The limit for an election campaign contribution is $500. However, most lobbyists and developers get around that pesky rule by having relatives give and/or they use a few different corporate accounts to funnel the money to the candidate. You often see campaign contributions of developers totaling between $2,000 and up to about $10,000 using these tricks. What trick was up Wayne Rosen's sleeve? Rosen spent a whopping $46,000 on the Homestead election, his candidate of choice, Steve Bateman, won. Out of that money Al Lorenzo got about $20,000 to run the campaign PAC, Citizens for Reform for Miami Dade. This PAC, in essence, added $84,000 to the Homestead election campaigns - none of it helping incumbent Lynda Bell. I think this is plain wrong. How can we the citizens get a fair shake when developers are throwing wads of money at candidates? How can my $25 contribution compare to a $46,000 contribution? One person is not suppose to have that much power - that is why they have a $500 limit. Think of it: Wayne's $46,000 is almost 2,000 times $25. In one month this PAC spent $83,547.59.
The PAC's stated purpose brazenly says: To influence the results of municipal elections within Miami Dade. According to its expense report, the PAC made and ran commercials for the Homestead election. Here is an insider scoop:
I am told the commercials targeted voters based on Al Lorenzo's Quantum Results voter identification software. The ads portrayed Lynda Bell and the incumbents (minus Judy Waldman) as insensitive to the taxpayers. The ad promised no new taxes, transparency, etc. with the new Council slate.
Homestead sources say that, the first month after being elected the new Council had Executive Session meetings to settle the City of Homestead and Redland Company lawsuit. Redland owes Homestead somewhere between $5 and $8 million for their over-excavation of the city owned quarry. Residents tell me that three of six test wells show salt water intrusion. Charles Munz owns Redland Company. Munz's company gave this PAC $25,000. Munz is also on the board of Community Bank.
Jeff Porter who is the PAC treasurer also was the incoming Chair of the Military Affairs committee of the Homestead Chamber of Commerce.
Frank May the PAC Chair is the Director of a non-profit in Homestead restoring the Seminole Theater. Since 1998 the City gives about $140,000 for restoration and management of this theater. County Commissioner Sorenson also sent Seminole a hefty check two or three years ago. I am told it was in the neighborhood of $500,000. Sources say the theater is STILL not renovated.
Wayne Rosen and Michael Latterner often partner with Lennar on deals. They own a 37 acre parcel in the Homestead Park of Commerce, it is part of a Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) overlay. The grant holder of the FTZ is the Vision Council it is headed by Dennis Daley, who took over for Steve Shiver and before him Mike Richardson.
Two hours before the new slate was sworn in, City Manager Mike Shehadeh and Asst. City Manager Johanna Faddis were suspended.
So what is up in Homestead? It is anyone's guess since it is such a tangled web but I think Wayne Rosen has the inside track on whatever happens there.
All I can say about Wayne is I am glad he sold that big chunck of property to the EEL Program that he owned with Michael Latterner East of Atlantic Civil (The former Florida City DRI - optioned to Lennar/Rosen/Latterner, that is now a rock mine). Yes, I know, complicated. My heads spins when I write about Homestead.
(Hit on Images to enlarge them -- I just threw this in because I had room. Add this to the Homestead PAC money and it looks like Wayne Rosen donated about $100,000 to political campaigns and PAC's in 2008.)
24 comments:
Great story for the FBI. Homestead: the city the building boom and local bankers destroyed. If Rosen is putting that much money into a PAC, was campaign law broken? And why would he do that, on behalf of Munz? How much money was at stake in the penalties assessed by Homestead for Munz, owner of the wrecked aquifer/dredged lake. Transactions between Munz and Rosen/Latterner and any offshore companies should be scrutinized.
Let's not forget the Redland Company! The City is trying to settle the suit behind closed doors.
Homestead should just create their own County and go away. They take a few steps forward than ten back. It's the most backward place I've ever experienced.
The brain trust within the City is certainly lacking common sense and higher IQ's!
Rosen and Munz are in bed together. Munz will be penalized $XX million for destroying the aquifer with his illegal rock mining. Rosen hires a new Homestead Mayor and commission so the penalty to Munz will be reduced by $XX/2 and Rosen gets a success fee-- a multiple of what he invested in the PAC-- based on a predetermined baseline. Cool beans.
Don't forget that Bell was a right-wing dictator - she pissed off everyone in Homestead and she lost because of it. The PAC was just icing on the cake.
This post isn't about Bell. I wasn't a fan. It is about the unfair advantage that money brings to an election.
The election was about Bell and the PAC was a byproduct. Maybe you should write all the posts.
I do write all the posts. These are COMMENTS. I just don't want people to lose sight of the pac. It is symptomatic of a larger problem.
Ok, comment: Permit larger contributions from individuals and eliminate corporate donations. Even better: just deregulate the whole process. All the regulations in the world cannot force elected officials to be honest.
It's all about the 93 agreement for Rosen and the 40 acre FTZ parcel was a ruse to get people hungry for a new high school to vote Bell out.
Rosen and Munz invested wisely in Al Lorenzo they have five robots who will do anything including giving away millions and millions.
All of those houses built on gimleteyes post pay taxes, that is the target.
$20 million set aside for a new city hall will be used to insure their place in Homestead society.
ANON makes sense just take limits of amounts and make disclosure the only requirement. It will at least make it easier to see whose in bed with who in the incestious world of politics.
What's killingus are two things A- Governments in general have to much power over too many things and B- Low voter turnout. If A is fixed B won't matter that much.
Cato that is exactly why I support state amendment 4. Governments have too much power and people don't vote because they feel it doesn't give them meaningful results. Amendment would address both as far as landuse is concerned.
The problem with Amendment 4 is that it covers too many obscure topics. Each time the local government wants to amend the master plan, such amendments are subject to referndum, Blackner's claims notwithstanding. You have to look at the impact on the ballot, which will be significant in multi-lingual communities like Miami's. EOM doesn't seem to want to acknowledge the problem.
The public only votes on land-use changes that were voted favorably by your commission or council. If they turn them down: No vote.
The hope is, there won't be many changes. The Comprehensive plan is a document that encompasses growth. IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE CHANGED as often as developers want it to change. The misinformation is staggering on this amendment.
Respectfully Genius, the comp plan is amended all the time. It covers transportation, educational facilities, water and sewer, etc. Amendment 4 applies to ALL amendments and all new plans. Here is the text:
"Establishes that before a local government may adopt a new comprehensive land use plan, or amend a comprehensive land use plan, the proposed plan or amendment shall be subject to vote of the electors of the local government by referendum, following preparation by the local planning agency, consideration by the governing body and notice.”
Respectfully Anonymous this is RIGHT OFF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS WEBSITE: LAND USE IS ONE ELEMENT OF THE COMP PLAN, SEE FOR YOURSELF, THE AMENDMENT ONLY ADDRESSES LAND-USE:
Comprehensive Plans that guide future growth and development. Comprehensive plans contain chapters or "elements" that address future land use, housing, transportation, infrastructure, coastal management, conservation, recreation and open space, intergovernmental coordination, and capital improvements.
Genius I'm not so sure about amendment 4 too much democracy can be a problem too. Plus all a developer has to do is hire an absentee ballot brigade and he's in, in which case Amendment 4 will only serve to make process more expensive.
I think we need to have competent people to make decisions on traffic concurrency, Water and Sewer Capacity, and compatability, if we can't find those people I don't think voters who are uninformed should making these decisions either.
A little more respect for everyones property rights would be best solution.
Regarding the money issue in Homestead nobody has mentioned the fact that the same four who donated to the PAC also gave individually to six candidates.
The PAC supported five in the general election but those five plus some other guy got another $50K.
Gimme a break Cato...first amendment 4 has nothing to do with:
"traffic concurrency, Water and Sewer Capacity, and compatibility,"
all good things...yes, but moot to amendment 4.
But finding competent people in government, as you mentioned, to vote on anything is impossible because of the dollars developers throw at campaigns. If you put the votes on land-use changes during regular elections, it won't cost extra money. Think of all the money bad land use decisions have cost us over the years. PLENTY!!
You are buying into the developer argument and you know how I hate arguing with people who are indoctrinated. It is pointless. I thought you were different Cato!
When their neighborhood is under siege Mr. Cato, voters become very smart and do the right thing. When polled, something like 67% of Miami Dade Residents did not want to move the Urban Development Boundary. If the voters were so uninformed, why are developers spending so much time-energy-money to defeat amendment 4?
Genius I am the same Cato I've always been. If there had been more rigid standards re Traffic concurrency and Water and Sewer capacity a lot of (bad) development would not have taken place.
Is the right thing to always oppose anything a developer wants? I agree with not moving UDB but I have seen some pretty ridiculous arguments in opposition to some good projects (and there are good projects, most of us live in one).
There are problems with current system but more democracy may only make things worse.
More democracy in a place with ethically challenged politicians is not bad in my book.
Cato needs to spend more time at local zonong/land use meetings and listen to the people. Most "lay people" are amazingly informed in large part because they know their community and what is best. While the growth industry likes to paint residents as "not in my backyard", I have found this to not be true. In almost 30 years of zoning and land-use experience, I have found people object to projects that are not compatable with their communities. Most welcome a well-planed, sustainable project that enhances the area. Unfortunately, many projects are bulldoziers that rape the land with little concern for the mess they leave; Homestead is a case in point. One can't blame people for protecting their communities and their single biggest investment from rack and ruin. With Hometown Democracy, developers will be forced to meet with opponents and devise a plan the people can live with. Two other advantages of HD is that it removes the revolving door of money influence on elected officials and puts the people in a position to veto their local government's decisions. How good is that for democracy?
Anon I do spend a lot of time at these hearings just not in South FLa, and I find a lot of residents have genuine concerns about development unfortunately there are those who just want things the way they are, putting undeveloped property owners at a distinct disadvantage under amendment 4.
We must find a more balanced way to protect every property owners right, not just those who already own developed property.
OK, so back to the subject of campaign contributions - has anyone indeed sent this article off to those who investigate this stuff. It sounds like a heaping dose of corruption in all directions. I think it needs to go in two or three directions, personally.
Post a Comment