were not using their apartment as their primary residence,'' said Garodnick, himself a resident of Peter Cooper Village.
Garodnick helped tenants fight eviction and supported a lawsuit. It contended that the owners had improperly raised rents after getting special tax breaks. The tenants sought $215 million in rent they overpaid.
BlackRock and Tishman Speyer's confidential memo to Florida's pension fund had warned that a lawsuit could cripple the deal.
The owners said they thought the tenants' claims were without merit. But if the residents were to prevail, the memo said, the owners would "suffer an immediate and very substantial loss of revenues and would be unable to carry out a significant part of its plan to convert rent-stabilized units to market rate.''
Lawrence Longua, a real estate professor at New York University, said the Manhattan gamble reveals some investment mistakes and truths about pension plans.
They are driven to make "goofy investments'' like the Manhattan deal, Longua said, because with low interest rates and aging baby boomers, it's getting harder for states to meet their pension promises.
"So public pension funds now have to go up the risk curve to meet those obligations.''
Running out of money
On June 7, 2007, with the real estate market about to head south, the SBA sank $266,780,948 into the Peter Cooper Village partnership with other investors: $250 million for the investment plus $16,780,948 in fees.
By September 2008, the investment was in deep trouble. BlackRock and Tishman Speyer were having trouble converting the rent-regulated apartments to market-rate units. Expenses were higher than expected, income,lower. The new owners were running low on cash to cover payments on their $3 billion mortgage.
On Dec. 4, 2008, at a meeting of the group that advises the Florida pension fund on investments, a member questioned why nobody at the SBA had mentioned the troubled Peter Cooper Village investment.
"I think this should have been on the agenda,'' said Jim Dahl, a Jacksonville investor. "Let's make sure we talk about 'em so we don't repeat mistakes. … This is a serious, serious problem and we almost went through the meeting without discussing it.''
Dahl said many investors thought the deal was based on "pie-in-the-sky'' assumptions and was "going to have a bad ending.''
The SBA said otherwise.
"This is a long-term investment,'' SigRist said in an interview a few weeks later. "The view here is, as a long-term investor, we're uniquely qualified to hold these investments.'' He blamed problems not on inadequate vetting but on the changing financial world.
For months, the SBA did not respond to information requests from the Times about the Peter Cooper Village deal. They did not disclose documents the newspaper requested in December 2008, again in January 2009 and again in March.
Prompted by a fourth request, in April the agency released copies of appraisals and two redacted reports. Information about fees, expenses and investment issues was blacked out. The agency is still withholding documents about the deal, saying the legal department is reviewing them to determine if they can be released.
Worth zero
After a New York court ruled for the tenants, SBA managers exchanged e-mails and acknowledged their investment had been "wiped out.''
On July 28, Doug Bennett authorized the SBA's director of accounting to write off the entire $266,780,948.
In a memo last month to the three trustees who oversee the SBA — Gov. Crist, CFO Sink and Attorney General Bill McCollum — Williams blamed the loss on the recession, slow income growth and leverage.
In an interview, he deflected questions about whether the SBA needed to change policies or add checks and balances to property investment decisions.
"I don't want to be overly sunny,'' Williams said of Peter Cooper Village. But when the economy comes back, the rents could go up and the property could regain its value. "That's what America is all about.''
Damage control
As SBA trustees, Crist, Sink and McCollum have had a mostly hands-off style of oversight. Under their watch, the agency has been bruised by risky investments tied to the subprime mortgage crisis.
None of the trustees agreed to be interviewed about the Peter Cooper Village problem.
Last Tuesday, however, Sink brought up the real estate deal at a public meeting in Tallahassee. It was the first of the quarterly meetings they ordered after a Times investigation found deceptive and misleading practices by some SBA officials.
Williams told the trustees that investors besides Florida got hurt. He said the SBA staff followed all procedures. "To the extent we had a bad experience,'' he said, "that's unfortunate; we regret it, and we've endeavored with all our hearts to make sure we don't do that again and we understand how it happened.''
But overall, Williams said, the agency's real estate holdings are doing well. Worth $9.7 billion last year, their values tumbled to $7.8 billion for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2009.
With stocks starting to rebound, Williams emphasized the uptick in the value of the entire pension fund. It hit $138 billion in September 2007, dropped to $83 billion in March 2009 and now is up to $106 billion.
Meantime, the SBA managers are bracing for additional real estate hits, especially in their higher-risk, commercial property holdings, like hotels and office buildings. Tanking values are making it tough for their owners to refinance mortgages.
For Doug Bennett's performance during the peak of the market in 2006-07, on top of his $135,000 annual salary, the SBA last year awarded him an $11,000 bonus.
Spook, who analyzed the Manhattan investment and last year made about $87,000, received a $7,000 bonus.
Two other real-estate employees who had a role in the Peter Cooper Village investment also got bonuses last year for their work in 2006-07.
The SBA said the bonuses were reward for good performance of the entire pension fund.
Times computer assisted reporting specialist Connie Humburg and researcher Shirl Kennedy contributed to this report.
[Last modified: Sep 06, 2009 03:48 AM]
Don't Eat the Pythons -- Mercury. By Geniusofdespair
National Park Service officials have found "extraordinarily high levels of mercury" in the invasive python snakes taking root in the Everglades. It appears that the Everglades is doing its job as a marsh, filtering out pollutants like mercury. Only trouble is, methylmercury is bioavailable and bioaccumulated. Sulfur-based fertilizers used by Florida sugarcane farmers may be the source of increasing methylmercury production in the Everglades. U.S. Geological Survey had a report in 2004 that high concentrations have been found in panthers and game fish and that they were doing additional research investigating the mercury cycle in South Florida "to gain a better understanding of the microbial and geochemical controls regulating methylmercury degradation."
Miami Herald on the CHEAP. By Geniusofdespair
My paper was so thin this morning I didn't have to lift it - it floated into my hand.
Don't look for the Tropic Section on Monday anymore. It is combined with the Local Section to save bucks. Other cost saving gimmicks soon to come. My favorite: The narrowing of pages. Least favorite: Cutting reporting staff.
Don't look for the Tropic Section on Monday anymore. It is combined with the Local Section to save bucks. Other cost saving gimmicks soon to come. My favorite: The narrowing of pages. Least favorite: Cutting reporting staff.
The Marlin's Menu, what will it be? By Youbetcha
I am sitting here fantasizing about stadium food. I can’t wait to see the new and improved Marlin menu that will be coming with the new stadium. Based on these menu items from other stadiums Marlin fans better be prepared for the $4.00 bottled water and the $5.00 wiener.A story circulating in the news recently claimed that pizza in the new Dallas Cowboys football stadium will cost $90. However, later reports confirmed it will cost only $60, the same price as it was in the old stadium. A bargain! New York's Yankee Stadium:
Has already become famous for the $850,000 suites, but food isn't a cheap either in the "house that replaced the house that Ruth built." A single patty burger goes for $9, Philly cheese steak for $10.75, large garlic fries $8, hot dogs for $5.50 and up.
Yet, for all the cost, these stadiums can't match the food at the minor league baseball home of the Gateway Grizzlies, near Chicago. Each year, the Grizzlies unveil a new treat.
In 2007, its deep-fried White Castles were a hit. It's Best Burger is a cheeseburger between two Krispy Kreme doughnuts. It's toasted ravioli would go great with one of its own beers brewed nearby by O'Fallon Brewery. Also on the menu is The World's Best Hot Dog (so it says), made with black angus beef, bacon, onions and cheese sauce. For only $4 -- take that, Dallas! And it is a bonus that besides your stomach it will fill your arteries too.
I suppose fans who can afford tickets to NFL and Major League Baseball games can afford to pay haute cuisine prices for street food. However, I'd be happy with a box of Cracker Jacks ($4.75 at Yankee Stadium).
I wanted to share this little fact of my own about our Fish Bowl, so sports fans everywhere can be jealous:
Our Marlins fans can get seats and pig out for one low price in the All You Can Eat Seats. These comprehensive Club Level tickets range from $47.00 to $70.00 depending on the game. Fans get to chow down on buffet inside the Club Level. The South Florida health food menu includes hot dogs, nachos, popcorn, peanuts and fountain soda. The very best part of the deal is when the game is not going well and it is hotter than Hell, you can duck in the buffet area which is air-conditioned and pretend you are in Yankee Stadium’s S850,000 suite.
Of course, Marlin’s fans better hurry-up and take advantage of this All You Can Eat deal, because in a short few years, they will be longing for the good-old-days when a $70.00 peanut feast was a bargain.
Someone will have to pay the players’ salaries, and I am betting it will not be the Marlin’s management. The outrageously priced, artery clogging fare, will go a long way towards salaries.
Sunday, September 06, 2009
Rasmussen Polls: Here is a tip for you. By Geniusofdespair
Identify your poll at the BEGINNING of the phone call not at the end Rasmussen. Had I known it was you calling, I would not have sabotaged your polling data with wacky information. They will probably dump my results anyway as not many real Republicans make $20,000 a year, support the President and don't want to support France if there is a war. They named about 10 countries that I could choose to support in a war. I didn't support any of them but I did support health care reform and I now have a few kids that I didn't have before the call.
I just saw "Inglorious Basterds" or as it is better known: that Brad Pitt movie. Stupid name for a very entertaining flick.
I just saw "Inglorious Basterds" or as it is better known: that Brad Pitt movie. Stupid name for a very entertaining flick.
How Far is Juno Beach? It is Only a Helicopter Ride Away for FP&L CEO! By Geniusofdespair
I made a mistake on this blog that has been rectified.
Juno Beach is 77 miles North of Miami. That is a an hour and a half commute by car. Big deal. Many people do it or they move. They don't keep a helicopter and pilot for a 77 mile journey.
Our money, held hostage by this utility/monopoly, is being used to buy FP&L a new Corporate jet at $31 Million at the same time they want a rate hike. Armando Olivera, CEO who is out of touch with the common folks, said he uses the Jet for Tallahassee trips "generally" using the additional Corporate helicopter get to work in Juno, but not always. Generally is a lot of the time in my book. So the helicopter has to be kept available for these trips to Juno Beach from Olivera's home in Miami...a helicopter and a pilot to go 77 miles. The pilot has to be a full-time employee ($90,000 a year?). And the jet also has to have a pilot (another $90,000?)!
A year 2,000 estimate on operating cost for helicopters per hour ranges from $143 to $320, hence, these daily commuting trips to Juno Beach are costing a lot of money ($500 at least with pilot costs -- more than most Miami rate-payers make in a week). I say: Ditch the copter and get this CEO to move. But definitely, get rid of the copter, jet and the 2 pilots! Charter a plane if you have to FP&L. Maybe Rodney Barreto can fly you around, Armando, to save some bucks.
Juno Beach is 77 miles North of Miami. That is a an hour and a half commute by car. Big deal. Many people do it or they move. They don't keep a helicopter and pilot for a 77 mile journey.Our money, held hostage by this utility/monopoly, is being used to buy FP&L a new Corporate jet at $31 Million at the same time they want a rate hike. Armando Olivera, CEO who is out of touch with the common folks, said he uses the Jet for Tallahassee trips "generally" using the additional Corporate helicopter get to work in Juno, but not always. Generally is a lot of the time in my book. So the helicopter has to be kept available for these trips to Juno Beach from Olivera's home in Miami...a helicopter and a pilot to go 77 miles. The pilot has to be a full-time employee ($90,000 a year?). And the jet also has to have a pilot (another $90,000?)!
A year 2,000 estimate on operating cost for helicopters per hour ranges from $143 to $320, hence, these daily commuting trips to Juno Beach are costing a lot of money ($500 at least with pilot costs -- more than most Miami rate-payers make in a week). I say: Ditch the copter and get this CEO to move. But definitely, get rid of the copter, jet and the 2 pilots! Charter a plane if you have to FP&L. Maybe Rodney Barreto can fly you around, Armando, to save some bucks.
"Good Evening, Mr. Mayor, wherever you are…" Guest Blog By Outofsight
The best part about having county budget hearings is that it is always the best show in town. This year‘s budget hearing was no exception and did not disappoint viewers. The budget hearing is a process like none other in the county governance calendar. The Stephen P. Clark Center comes alive with very animated people all with very colorful stories or weird tales and in some cases, some poignant tragedies in their personal histories.Thursday evening’s meeting took on an underlying tone of anger and bitterness directed towards the county elected officials and more directly, Mayor Alvarez. Even with the hundreds of people who spoke ,there was an ear-catching phrase heard more than once as speakers greeted the dais:
“Good Evening, Mr. Mayor, wherever you are…” (hit read more)
From the TV viewer’s perspective, the Mayor’s seat on the dais was not visible. But, one could tell as the speaker’s eyes searched the dais for Mayor Alvarez that he had abandoned premises for somewhere more Mayor friendly and tush comfortable. The abandonment was obvious to the people who had stood in line for as long as eight hours for their only opportunity to personally address the man they had put into office. He was gone.
If the Mayor wasn’t around, one cannot help but wonder if he ran off to the safety of his 29th floor fiefdom to watch TV and eat in comfort. Meanwhile those regular folks (you) were allowed to stand for eight hours without resting, to go without dinner (and almost breakfast!) all so you could personally greet his empty chair with the words,
“Good Evening, Mr. Mayor, wherever you are…”
Dearest meeting-going constituents: Thank you for pointing out to the rest of us what we had merely suspected: that Mayor Alvarez was gone.
But to you loyal folks in our wonderful confused South Florida, I would like to point out one thing: as Mayor, Mr. Alvarez is not gone. Indeed, he has never been here or fully committed to the general community. He has not been with us, not now or ever. So I more accurately say:
Good Bye, Mr. Alvarez, wherever you are.
Saturday, September 05, 2009
On publishing the photographs of horrible war ... by gimleteye
Americans have been sheltered from visual images of the worst encountered by our young adults serving in the US military in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Bush White House prohibited photographs of our returning dead. To what end? That these images would be demoralizing and undercut public support for war? Now, suddenly and shockingly, we have a photograph of a young dying American who stands for so many thousands of fallen and wounded soldiers; surely to become an iconic image of war. While respecting the Bernard family's objections to the A.P. photograph showing their dying son in combat, publishing the photograph by Julie Jacobson serves a national purpose: it captures the nature of sacrifice, war, and death better than a thousand words. (The New York Times "Lens Blog" discusses the controversy.)
"During the firefight, Jacobson had wrestled with a question every war photographer faces: whether to offer to help save a life, or keep out of the way of the professionals and go on shooting pictures. Some of Bernard's comrades asked to see the photos. In her journal she described them flipping through the images she had captured that day: "They did stop when they came to that moment. But none of them complained or grew angry about it. They understood that it was what it was. They understand, despite that he was their friend, it was the reality of things." It had all gone very quickly. It was late afternoon when the Taliban fired their first RPGs. It was dusk when the Marine was driven away in the armored vehicle. And it was night when the patrol returning to base saw the dark silhouette of the helicopter that flew him away. Lance Cpl. Joshua "Bernie" Bernard was 21 years old."
Today, there are more private contractors in Afghanistan working for the Pentagon and government agencies than soldiers, paid far more than soldiers in an amazing proof that corporations are more representative of the interests of US citizens than the US military. There may be excellent reasons to be fighting our wars. These reasons ought to be better than those that committed America to war in Vietnam, or, the 40 years American policies allowed our nation to become addicted to foreign sources of oil. No one should be insulated from the costs of war, including what happens when our troops and mercenaries come home to a jobless economic recovery. Message to government: "Just give us the truth".
Cuba Libre! Not the Drink --- But a place for your County tax dollars. By Youbetcha'
The Union for Cuba Libre is calling for an uprising against the tyranny in Cuba, which is a noble goal, but shouldn't they be doing it with the federal government’s policy people and not with our county tax dollars? Cuba Libre is an organization, not a stylish beverage from the streets of Miami’s Little Havana. Reading the organization’s statement of purpose is little like listening to our beloved Commissioner Souto on a bad day. Mayor Alvarez must have understood something about this organization that is not readily apparent after all, he shelled out $5,000 of his 2008 discretionary fund to support the group’s endeavors.
Let’s ponder this one. Cut county support services to the community and give Union for Cuba Libre $5000.00. While we used to think that it was only the county commission doing bizarre things with county money, it turns out that Alvarez can do equally as well in the “waste of county dollars department.” (hit read more)
2008 was a huge election year. Alvarez and his fellow politicians wrote checks to people all over the county. Oops. Isn’t that an argument against discretionary funds? Nevertheless, I appreciate the need for discretionary funding; many times the money is used to do some great work in our community at a grass roots level. There is nothing to complain about when organizations are using the money to feed our hungry families.
However, I temper my enthusiasm for discretionary funding when county money goes to a politically based organization that has a very vague stated purpose. It may be a moot point, but Union for Cuba Libre, Inc. doesn’t show up in the state incorporation site, so we don’t even know who they are. The Cuba Libre website tries to lay their purpose out for us mere mortals; I don’t think it succeeds. Of course, something could be getting lost in the literal translation of the website, but somehow, I get the drift.
Alvarez did not need to give this group a $5000.00 for any other reason than it was an election year. The Union for Cuba Libre is calling for an uprising against the tyranny in Cuba, which is a noble goal, but shouldn't they be doing it with the federal government’s policy people and not with our county tax dollars?
Friday, September 04, 2009
Miami 21 Gets Approval. By Geniusofdespair
Commissioner Tomas Regalado cast the only NO vote on the new City zoning code, called Miami 21. There has to be a confirmation vote by the Commission to make it official.
No Tax Raise in County - Expect Cuts in Services. By Geniusofdespair
All those people begging for money yesterday are going to be disappointed. There will be no money for their charities or causes. Commissioners now must cut half billion dollars out of their $7.5 billion budget.
According to the Miami Herald:
Voting for the flat tax rate: Javier Souto, Joe Martinez, Rebeca Sosa, Carlos Gimenez, Bruno Barreiro, Natacha Seijas, Jose "Pepe" Diaz and Sally Heyman.
Voting against: Chairman Dennis Moss, Barbara Jordan, Audrey Edmonson, Dorrin Rolle and Katy Sorenson.
According to the Miami Herald:
Voting for the flat tax rate: Javier Souto, Joe Martinez, Rebeca Sosa, Carlos Gimenez, Bruno Barreiro, Natacha Seijas, Jose "Pepe" Diaz and Sally Heyman.
Voting against: Chairman Dennis Moss, Barbara Jordan, Audrey Edmonson, Dorrin Rolle and Katy Sorenson.
City of Miami: A Private Investigator Exposes an Overpaid Executive. By Geniusofespair
Check out Miami New Times, this is a real eye-opener. New Times prints a diary of the daily schedule of City Executive, Christine Morale -- who appeared to be working 4 to 6 grueling hours every day to earn her $112,000. Oh, and she was also involved with delivering money to disgraced former County Commissioner Miriam Alonso years ago.
Union Boss Charlie Fox had her followed after she got two union workers fired for tardiness. Cox said:
"You fuck with my people and I'm going to fuck with you." This is sordid tale, too bad it is true, and, of course, Morales leaves with a hefty package and her pension.
Also see NBC Story...
Union Boss Charlie Fox had her followed after she got two union workers fired for tardiness. Cox said:
"You fuck with my people and I'm going to fuck with you." This is sordid tale, too bad it is true, and, of course, Morales leaves with a hefty package and her pension.
Also see NBC Story...
Miami: 3rd Worst for Traffic Angst in the Country. By Geniusofdespair
According to the South Florida Business Journal, Greater Miami has once again made it to the top tier of a title to be ashamed of (this is the second "bad" list we made in just a few weeks time): Greater Miami has surpassed Atlanta in IBM’s second annual Commuter Pain Index survey of traffic in major metropolitan areas. The survey, released Friday, ranks Miami the third-worst area in the nation for commuter pain, behind only Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
We beat out New York and Chicago for third worst. This is what happens when you push growth and sprawl without preparing for it. Thank you County Commissioners for 'paving' the way for this title of making commuters crazy. The study found for example:
• Forty percent of respondents in greater Miami report aggressive/rude drivers as the most frustrating part of their commute. This is a five percentage-point increase from last year and the highest percentage among the 10 cities surveyed.
• Traffic was so bad on at least one occasion within the last three years that nearly 39 percent of Miami drivers turned around and went home. That percentage – up 6 points since last year – is higher than any other city in the survey.
Virginia Key Beach Park is Threatened to be UNFUNDED! By Geniusofdespair
The largest city park in the City of Miami, Virginia Key Beach Park, funding will be eliminated for fiscal year ’09-’10; effectively terminating all positions at the property. In other words, the staff funding will go but the City of Miami claims the Park's Department will continue to maintain the property.Established in 1945 as ‘The Colored Beach’ this site immediately became a spot for social gatherings for Black residents who made weekly trips to enjoy things such as the carousel, the dancing pavilion or the mini-train. During this era, there was a lack of beach facilities for Blacks and this 1000-acre barrier island characterized by a unique and fragile natural environment, served as the recreational location for those who wanted to swim in the ocean or picnic on the beach. (Historic photo of park - hit read more)
The public is urged to lend their endorsement for the proposed budget contribution from the City by telephoning, writing and e-mailing all City of Miami officials (including commissioners and the mayor), to voice their messages of support in addition to attending the two public budget meetings scheduled for September 10th and 24th at Miami City Hall.
Since the beach/park’s grand-re-opening in February 2008, praises have poured in from local residents, tourists and members of the press about the enormous strides made in the popular environmental, preservation and educational programs taking place at Historic Virginia Key Beach Park, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 2008, for example, the Children’s Trust presented the Marine Biology Summer Camp with the prestigious ‘Youth Development Program Award’ while Miami New Times readers voted the only Atlantic shoreline in the City of Miami, the ‘Best Beach’ in Miami-Dade.
Among the city’s independent agencies, Historic Virginia Key Beach Park stands out as a prime example of what local advocacy can achieve for the betterment of the community. As decision-makers contemplate ways to prioritize limited tax dollars, the total withdrawal of future funding for Virginia Key Beach Park Trust would not only be very wasteful and shortsighted, but, would also send an ominous signal about what is truly deemed significant in the City of Miami.
Historic Virginia Key Beach Park, once called ‘Bears Cut’, was frequented in the early 1900’s by Black settlers arriving on the island by ferry from a dock at the end of Fifth Street, in downtown Miami.
Former City of Miami Commissioner, M. Athalie Range was instrumental, together with the Virginia Key Beach Park Trust, in adding this remarkable landmark to the National Register of Historic Places in June 2002.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
10:45 pm: Budget Hearings Are Still Going at the County. By Geniusofdespair
A woman just yelled at Commissioner Pepe Diaz for laughing while she was talking. She said she was down in the lobby for 5 hours. Mr. Mayor, let's get these people some cookies and vino while they are waiting, it would put them in a better mood. Most of the people so far are begging for money for their organizations and causes. Glad I didn't go to hear that. BTW - To whomever thought it up: Stop blocking off VIP "Reserved" seating in the commission chambers. The seats are not for VIP's they are for the people. Give me a break. Remember Miami 21 is being heard again at the City of Miami tomorrow. Aren't you glad you had nothing better to do this week?
FP&L refuses to answer questions on Nuke Expansion. By Genius & Guest Blogger Caitlin
The Hurricane room at the University of Miami was packed last night with 150 people -- all with the same nagging question: “What the hell is Florida Power and Light up to?” Held by the South Florida Regional Planning Council, the meeting was about FPL’s proposed expansion to add two new reactors at Turkey Point and the God-awful high tension wires that the expansion would require. We heard 2 canned speech from an FPL spokesperson and a Dept. of Environmental Protection Staff Member (who appeared to be shilling for the utility). After that, the 7 or 8 blue-shirted power company employees took to the corners to answer questions "PRIVATELY ONLY.”
Strangely, the DEP guy expressed a high degree of certainty about a very complicated and scientific topic - health effects from Electric and Magnetic fields (none). In contrast, a simple question about how high the transmission lines were going to be – was never answered. (hit read more)
Person after person raised questions about public health, environmental stewardship and quality of life. No representative from FPL was available to answer those questions on the record, nor did they linger, as promised, to answer face-to-face queries.
Citizens voiced concerns that the rock mining that is required to elevate the new nuclear reactors would exacerbate salt-water intrusion into the aquifer, while also destroying farmland. Others demanded that the transmission lines from the plant be buried for safety and aesthetics.No one stood up to speak in favor of the expansion plan. Many cited declining populations in Florida and asserted that FPL has no reason to expand. A common theme was cost—financial and environmental. No one seemed to want to foot the bill for an unpopular plan, and several people stated that the enormous amount of water necessary to sustain the reactors would not jive with South Florida’s inconsistent water supply.
Want to get involved? Be sure to attend the Tropical Audubon Society meeting September 24th at Pinecrest Library, 6pm.
Comments about FPL’s application can be sent to khamilton@sfrpc.com, and more information about the application is on SFRPC’s website.
P.S. If FP&L just gave answers they wouldn't have angered the crowd. They could have just hired professional lobbyists who are masters at manufacturing non-answers to questions by the public. They instead left scores of people mad at them. Are they that arrogant? They couldn't be that stupid.
Now what? US Army Corps of Engineers must take sea-level rise into account ... by gimleteye
The US Army Corps of Engineers has played a central role in the unsustainable development of Florida. A catalogue of its errors and violations of law would and does fill volumes. Suffice to say, in the past two decades the Corps has struggled to reform its loutish behavior in permitting and planning major water infrastructure projects across the country, with decidely mixed results. This federal agency-- charged with both flood protection for humans and for protecting federal environmental laws-- seems designed to fail. Its core missions could be mistaken for providing a revolving door between agency specialists and private industry. In Florida, the Corps is the co-partner, with the state of Florida, operating the massive flood control system. From the business of opening and closing gates to science, planning and permitting, it is often one step forward and two steps back.
This lack of clarity and resolve is not likely to improve under the pressure of global warming without strong direction from the White House and Congress. Two and a half years ago, the US Senate offered an amendment to the Water Resources Development Act that would require the Corps to plan ahead on global warming. Recently, the Sacramento Bee reported, "Levee projects in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta will have to account for rising sea levels under a new federal policy aimed at shoring up the region's main line of defense against climate change. It's the first comprehensive policy by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to require that projects under its jurisdiction be designed with higher sea levels in mind." (Delta levee projects must now prepare for rising sea level, August 31, 2009) The new stand-alone policy supercedes other references to sea-level rise that have been buried, for years, beneath Corps objectives.
It would be historic if the US Army Corps of Engineers were required to include global warming considerations as a driver of decision-making. With so much at stake in the continuous internal conflicts of mission and purpose, it is easy to see why special interests are fighting tooth and nail to keep global warming off the table. Along those lines there is another interesting development: Obama EPA chief Lisa Jackson recently stated that it the intent of the agency to begin taking a closer look at blanket approval of Corps dredge and fill permits: the heart and soul of unsustainable development in Florida.
According to the St. Petersburg Times, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is vowing to increase EPA's use of its little-used veto authority to override Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act (CWA) "dredge and fill" permits. These permits are ubiquitous; from development in wetlands to rock mines and other purposes. "The Corps and the public should know that, instead of just expressing objections, the EPA will once again use its veto power," Jackson said in an interview with the Times, published Aug. 8. Jackson also called the old permit review process "toothless," noting that, in the past, when staff made their concerns known to the Corps, they "didn't hear back." Under section 404 of the water act, EPA has authority to veto Corps-issued permits. The Times notes the agency has only used the authority 13 times since the CWA was enacted in 1972. By more frequently wielding its authority to veto, EPA could force stricter environmental requirements for the permits."
What this means for South Florida is anyone's guess. Projects like FPL's $20 billion plan to build nuclear reactors in Everglades wetlands could face sharper scrutiny. It will be harder for FPL to do a "no show" with federal regulators, like it did at a public hearing last night in Miami. I've repeatedly raised the question how anyone could allow building more nuclear power at sea level, where both ratepayers and ancilliary support infrastructure will suffer severely under conditions of rising seas within the service lifetimes of the new reactors. Both the Corps and EPA must sign off on FPL's plans, although if past holds true to form, the exact meaning of progress will end up in rounds of terrible politics and costly litigation.
This lack of clarity and resolve is not likely to improve under the pressure of global warming without strong direction from the White House and Congress. Two and a half years ago, the US Senate offered an amendment to the Water Resources Development Act that would require the Corps to plan ahead on global warming. Recently, the Sacramento Bee reported, "Levee projects in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta will have to account for rising sea levels under a new federal policy aimed at shoring up the region's main line of defense against climate change. It's the first comprehensive policy by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to require that projects under its jurisdiction be designed with higher sea levels in mind." (Delta levee projects must now prepare for rising sea level, August 31, 2009) The new stand-alone policy supercedes other references to sea-level rise that have been buried, for years, beneath Corps objectives.
It would be historic if the US Army Corps of Engineers were required to include global warming considerations as a driver of decision-making. With so much at stake in the continuous internal conflicts of mission and purpose, it is easy to see why special interests are fighting tooth and nail to keep global warming off the table. Along those lines there is another interesting development: Obama EPA chief Lisa Jackson recently stated that it the intent of the agency to begin taking a closer look at blanket approval of Corps dredge and fill permits: the heart and soul of unsustainable development in Florida.
According to the St. Petersburg Times, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson is vowing to increase EPA's use of its little-used veto authority to override Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act (CWA) "dredge and fill" permits. These permits are ubiquitous; from development in wetlands to rock mines and other purposes. "The Corps and the public should know that, instead of just expressing objections, the EPA will once again use its veto power," Jackson said in an interview with the Times, published Aug. 8. Jackson also called the old permit review process "toothless," noting that, in the past, when staff made their concerns known to the Corps, they "didn't hear back." Under section 404 of the water act, EPA has authority to veto Corps-issued permits. The Times notes the agency has only used the authority 13 times since the CWA was enacted in 1972. By more frequently wielding its authority to veto, EPA could force stricter environmental requirements for the permits."
What this means for South Florida is anyone's guess. Projects like FPL's $20 billion plan to build nuclear reactors in Everglades wetlands could face sharper scrutiny. It will be harder for FPL to do a "no show" with federal regulators, like it did at a public hearing last night in Miami. I've repeatedly raised the question how anyone could allow building more nuclear power at sea level, where both ratepayers and ancilliary support infrastructure will suffer severely under conditions of rising seas within the service lifetimes of the new reactors. Both the Corps and EPA must sign off on FPL's plans, although if past holds true to form, the exact meaning of progress will end up in rounds of terrible politics and costly litigation.
Hialeah Resident Milly Herrera: Personal Account of Dealing with her Commissioner Vile Natacha Seijas. By Geniusofdespair
Hialeah resident, Milly Herrera gave this firsthand account of dealing with Vile Natacha Seijas:I was contacting everyone and their grandmother two weeks ago about a problem I have with property taxes. I spoke with Commissioner Seijas when she was nice enough to return my call, but after the conversation, she left me void of any faith in her. The commissioner is of the opinion that: 1. I do not know how government operates, 2. I do not know anything about government, and 3. I dislike government. She demonstrated to be all those things some people say she is - vile, mean and insensitive.
I guess my college education should have taught me more. I admit that, while I might be naive about many aspects of government, I am smart enough to understand that none of them know how how run government effectively.
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
Time Magazine Looks at Reasons for Exodus from South Florida. By Geniusofdespair
"In a state that worshipped condo-flippers as great entrepreneurs, it was all a house of cards waiting to be blown down when the housing bubble burst."
This article makes us look like a bunch of bozos and our leaders as incompetent. Anyway, here are three excerpts from the Time Magazine Article - "Behind Florida's Exodus: Rising Taxes, Political Ineptitude" by Tim Padgett:
There are many things public officials probably shouldn't do during a severe recession, but no one seems to have told the leaders in Florida about them. One thing, for instance, would be giving a dozen top aides hefty raises while urging a rise in property taxes, as the mayor of Miami-Dade County recently did. Or jacking up already exorbitant hurricane-insurance premiums, as Florida's government-run property insurer just did. Or sending an army of highly paid lobbyists to push for a steep hike in electricity rates, as South Florida's public utility is doing. --- And, sadly there is more:
Homeowners, especially in Broward and Miami-Dade, have been falling out of their flip-flops in recent days as they open their preliminary property-tax notices to find increases of 15% or more. That's sizable in a low-income region where the median property-tax bill is already some $3,000, and it's doubly frustrating given that property values have slid by some 25% during Florida's housing bust. Residents have barely digested the recent news that their hurricane-insurance premiums, which can top $5,000 a year for most South Florida homes, will rise 10% a year for the next three years (vital, officials claim, for handling claims from the next big storm). And their public utility, Florida Power & Light (FPL), is lobbying the state for a 30% rate hike (vital, FPL execs insist, for upgrading infrastructure). And (sadly there is STILL more):
In a state that worshipped condo-flippers as great entrepreneurs, it was all a house of cards waiting to be blown down when the housing bubble burst. Now that it has happened, those Floridians who haven't left the state had hoped their officials might change the way they do things — or at least not attend a Kentucky Derby party hosted by the same FPL honchos lobbying them for a rate hike, as a Florida Public Service Commission director has admitted to doing a few months ago. But if Miami and Florida officials can't get their acts together, they can probably expect even lower head counts in the years to come.
This article makes us look like a bunch of bozos and our leaders as incompetent. Anyway, here are three excerpts from the Time Magazine Article - "Behind Florida's Exodus: Rising Taxes, Political Ineptitude" by Tim Padgett:
There are many things public officials probably shouldn't do during a severe recession, but no one seems to have told the leaders in Florida about them. One thing, for instance, would be giving a dozen top aides hefty raises while urging a rise in property taxes, as the mayor of Miami-Dade County recently did. Or jacking up already exorbitant hurricane-insurance premiums, as Florida's government-run property insurer just did. Or sending an army of highly paid lobbyists to push for a steep hike in electricity rates, as South Florida's public utility is doing. --- And, sadly there is more:
Homeowners, especially in Broward and Miami-Dade, have been falling out of their flip-flops in recent days as they open their preliminary property-tax notices to find increases of 15% or more. That's sizable in a low-income region where the median property-tax bill is already some $3,000, and it's doubly frustrating given that property values have slid by some 25% during Florida's housing bust. Residents have barely digested the recent news that their hurricane-insurance premiums, which can top $5,000 a year for most South Florida homes, will rise 10% a year for the next three years (vital, officials claim, for handling claims from the next big storm). And their public utility, Florida Power & Light (FPL), is lobbying the state for a 30% rate hike (vital, FPL execs insist, for upgrading infrastructure). And (sadly there is STILL more):
In a state that worshipped condo-flippers as great entrepreneurs, it was all a house of cards waiting to be blown down when the housing bubble burst. Now that it has happened, those Floridians who haven't left the state had hoped their officials might change the way they do things — or at least not attend a Kentucky Derby party hosted by the same FPL honchos lobbying them for a rate hike, as a Florida Public Service Commission director has admitted to doing a few months ago. But if Miami and Florida officials can't get their acts together, they can probably expect even lower head counts in the years to come.
23 County Commission Staff Members Got Raises This Year. By Geniusofdespair
Commission Chair Moss defends the 18 raises he handed out by saying his staff have new duties because he is the "Chair" according to the Miami Herald. The problem with that defense, Commissioner Moss, is that your Chairmanship will be gone in 2 years but those raises have bumped up staff salaries for the next 20 or 30 years. That 22 percent raise you gave to your assistant, translates to half a million bucks over the long haul, and you have also increased the pension. One of 110 comments so far on the Herald Website said: So the previous chairman Martinez gave his staff raises for so-called increased responsibilities. Did their salaries go back to the pre-chairman levels after Moss took over? donkeyho (actually Donkey, the previous chair was Bruno Barreiro but he is unmemorable so I don't blame you for forgetting)
Again, I say this salary stuff is a red herring -- small stuff in comparison to other things they are doing at County Hall to slap around citizens.
Advice to FPL's Lewis Hay: time to re-think your strategy ... by gimleteye
FPL is one of Wall Street's favored large electric utilities, but the raft of bad news emanating out of Florida-- its corporate home state-- has reached a level of alarm. The corporation has taken a very aggressive strategy in Florida, pulling out all the stops to increase its productive capacity: mainly in the form of two new nuclear units at Turkey Point in Homestead, Florida. This $20 billion project is moving toward a final decision by the State of Florida, and then the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
FPL's strategy for new nuclear was born in the fog of the housing boom that topped in 2005; showing it takes large, massive corporations almost as long as the government to adjust to changing economic reality. The problem is that top executives like Lewis Hay, III, Florida Power & Light's chief executive, talk to each other in a bubble. They see the forest through the trees, but they imagine they can impose the same forest on everyone else. Today, the economic collapse in Florida and across the nation is still trying to find adequate historic comparisons. We're not out of the woods yet. And the woods are nothing like Lew Hay and his lobbying corps imagine.
It is very difficult and very costly to plan and to permit new nuclear power. No question there. But the force of economic reality is bending FPL's corporate tactics to the breaking point: the company is under pressure to divulge top salaries by the Public Service Commission that is, itself, under investigation for undue influence of regulated companies like FPL. It is seeking a massive 30 percent rate increase at the same time it is pushing through permitting plans that government agencies are finding huge problems with. From my own point of view, trying to shoe-horn new nuclear at Turkey Point-- where the plants will have to be decommissioned within their service lifetime because of sea level rise-- is insanity. The only figure who seems truly oblivious to the difficulties: Gov. Charlie Crist. Crist knows that he is in the catbird's seat. He's already indicated his approval of nuclear power. All the turmoil FPL is encountering along the way to a complete nuclear site application is no skin off his back.
But, one has to wonder why FPL would continue to play its bad hand of cards, amidst all the problems the corporation is stirring up. To be sure, FPL already has ratepayer money -- more than $100 million-- in its corporate pocket to fund planning and public relations and marketing and spin doctoring and litigation against grouchy environmentalists and intervenors. But if Lew Hay is smart, he'd listen to voices outside his bubble-- where everyone says 'yes' to every time he nods his head or shakes it. He's not paid so well by shareholders to be stupid. Is he?
FPL's strategy for new nuclear was born in the fog of the housing boom that topped in 2005; showing it takes large, massive corporations almost as long as the government to adjust to changing economic reality. The problem is that top executives like Lewis Hay, III, Florida Power & Light's chief executive, talk to each other in a bubble. They see the forest through the trees, but they imagine they can impose the same forest on everyone else. Today, the economic collapse in Florida and across the nation is still trying to find adequate historic comparisons. We're not out of the woods yet. And the woods are nothing like Lew Hay and his lobbying corps imagine.
It is very difficult and very costly to plan and to permit new nuclear power. No question there. But the force of economic reality is bending FPL's corporate tactics to the breaking point: the company is under pressure to divulge top salaries by the Public Service Commission that is, itself, under investigation for undue influence of regulated companies like FPL. It is seeking a massive 30 percent rate increase at the same time it is pushing through permitting plans that government agencies are finding huge problems with. From my own point of view, trying to shoe-horn new nuclear at Turkey Point-- where the plants will have to be decommissioned within their service lifetime because of sea level rise-- is insanity. The only figure who seems truly oblivious to the difficulties: Gov. Charlie Crist. Crist knows that he is in the catbird's seat. He's already indicated his approval of nuclear power. All the turmoil FPL is encountering along the way to a complete nuclear site application is no skin off his back.
But, one has to wonder why FPL would continue to play its bad hand of cards, amidst all the problems the corporation is stirring up. To be sure, FPL already has ratepayer money -- more than $100 million-- in its corporate pocket to fund planning and public relations and marketing and spin doctoring and litigation against grouchy environmentalists and intervenors. But if Lew Hay is smart, he'd listen to voices outside his bubble-- where everyone says 'yes' to every time he nods his head or shakes it. He's not paid so well by shareholders to be stupid. Is he?
King Mango Strut Parade: in need of a bailout? by gimleteye
There are rumblings of dissent in the ranks of the organizers of the Mango Strut Parade, Miami's only officially benign blowing-off-of-steam and the local and national Idiocracy in its many forms. It is a blissful parade in Coconut Grove shortly after New Year and perhaps the best contribution to the Miami melting pot from a once-stalwart Anglo majority that took its freedoms in equal parts tea, gin, and hooch. Its demise would be a shattering event for Miami, a city in continual need of satire, irony, and attention to the glorious role of the Seven Deadly Sins in its official affairs. I'm not sure of its rumored demise, but at a time of rising taxes, job insecurity and a "cash for clunker" economy, Miami needs the King Mango Strut Parade now more than ever.
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
What is Little Wise Guy Commissioner Joe Martinez Up To? By Geniusofdespair
Mayor Wannabe Little Joe and Vile Natacha Seijas have been whining that they don’t have a voice at County budget meetings being conducted by the Budget, Planning and Sustainability Committee. The workshops/meetings are chaired by Commissioner Katy Sorenson. Martinez is on the Budget Committee, the Vice Chair, Natacha isn’t a member. Martinez has a high seat at the table but strangely, he hasn’t shown up for the 3 meetings (protest?) except for about an hour at one.It said in Miami Today that Joe Martinez is proposing legislation that a Budget and Conference Committee should be formed, made up of the chairs of each of the county’s regular committees. This new entity would be headed by Katy Sorenson, according to his legislation.
Here is the really dumb part, neither he nor Vile Natacha Seijas are Chairs of ANY committees. So what does this legislation get him (it, in fact, removes him) or her? Nada. This is really petty. I heard there are memo's floating around about this...will post if I get one. Here are the members of the existing Committee:
Katy Sorenson (8) Chair; Joe A. Martinez (11) Vice Chair; Commissioners Audrey M. Edmonson (3), Carlos A. Gimenez (7), Sally A. Heyman (4), and Barbara J. Jordan (1)
Big Sugar: fat, powerful and rippling with analogies ... by gimleteye
The American Heart Association doesn't have a soft spot in its heart for processed sugar. Nor should anyone else. "In a scientific statement issued Monday, the organization says most women should limit their sugar intake to 100 calories, or about six teaspoons, a day; for men, the recommendation is 150 calories, or nine teaspoons. The recommendations are likely to prove challenging for many consumers to meet. Just one 12-ounce can of cola has about 130 calories, or eight teaspoons of sugar. ... The heart association has encouraged consumers to moderate sugar consumption, but the new statement is the first time it has suggested specific limits." (Wall Street Journal, August 25, 2009)
There is a funny thing about sugar. It is so ubiquitous in our diets that it becomes hard to describe. Sugar is in the air we breathe. Not literally, of course, but the point is that Sugar invites a thousand comparisons and analogies. Here are two: the American taxpayer and voter has allowed Congress and White House to lick the sugar stick like hamsters on a water dispenser laced with nicotine. Comparing the sugar lobby to tobacco is not far from the truth.
In a 2007 editorial, the Orlando Sentinel called the sugar provision in the Farm Bill, "a shakedown". Why are we so willing to be shaken down and suffer health consequences at the same time? A friend of mine just returned from Switzerland. In an informal airport survey, he noticed an immediate difference between the airport crowd in Switzerland and the US airport where he landed: obesity. Just plain fat. We have turned into a curious nation, jiggling with layers of excess. America doesn't manufacture much. We leave that work to low cost labor nations. Much of the technology that we rely on is now made in other nations, too. We have a lot of government employees and a bloated health care system filled with intermediaries. We make airplanes, weapons and wage wars on behalf of the free world. And we fuel our ambitions with sugar.
"For decades, a federal program has protected the U.S. sugar industry by propping up its prices. The sugar program has been a sweet deal for the industry, and a rip-off for just about everyone else." (Sugar Shakedown, Oct. 26, 2007, Orlando Sentinel) To be clear, this "shakedown" has its companion analogies in state politics. When Gov. Jeb Bush encouraged the Florida legislature to re-write the legal agreement forged in the early 1990's between the US government and Florida and sugar producers polluting the Everglades, there were more lobbyists employed by sugar patrolling the capitol hallways than Florida senators. And, back when I was leading the fight against the Homestead Air Force Base conversion to a privatized commercial airport in Miami-Dade and trying to arrange a press conference at County Hall, it was a sugar lobbyist who intervened with then commissioner chairwoman Gwen Margolis to shut down the event.
In a 2005 editorial, the Wall Street Journal wrote: "U.S. sugar policy has also harmed the environment by encouraging overproduction. Florida's Everglades have been damaged enough by runoff from sugar cane fields that a $300 million water treatment facility will be required to clean it up. But the sugar industry will pay less than one-third of that cost, while taxpayers pick up the rest, especially Floridians who have a new line on their property tax bill. Think of it as a second sugar tax, after the first tax of higher sugar prices. What's astonishing about all this is how much damage is being done to so many for the benefit of so few. A handful of cane and sugar beet growers in a few states benefit the most, and one key to their success is their ability to dole out campaign contributions. In the 2004 election cycle, Florida's Fanjul family, owner of mega-sugar producer Flo-Sun, gave $430,750 in political donations for a total Flo-Sun contribution of $573,700." (Bittersweet Trade, May 13, 2005, Wall Street Journal)
In yet another newspaper editorial against sugar policy-- I can't think of a single newspaper that has endorsed the sugar subsidy in the Farm Bill-- The Washington Post editorial page recently wrote, "Since 1982, domestic sugar producers have lobbied for, and gotten, a government-guaranteed share of the market. Today, their guaranteed share is up to 85 percent; the rest gets divided up among some 40 countries lucky enough to hold quotas of varying sizes. The advent of free Mexican imports upset this scheme somewhat, which is why the 2008 farm bill promised that the government would offset them by purchasing excess U.S. sugar and shipping it to ethanol factories. In addition, the federal government guarantees minimum prices for both raw cane sugar and refined beet sugar. Pretty sweet." (Washington Post, "Sugar's sickeningly sweet deal with the government", August 23, 2009) Well it is even sweeter. The Washington Post doesn't want to bore readers with the details of the failed ethanol bubble or sugar's welfare racket.
Sugar wields its outsized profits in South Florida, from spin doctors inventing "green" sugar packaging to PR flaks to big downtown law firms that have been sucking on the sugar-tipped tit for decades. It is playing a behind the scenes role in promoting the campaign of Marco Rubio against Gov. Charlie Crist, who angered Fanjul family sugar interests by entering into a land deal they deemed 'too sweet' with their chief competitor, US Sugar.
In a Herald puff piece, former Florida governor and US Senator Bob Graham discusses his new book, "America: The Owner's Manual". He cites the capacity of citizens to effectively change government. ("Yes, you can fight City Hall, August 25, 2009, Miami Herald") But while he was US Senator, when it came to standing up to Big Sugar on behalf of public health and the Everglades, Bob Graham hardly practiced what he now preaches.
On the big stuff, there are no differences between Florida's sugar growers. When they can't grow sugar, they will build inland ports, rock mines, or new suburbs.
The economic downturn has done nothing to lessen either sugar's influence or desire to knock down barriers to building whatever industrial facilities they want in historic Everglades wetlands. According to the Wall Street Journal, "Sugar is a classic case of what Milton Friedman once called the Law of the Few -- that in a democracy the intense interests of a few can often trump the diffuse costs spread among many." (Today, the Martin County Commission is taking up a new proposal to weaken growth management restrictions in the western part of the county; long a goal of sugar growers and land speculators.)
The Wall Street Journal reports, "Current food labels don't list sugar content in calories or teaspoons and don't distinguish between natural and added sugars." You can ask former Senator Graham or current US Senator Bill Nelson, why. I'm not sure they would admit that Big Sugar controls local and state politics with its sweet tooth along the lines of the popular HBO show, "True Blood"; where excess and sweetness interlock like legislators and sugar money after the sun goes down.
April 27, 2000
Sugar Industry Seeks Bailout,
Gives Money to Help Get Way
By BRUCE INGERSOLL
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
WASHINGTON -- Never have old hands at the Agriculture Department
seen such a turnout: 11 U.S. senators trooping into Secretary Dan
Glickman's office to lobby for a big sugar-industry bailout.
"When you have 11 senators showing up," says Florida sugar-company
executive Robert Buker, "that's horsepower" -- enough power, he
believes, to push an ambivalent Clinton administration into an
unprecedented market intervention to bail out distressed U.S. sugar
producers.
The producers are floundering beneath a market-depressing glut of sugar.
Come October, they face another problem: a tenfold jump in Mexican
sugar imports. The federal sugar-loan program, which has cosseted them
for nearly two decades, is suddenly in danger of imploding.
So, to shore up the domestic market, sugar lobbyists are imploring
administration officials to authorize a bold sugar-buying spree. Only by
spending $100 million now to buy sugar and boost market prices, they
contend, can the government hope to head off a much costlier wave of
sugar-loan forfeitures later this summer, in the midst of an election
campaign.
Fighting the sugar lobby at every turn is a well-financed alliance of
consumer groups, candy makers, confectioners and other major users of
sweeteners. Their vision of the sweet hereafter is a deregulated sugar
industry, and they want the administration to let the market sink. Says Jeff
Nedelman, spokesman for the Coalition for Sugar Reform: "The whole
house of cards is starting to collapse."
The government has long managed to keep U.S. sugar prices far above the
world price, largely by curtailing imports of lower-cost sugar. That benefits
producers, obviously, though it also means consumers get stuck with a
price-support tab -- estimated at more than $1 billion a year -- in the form
of higher sugar, candy and soft-drink prices.
But in recent months, due to rising sugar plantings and improving yields,
prices have fallen below the guaranteed price-support levels of 18 cents a
pound for raw cane sugar and 22.9 cents for refined beet sugar. Lately,
prices are up a little in anticipation of a bailout. Under the loan program,
sugar processors who put up sugar as collateral are entitled to forfeit their
crop, keep the loan money and let the government eat the loss.
Processors are threatening to forfeit as much as 1.4 million tons of sugar
valued at an estimated $550 million. The sugar lobby's pitch to Mr.
Glickman and White House officials is that buying 300,000 to 350,000
tons immediately will give the market enough lift to avert massive forfeitures
at the end of August and September. "Sugar prices are at a 20-year low,''
says Sen. Larry Craig, an Idaho Republican. "The potential for loan
forfeitures ... is very real."
The senators visiting Mr. Glickman on March 26 -- all but one from major
sugar-producing states -- told the agriculture secretary that "he needed to
get on the stick," says Mr. Buker, senior vice president of United States
Sugar Corp., the nation's largest processor. On April 6, a dozen
sugar-state lawmakers met with White House Chief of Staff John Podesta.
They and the industry fear costly forfeitures would be a public-relations
debacle, sparking moves in Congress to scrap the shaky program.
Administration officials wouldn't be so hesitant about buying heaps of sugar
if they knew what to do with it. One option is to sell excess sugar on the
world market at cut-rate prices, but that would be just as controversial as
Europe's oft-deplored dumping practices. Another is to donate it overseas
as humanitarian aid, but so far no country has shown any interest in empty
calories.
Limited amounts could possibly be used for school lunches and other
feeding programs. The only other viable option is to use it as feedstock for
ethanol plants, but it would have to be dirt-cheap to compete with corn,
which sells for a nickel a pound.
Sweet Contributions
Top Sugar Daddies
1999 PAC, soft-money and individual contributions from sweetener industry
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.
$405,000
Florida Crystals Inc.
$344,350
American Sugar Cane League
$144,750
United States Sugar Corp.
$144,040
Florida Sugar Cane League
$93,500
American Crystal Sugar Co.
$79,000
Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar
$74,150
Minn-Dak Farmers Co-op.
$59,050
Other Producers
$176,320
Total
$1,520,160
Competing Commodities
1995-99 PAC, soft-money and individual contributions by commodity group
Sugar Beets & Cane
$7,204,000
Livestock
$5,705,000
Dairy
$5,105,000
Fruits & Vegetables
$4,566,000
Poultry & Eggs
$2,914,000
Rice & Peanuts
$1,294,000
Cotton
$1,087,000
Grain & Soybeans
$665,000
Horses
$579,000
Sheep & Wool
$121,000
Source: Center for Responsive Politics
Diverting sugar into ethanol, a fuel additive, would displace corn, costing
farmers $100 million a year, the National Corn Growers Association
argues. They shouldn't have to "shoulder the burden" of bailing out sugar
producers, the association says.
Adding to the difficulty of a bailout is the opposition from politicians who
represent more sugar consumers than producers. Splurging on sugar would
be a "quick fix" of "dubious legality," 15 House members asserted in a
bipartisan letter. It would bestow a "bonanza" on processors, without
preventing forfeitures in the end, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman
Richard Lugar cautioned last week. The Indiana Republican also warned
that "dumping" sugar overseas would infuriate trading partners.
Ultimately, though, such considerations may not offset the political leverage
of Big Sugar, which gave Democrats and Republicans $7.2 million
between 1995 and 1999, more than any other commodity group in
Washington. The fact that the meeting with Mr. Glickman was attended by
New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli, who hails from a state with no sugar
growers but is chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee, highlights sugar's importance in an election year.
At least three sugar states -- Michigan, Ohio and Florida -- are seen as
being in play in the presidential race. Earlier this year, Florida Crystals
Inc., owned by the Cuban-born Fanjul family, gave Sen. Torricelli's committee
$50,000. Last July, Alfonso Fanjul hosted a $25,000-a-couple dinner,
attended by President Clinton, raising more than $1 million for the Florida
Democratic Party. Mr. Fanjul is renowned for calling up the president to
discuss sugar-related issues.
Particularly desperate are three big Hawaiian sugar-cane producers, Gay
& Robinson Sugar Co., an Alexander & Baldwin Inc. subsidiary and
Amfac/JMB-Hawaii Inc., whose first shipload of the season is due to
reach the mainland next week. Unlike their counterparts, they are
"price-takers," says their lobbyist, Dalton Yancey. Under an exclusive
contract with a refinery on San Francisco Bay, they are obligated to base
the price of arriving shiploads on the going New York price, no matter
how far it falls below the guaranteed price-support level. The contract
doesn't allow putting sugar under loan or forfeiting it.
Adding to the industry's problems is a looming surge of Mexican imports.
In October, under terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement,
Mexico will be free to ship 250,000 metric tons of low-duty sugar into the
U.S.
Despite more than a 20% drop in prices since 1996, sugar production is
still much more profitable than raising grain or cotton. The result is that
the nation's 10,000 cane and beet growers are shifting more land into sugar.
Their lobbyists portray them as suffering from agriculture's woes, including
crop failures and lost markets, when in fact most fare better than non-sugar
producers.
All told, the sugar problem threatens to haunt the White House and Vice
President Al Gore's presidential bid. It could complicate the coming visit of
Mexico's president to Washington, and could further hamstring U.S. efforts
to open up overseas markets for meat, corn sweetener and other
foodstuffs.
Ironically, the administration could have avoided the whole sticky mess.
But Messrs. Glickman and Podesta, under intense industry pressure, went
along with an administrative decision last fall to reinstate the guaranteed
minimum price, even though under a 1996 change in the loan program it
shouldn't have been offered to processors.
Now, the industry is arguing that "sugar is in crisis," in the words of Jack
Roney, economist for the American Sugar Alliance.
-- Jake Bleed contributed to this article.
Write to Bruce Ingersoll at bruce.ingersoll@wsj.com
U.S Sugar: Clean Up Your Own Mess
By Christine Stapleton
The Palm Beach Post
Friday, November 14, 2008
In the last month we -- the taxpayers -- have been told that WE have to pay
for the mistakes of others: at least $700 billion to Wall Street’s greedy
financiers; $25 billion to the walking anachronisms in Detroit; and $143 billion to AIG
for forgetting that insurance can be risky business.
So the measly $1.34 billion that WE will pay for a huge swath of heavily
polluted land at the south end of Lake Okeechobee doesn’t sound like much.
Neither does the estimated $44 million WE will pay to clean up the pollution
left by one of the nation’s most profitable and powerful companies: U.S. Sugar.
I am referring to the cost estimate of cleaning up 181,000 acres of land that
WE are going to buy from U.S. Sugar to clean-up the Everglades. U.S. Sugar -
the fabulously powerful and successful sugar-grower - has been allowed to
pollute its farmland for decades, while at the same time telling us that it
wasn’t really polluting its farmland for decades.
Yesterday the truth - or close to the truth - came out. It is going to cost US at
least $44 million to clean up U.S. Sugar’s polluted land before we can begin
using it to restore the waterflow between Lake Okeechobee and the
Everglades. Another clean-up estimate has the cost as high as $119 million.
WE know - from our recent experience with AIG, The Big Three and Wall
Street - that these estimates are lowball numbers. The cleanup will - in my
humble opinion - cost a lot more than $119 million because no Everglades
Restoration project comes in even close to budget.
Sure, U.S. Sugar will be responsible for decontaminating some of the land it
polluted with toxic fertilizers and pesticides - about 7,700 acres of about
85,000 acres that need to be decontaminated. The estimated cost of U.S.
Sugar’s portion of the cleanup: $25 million.
Carol Wehle, executive director of the South Florida Water Management
District, assured board members on Thursday that the district typically picks
up the cost of decontaminating land it uses for environmental projects.
“This is nothing different than we’ve always done,” Wehle said.
Paying the cost of cleaning up someone else’s mess just because it is
what “we’ve always done” is no longer a good enough reason to spend tax-
dollars. Maybe we need to try something different. This is a radical idea but
why don’t we make U.S. Sugar clean up its own mess?
It is called “personal responsibility.” Where I come from it would dishonorable
and shameful to make a mess and expect others to clean it up. My mother
drilled it into our heads when we were toddlers: “You make a mess, you clean
it up.”
Roll up your sleeves, Sugar Boys. It’s time to get to work.
There is a funny thing about sugar. It is so ubiquitous in our diets that it becomes hard to describe. Sugar is in the air we breathe. Not literally, of course, but the point is that Sugar invites a thousand comparisons and analogies. Here are two: the American taxpayer and voter has allowed Congress and White House to lick the sugar stick like hamsters on a water dispenser laced with nicotine. Comparing the sugar lobby to tobacco is not far from the truth.
In a 2007 editorial, the Orlando Sentinel called the sugar provision in the Farm Bill, "a shakedown". Why are we so willing to be shaken down and suffer health consequences at the same time? A friend of mine just returned from Switzerland. In an informal airport survey, he noticed an immediate difference between the airport crowd in Switzerland and the US airport where he landed: obesity. Just plain fat. We have turned into a curious nation, jiggling with layers of excess. America doesn't manufacture much. We leave that work to low cost labor nations. Much of the technology that we rely on is now made in other nations, too. We have a lot of government employees and a bloated health care system filled with intermediaries. We make airplanes, weapons and wage wars on behalf of the free world. And we fuel our ambitions with sugar.
"For decades, a federal program has protected the U.S. sugar industry by propping up its prices. The sugar program has been a sweet deal for the industry, and a rip-off for just about everyone else." (Sugar Shakedown, Oct. 26, 2007, Orlando Sentinel) To be clear, this "shakedown" has its companion analogies in state politics. When Gov. Jeb Bush encouraged the Florida legislature to re-write the legal agreement forged in the early 1990's between the US government and Florida and sugar producers polluting the Everglades, there were more lobbyists employed by sugar patrolling the capitol hallways than Florida senators. And, back when I was leading the fight against the Homestead Air Force Base conversion to a privatized commercial airport in Miami-Dade and trying to arrange a press conference at County Hall, it was a sugar lobbyist who intervened with then commissioner chairwoman Gwen Margolis to shut down the event.
In a 2005 editorial, the Wall Street Journal wrote: "U.S. sugar policy has also harmed the environment by encouraging overproduction. Florida's Everglades have been damaged enough by runoff from sugar cane fields that a $300 million water treatment facility will be required to clean it up. But the sugar industry will pay less than one-third of that cost, while taxpayers pick up the rest, especially Floridians who have a new line on their property tax bill. Think of it as a second sugar tax, after the first tax of higher sugar prices. What's astonishing about all this is how much damage is being done to so many for the benefit of so few. A handful of cane and sugar beet growers in a few states benefit the most, and one key to their success is their ability to dole out campaign contributions. In the 2004 election cycle, Florida's Fanjul family, owner of mega-sugar producer Flo-Sun, gave $430,750 in political donations for a total Flo-Sun contribution of $573,700." (Bittersweet Trade, May 13, 2005, Wall Street Journal)
In yet another newspaper editorial against sugar policy-- I can't think of a single newspaper that has endorsed the sugar subsidy in the Farm Bill-- The Washington Post editorial page recently wrote, "Since 1982, domestic sugar producers have lobbied for, and gotten, a government-guaranteed share of the market. Today, their guaranteed share is up to 85 percent; the rest gets divided up among some 40 countries lucky enough to hold quotas of varying sizes. The advent of free Mexican imports upset this scheme somewhat, which is why the 2008 farm bill promised that the government would offset them by purchasing excess U.S. sugar and shipping it to ethanol factories. In addition, the federal government guarantees minimum prices for both raw cane sugar and refined beet sugar. Pretty sweet." (Washington Post, "Sugar's sickeningly sweet deal with the government", August 23, 2009) Well it is even sweeter. The Washington Post doesn't want to bore readers with the details of the failed ethanol bubble or sugar's welfare racket.
Sugar wields its outsized profits in South Florida, from spin doctors inventing "green" sugar packaging to PR flaks to big downtown law firms that have been sucking on the sugar-tipped tit for decades. It is playing a behind the scenes role in promoting the campaign of Marco Rubio against Gov. Charlie Crist, who angered Fanjul family sugar interests by entering into a land deal they deemed 'too sweet' with their chief competitor, US Sugar.
In a Herald puff piece, former Florida governor and US Senator Bob Graham discusses his new book, "America: The Owner's Manual". He cites the capacity of citizens to effectively change government. ("Yes, you can fight City Hall, August 25, 2009, Miami Herald") But while he was US Senator, when it came to standing up to Big Sugar on behalf of public health and the Everglades, Bob Graham hardly practiced what he now preaches.
On the big stuff, there are no differences between Florida's sugar growers. When they can't grow sugar, they will build inland ports, rock mines, or new suburbs.
The economic downturn has done nothing to lessen either sugar's influence or desire to knock down barriers to building whatever industrial facilities they want in historic Everglades wetlands. According to the Wall Street Journal, "Sugar is a classic case of what Milton Friedman once called the Law of the Few -- that in a democracy the intense interests of a few can often trump the diffuse costs spread among many." (Today, the Martin County Commission is taking up a new proposal to weaken growth management restrictions in the western part of the county; long a goal of sugar growers and land speculators.)
The Wall Street Journal reports, "Current food labels don't list sugar content in calories or teaspoons and don't distinguish between natural and added sugars." You can ask former Senator Graham or current US Senator Bill Nelson, why. I'm not sure they would admit that Big Sugar controls local and state politics with its sweet tooth along the lines of the popular HBO show, "True Blood"; where excess and sweetness interlock like legislators and sugar money after the sun goes down.
April 27, 2000
Sugar Industry Seeks Bailout,
Gives Money to Help Get Way
By BRUCE INGERSOLL
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
WASHINGTON -- Never have old hands at the Agriculture Department
seen such a turnout: 11 U.S. senators trooping into Secretary Dan
Glickman's office to lobby for a big sugar-industry bailout.
"When you have 11 senators showing up," says Florida sugar-company
executive Robert Buker, "that's horsepower" -- enough power, he
believes, to push an ambivalent Clinton administration into an
unprecedented market intervention to bail out distressed U.S. sugar
producers.
The producers are floundering beneath a market-depressing glut of sugar.
Come October, they face another problem: a tenfold jump in Mexican
sugar imports. The federal sugar-loan program, which has cosseted them
for nearly two decades, is suddenly in danger of imploding.
So, to shore up the domestic market, sugar lobbyists are imploring
administration officials to authorize a bold sugar-buying spree. Only by
spending $100 million now to buy sugar and boost market prices, they
contend, can the government hope to head off a much costlier wave of
sugar-loan forfeitures later this summer, in the midst of an election
campaign.
Fighting the sugar lobby at every turn is a well-financed alliance of
consumer groups, candy makers, confectioners and other major users of
sweeteners. Their vision of the sweet hereafter is a deregulated sugar
industry, and they want the administration to let the market sink. Says Jeff
Nedelman, spokesman for the Coalition for Sugar Reform: "The whole
house of cards is starting to collapse."
The government has long managed to keep U.S. sugar prices far above the
world price, largely by curtailing imports of lower-cost sugar. That benefits
producers, obviously, though it also means consumers get stuck with a
price-support tab -- estimated at more than $1 billion a year -- in the form
of higher sugar, candy and soft-drink prices.
But in recent months, due to rising sugar plantings and improving yields,
prices have fallen below the guaranteed price-support levels of 18 cents a
pound for raw cane sugar and 22.9 cents for refined beet sugar. Lately,
prices are up a little in anticipation of a bailout. Under the loan program,
sugar processors who put up sugar as collateral are entitled to forfeit their
crop, keep the loan money and let the government eat the loss.
Processors are threatening to forfeit as much as 1.4 million tons of sugar
valued at an estimated $550 million. The sugar lobby's pitch to Mr.
Glickman and White House officials is that buying 300,000 to 350,000
tons immediately will give the market enough lift to avert massive forfeitures
at the end of August and September. "Sugar prices are at a 20-year low,''
says Sen. Larry Craig, an Idaho Republican. "The potential for loan
forfeitures ... is very real."
The senators visiting Mr. Glickman on March 26 -- all but one from major
sugar-producing states -- told the agriculture secretary that "he needed to
get on the stick," says Mr. Buker, senior vice president of United States
Sugar Corp., the nation's largest processor. On April 6, a dozen
sugar-state lawmakers met with White House Chief of Staff John Podesta.
They and the industry fear costly forfeitures would be a public-relations
debacle, sparking moves in Congress to scrap the shaky program.
Administration officials wouldn't be so hesitant about buying heaps of sugar
if they knew what to do with it. One option is to sell excess sugar on the
world market at cut-rate prices, but that would be just as controversial as
Europe's oft-deplored dumping practices. Another is to donate it overseas
as humanitarian aid, but so far no country has shown any interest in empty
calories.
Limited amounts could possibly be used for school lunches and other
feeding programs. The only other viable option is to use it as feedstock for
ethanol plants, but it would have to be dirt-cheap to compete with corn,
which sells for a nickel a pound.
Sweet Contributions
Top Sugar Daddies
1999 PAC, soft-money and individual contributions from sweetener industry
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.
$405,000
Florida Crystals Inc.
$344,350
American Sugar Cane League
$144,750
United States Sugar Corp.
$144,040
Florida Sugar Cane League
$93,500
American Crystal Sugar Co.
$79,000
Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar
$74,150
Minn-Dak Farmers Co-op.
$59,050
Other Producers
$176,320
Total
$1,520,160
Competing Commodities
1995-99 PAC, soft-money and individual contributions by commodity group
Sugar Beets & Cane
$7,204,000
Livestock
$5,705,000
Dairy
$5,105,000
Fruits & Vegetables
$4,566,000
Poultry & Eggs
$2,914,000
Rice & Peanuts
$1,294,000
Cotton
$1,087,000
Grain & Soybeans
$665,000
Horses
$579,000
Sheep & Wool
$121,000
Source: Center for Responsive Politics
Diverting sugar into ethanol, a fuel additive, would displace corn, costing
farmers $100 million a year, the National Corn Growers Association
argues. They shouldn't have to "shoulder the burden" of bailing out sugar
producers, the association says.
Adding to the difficulty of a bailout is the opposition from politicians who
represent more sugar consumers than producers. Splurging on sugar would
be a "quick fix" of "dubious legality," 15 House members asserted in a
bipartisan letter. It would bestow a "bonanza" on processors, without
preventing forfeitures in the end, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman
Richard Lugar cautioned last week. The Indiana Republican also warned
that "dumping" sugar overseas would infuriate trading partners.
Ultimately, though, such considerations may not offset the political leverage
of Big Sugar, which gave Democrats and Republicans $7.2 million
between 1995 and 1999, more than any other commodity group in
Washington. The fact that the meeting with Mr. Glickman was attended by
New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli, who hails from a state with no sugar
growers but is chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee, highlights sugar's importance in an election year.
At least three sugar states -- Michigan, Ohio and Florida -- are seen as
being in play in the presidential race. Earlier this year, Florida Crystals
Inc., owned by the Cuban-born Fanjul family, gave Sen. Torricelli's committee
$50,000. Last July, Alfonso Fanjul hosted a $25,000-a-couple dinner,
attended by President Clinton, raising more than $1 million for the Florida
Democratic Party. Mr. Fanjul is renowned for calling up the president to
discuss sugar-related issues.
Particularly desperate are three big Hawaiian sugar-cane producers, Gay
& Robinson Sugar Co., an Alexander & Baldwin Inc. subsidiary and
Amfac/JMB-Hawaii Inc., whose first shipload of the season is due to
reach the mainland next week. Unlike their counterparts, they are
"price-takers," says their lobbyist, Dalton Yancey. Under an exclusive
contract with a refinery on San Francisco Bay, they are obligated to base
the price of arriving shiploads on the going New York price, no matter
how far it falls below the guaranteed price-support level. The contract
doesn't allow putting sugar under loan or forfeiting it.
Adding to the industry's problems is a looming surge of Mexican imports.
In October, under terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement,
Mexico will be free to ship 250,000 metric tons of low-duty sugar into the
U.S.
Despite more than a 20% drop in prices since 1996, sugar production is
still much more profitable than raising grain or cotton. The result is that
the nation's 10,000 cane and beet growers are shifting more land into sugar.
Their lobbyists portray them as suffering from agriculture's woes, including
crop failures and lost markets, when in fact most fare better than non-sugar
producers.
All told, the sugar problem threatens to haunt the White House and Vice
President Al Gore's presidential bid. It could complicate the coming visit of
Mexico's president to Washington, and could further hamstring U.S. efforts
to open up overseas markets for meat, corn sweetener and other
foodstuffs.
Ironically, the administration could have avoided the whole sticky mess.
But Messrs. Glickman and Podesta, under intense industry pressure, went
along with an administrative decision last fall to reinstate the guaranteed
minimum price, even though under a 1996 change in the loan program it
shouldn't have been offered to processors.
Now, the industry is arguing that "sugar is in crisis," in the words of Jack
Roney, economist for the American Sugar Alliance.
-- Jake Bleed contributed to this article.
Write to Bruce Ingersoll at bruce.ingersoll@wsj.com
U.S Sugar: Clean Up Your Own Mess
By Christine Stapleton
The Palm Beach Post
Friday, November 14, 2008
In the last month we -- the taxpayers -- have been told that WE have to pay
for the mistakes of others: at least $700 billion to Wall Street’s greedy
financiers; $25 billion to the walking anachronisms in Detroit; and $143 billion to AIG
for forgetting that insurance can be risky business.
So the measly $1.34 billion that WE will pay for a huge swath of heavily
polluted land at the south end of Lake Okeechobee doesn’t sound like much.
Neither does the estimated $44 million WE will pay to clean up the pollution
left by one of the nation’s most profitable and powerful companies: U.S. Sugar.
I am referring to the cost estimate of cleaning up 181,000 acres of land that
WE are going to buy from U.S. Sugar to clean-up the Everglades. U.S. Sugar -
the fabulously powerful and successful sugar-grower - has been allowed to
pollute its farmland for decades, while at the same time telling us that it
wasn’t really polluting its farmland for decades.
Yesterday the truth - or close to the truth - came out. It is going to cost US at
least $44 million to clean up U.S. Sugar’s polluted land before we can begin
using it to restore the waterflow between Lake Okeechobee and the
Everglades. Another clean-up estimate has the cost as high as $119 million.
WE know - from our recent experience with AIG, The Big Three and Wall
Street - that these estimates are lowball numbers. The cleanup will - in my
humble opinion - cost a lot more than $119 million because no Everglades
Restoration project comes in even close to budget.
Sure, U.S. Sugar will be responsible for decontaminating some of the land it
polluted with toxic fertilizers and pesticides - about 7,700 acres of about
85,000 acres that need to be decontaminated. The estimated cost of U.S.
Sugar’s portion of the cleanup: $25 million.
Carol Wehle, executive director of the South Florida Water Management
District, assured board members on Thursday that the district typically picks
up the cost of decontaminating land it uses for environmental projects.
“This is nothing different than we’ve always done,” Wehle said.
Paying the cost of cleaning up someone else’s mess just because it is
what “we’ve always done” is no longer a good enough reason to spend tax-
dollars. Maybe we need to try something different. This is a radical idea but
why don’t we make U.S. Sugar clean up its own mess?
It is called “personal responsibility.” Where I come from it would dishonorable
and shameful to make a mess and expect others to clean it up. My mother
drilled it into our heads when we were toddlers: “You make a mess, you clean
it up.”
Roll up your sleeves, Sugar Boys. It’s time to get to work.
Bally Health Club Sucks: Burnside Reports on a Moldy & Dirty Club. By Geniusofdespair
Trendy, cheerful health club...I think not.
The Bally Health Club in Aventura held swim classes for toddlers, that is until the pool was shut down by the Health Department -- along with the spa. Also, the Health Department told Bally's Health Club to clean the bathrooms. Friends say at times you can find 3 or 4 treadmills out of order for weeks. They have called the club dingy.
Jeff Burnside of NBC Channel 6 did an investigative report called: "Aventura's Bally Total Filthiness Gym", that aired Friday, on the leaks and moldy ceiling at Bally's Health Club. These unhealthy conditions have existed for a year or more. Here are some of his findings and some more photos:
This is part of Jeff Burnside's script for his Channel 6 investigative report on the Bally's Health Club:
EMILIO FYFFE, HEALTH CLUB MEMBER:
"It's horrible. I mean the conditions are horrible."
THAT WAS THE SENTIMENT…FROM MOST OF THE HEALTH CLUB MEMBERS WE MET OUTSIDE THE BALLY TOTAL FITNESS IN AVENTURA.
WHY?
THESE PHOTOS SHOW WHY (Readers: These are different photos taken Monday of what was described in the report).
TAKEN BY AN UNHAPPY MEMBER, THEY SHOW LEAKS. MISSING CEILING SQUARES. GARBAGE CANS CATCHING WATER EVEN WHEN IT'S NOT RAINING. MOLD AND MILDEW AROUND THE AIR CONDITIONING DUCTS. AND MUCH MORE OFF CAMERA. SO MUCH SO MEMBERS TOLD US THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THEIR HEALTH.
EVEN THE ROOF SHOWED SIGNS OF DISREPAIR DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS.
Guy #1:
"And the pool is horrible. I don't know if you've been there. It's supposed to be blue and it's yellow."
TONY COLMENARES, HEALTH CLUB MEMBER:
"We've been coming here a long time and we've seen the deterioration over time."
BALLY MANAGERS DECLINED AN INTERVIEW.
BUT A SPOKESPERSON SAID "WE ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND WE ARE WORKING WITH THE LANDLORD TO GET THE NECESSARY PROBLEMS FIXED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE."
BURNSIDE OUTSIDE AVENTURA CITY HALL:
"NOT SOON ENOUGH FOR SOME HEALTH CLUB MEMBERS OR CODE INSPECTORS HERE AT AVENTURA CITY HALL WHO CONFIRM THE BLAME GOES NOT ON BALLY TOTAL FITNESS BUT ON THE BUILDING OWNER."
THE CITY HAS FINED SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE YEARS FOR LEAKS, DISREPAIR, ELECTRICAL WIRES - INCLUDING ONE SINGLE VIOLATION OF MORE THAN $14,000. IN FACT, SO FRUSTRATED ARE CITY INSPECTORS THAT THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HAS AGREED TO COME INSPECT THE POOL. (Thank you Jeff Burnside for supplying the script from your report on Bally's Health Club, and Jeff, as you can see - the pool has been closed after your report.)
The Bally Health Club in Aventura held swim classes for toddlers, that is until the pool was shut down by the Health Department -- along with the spa. Also, the Health Department told Bally's Health Club to clean the bathrooms. Friends say at times you can find 3 or 4 treadmills out of order for weeks. They have called the club dingy.
Jeff Burnside of NBC Channel 6 did an investigative report called: "Aventura's Bally Total Filthiness Gym", that aired Friday, on the leaks and moldy ceiling at Bally's Health Club. These unhealthy conditions have existed for a year or more. Here are some of his findings and some more photos:
This is part of Jeff Burnside's script for his Channel 6 investigative report on the Bally's Health Club:
EMILIO FYFFE, HEALTH CLUB MEMBER:
"It's horrible. I mean the conditions are horrible."
THAT WAS THE SENTIMENT…FROM MOST OF THE HEALTH CLUB MEMBERS WE MET OUTSIDE THE BALLY TOTAL FITNESS IN AVENTURA.
WHY?
THESE PHOTOS SHOW WHY (Readers: These are different photos taken Monday of what was described in the report).
TAKEN BY AN UNHAPPY MEMBER, THEY SHOW LEAKS. MISSING CEILING SQUARES. GARBAGE CANS CATCHING WATER EVEN WHEN IT'S NOT RAINING. MOLD AND MILDEW AROUND THE AIR CONDITIONING DUCTS. AND MUCH MORE OFF CAMERA. SO MUCH SO MEMBERS TOLD US THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT THEIR HEALTH.
EVEN THE ROOF SHOWED SIGNS OF DISREPAIR DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS.
Guy #1:
"And the pool is horrible. I don't know if you've been there. It's supposed to be blue and it's yellow."
TONY COLMENARES, HEALTH CLUB MEMBER:
"We've been coming here a long time and we've seen the deterioration over time."
BALLY MANAGERS DECLINED AN INTERVIEW.
BUT A SPOKESPERSON SAID "WE ARE AWARE OF THE PROBLEM AND WE ARE WORKING WITH THE LANDLORD TO GET THE NECESSARY PROBLEMS FIXED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE."
BURNSIDE OUTSIDE AVENTURA CITY HALL:
"NOT SOON ENOUGH FOR SOME HEALTH CLUB MEMBERS OR CODE INSPECTORS HERE AT AVENTURA CITY HALL WHO CONFIRM THE BLAME GOES NOT ON BALLY TOTAL FITNESS BUT ON THE BUILDING OWNER."
THE CITY HAS FINED SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE YEARS FOR LEAKS, DISREPAIR, ELECTRICAL WIRES - INCLUDING ONE SINGLE VIOLATION OF MORE THAN $14,000. IN FACT, SO FRUSTRATED ARE CITY INSPECTORS THAT THE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HAS AGREED TO COME INSPECT THE POOL. (Thank you Jeff Burnside for supplying the script from your report on Bally's Health Club, and Jeff, as you can see - the pool has been closed after your report.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)