Showing posts with label Codina. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Codina. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 03, 2015

Rumor and Truth Factory: Miami Dade County. By Geniusofdespair

Yes I do report rumors and truth...


Codina Partners in February hired a shitload of lobbyists. Now what is he up to?

Lennar's Mega-Development Parkland, (on the wrong side of the Urban Development Boundary) a DRI from 11/2005 -- according to the South Florida Regional Planning Council is still alive. Jeff Bercow is no longer lobbying for them according to the lobbyist list. Bercow is lobbying for Panattoni Development Company's approval for Westview Property. According to the bizjournals.com, Westview is seeking $9.5 Million in taxpayer funds. That is OUR funds.

Parkland might be coming back during the May CDMP cycle although I don't see a lobbyist for it yet. It is time. Lennar has been itching to get it going according to a Lennar insider. Yes, I know developers.

Rebeca Sosa said she is NOT running for County Mayor. Raquel Regalado is stuck on the fence on the Mayoral run.

Lynda Bell gets some retribution -- after her chain link fence fiasco, that partly did her in -- from Javier Souto, who hates chain link fences. He says they cheapen neighborhoods. This is on the Agenda today:
4F 150330 Ordinance Sen. Javier D. Souto, Prime Sponsor ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING; MODIFYING REGULATIONS REGARDING CHAIN LINK FENCES; AMENDING SECTIONS 33-11 AND 33-311 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE Commissioner Souto is seeks to ban the installation of new chain link fences around the County. Under the changes proposed in this item, chain link fences will only be allowed in areas zoned IU districts, AU districts and GU districts trended agricultural.


Rally to save endangered land

Pine Rockland: This is on the Agenda today -- I heard 40 people are there to speak but it is getting deferred for a second time (wear the people down, that is what they do, make everyone go all the way downtown...for nothing). I heard he wasn't even at the Commission, will have to turn on the TV to see if this is a rumor:

142509 Resolution Dennis C. Moss, Prime Sponsor
RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF UNINCORPORATED MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA DESCRIBED GENERALLY AS BOUNDED ON THE NORTH BY SW 152 STREET, ON THE WEST BY SW 137 AVENUE, ON THE SOUTH BY SW 184 STREET, AND ON THE EAST BY SW 117 AVENUE TO BE A SLUM OR BLIGHTED AREA; DECLARING THE REBUILDING, REHABILITATION, CONSERVATION AND REDEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA TO BE IN THE INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS AND WELFARE OF RESIDENTS OF RICHMOND HEIGHTS/METROZOO AREA, AND MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; FINDING NEED FOR CREATION OF COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY; AND DIRECTING THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR’S DESIGNEE TO PREPARE A REDEVELOPMENT PLAN(Office of Management and Budget)
On another note...
My eyes are so itchy I could scream.  Should I change our logo to this? I think so, to keep an Eye on Miami it is pretty painful.  I can see again and everything is fine except for the damn itching. Thank you all for your good wishes.  I am very cranky.

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Armando Codina Quote. by Geniusofdespair

While accepting the Real Estate lifetime achievement award Armando Codina said:

“If I live to be 100 years old, I can’t repay what this country and Miami have done for me. ... People talk about what Cubans have done for this city, but Miami has done a lot more for us than we have done for it.’’

I hope County Commissioner Javier Souto is listening.

Monday, April 02, 2012

What's New With Armando Codina. By Geniusofdespair


According to the South Florida Business Journal:

Coral Gables-based Mercantil Commercebank sold the mortgage on Century Lancaster Plaza to C/Lancaster LLC, which is affiliated with Coral Gables-based Codina Partners. It covers the 0.8-acre site at 250 Minorca Ave.

This property was previously owned by Sergio Pino and his partner Juan Carlos Mendez - it had been in foreclosure but a settlement was reached before that happened. Pino's group paid $7,499,200 in 2005. The paper said the mortgage was last modified at $4.39 million.

Sunday, February 27, 2011

FROM DEPOSITION: Armando Codina: "You Know I Don't Think Much of the Miami Herald." By Geniusofdespair

I read the February 16th deposition of Armando Codina in the Michelle Spence-Jones Trial. It is 81 pages...this is the part I was most intrigued with, especially around page 30:

QUESTIONS BY MR. SCRUGGS OF ARMANDO CODINA:
Page 21
15 Q. Anyway, you said that you did not want to poke
16 her in the eye, I think that was it, with a matter
17 pending before the commission.
18 Does that sounds about right? I may be
19 paraphrasing slightly.
20 A. Let me tell you what I said, and I'll paraphrase,
21 but I'll tell you how I feel and I'll include the part
22 that --
23 Q. Well, can you tell me if that's what you said?
24 We'll get to that part in just a second.
25 MR. RABEN: Wait. I'm going to object to that.

Page 22
1 He said what's in the transcript. If you want to
2 refer to the transcript, we have the transcript, but
3 it shouldn't be a memory test as to what he remembers
4 saying if we know what he said.
5 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
6 Q. Mr. Codina, do you remember what you said?
7 MR. SCRUGGS: I asked him did he want to see the
8 transcript, Mr. Raben.
9 THE WITNESS: Let me give you my thoughts, and
10 then you can take me back and forth and take me to the
11 statement, if you want.
12 MR. SCRUGGS: Yes, sir.
13 THE WITNESS: I gave the gift because, when I got
14 the e-mail, if you read what is in that e-mail as a
15 cause, it sounded to me to be very worthwhile.
16 More important, the money was going to be
17 deposited at the Dade Community Foundation. Burger
18 King was a sponsor, and they were honoring Barbara
19 Carey-Shuler.
20 Having looked at all of that, that would have
21 been an event that I would have given in any case, I
22 think that's what I said, so I saw no reason to poke
23 her in the eye.
24 I felt that way then, I feel that way today.

HIT READ MORE....
Page 23
1 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
2 Q. Right. Now, let me take that for a second,
3 though, and let's just kind of parse that out, if you
4 would.
5 A. Yes, sir.
6 Q. Poke her in the eye, I assume, at least to my
7 limited knowledge of things, basically means you don't
8 want to make her angry, right, or irritate her?
9 A. First of all, I don't ever poke anybody in the
10 eye, it is not my nature, but what I was saying, what I
11 was trying to say, and I'm sorry I used the term, but
12 what I was trying to say was if this is something that I
13 had come to the conclusion that it was legitimate, that
14 I would have done it anyway, why imply that she was
15 doing something?
16 Poking in the eye is an unprovoked -- I would
17 have felt that that was unprovoked.
18 Q. Was what? I'm sorry.
19 A. Unprovoked. She didn't provoke -- I thought it
20 was -- when you read through all of that, I was okay
21 making a contribution.
22 If I had felt for a moment that it was going to
23 go into her pocket or that it wasn't appropriate, I
24 wouldn't have done it.
25 There was an event scheduled long before that

24
1 coincided with this thing, so you can take -- you know,
2 you can take it -- you can disagree with my conclusion
3 or timing, but that's how I looked at it, Mr. Scruggs.
4 Q. Now, again, let's kind of take that piece by
5 piece.
6 A. Okay.
7 Q. Because, I mean, first of all, do we agree -- and
8 you can look at the transcript if you want, but do you
9 agree you said something like, I don't want to poke her
10 in the eye? Is that a starting point we can talk about?
11 A. Yes, I used that term, but I think I'd like to
12 use it in the context of exactly what I said and not
13 just independently, because I think I said it in the
14 context of having arrived at the fact that I thought all
15 of this was fair.
16 I gave her the benefit of saying, okay, that
17 ought to be given.
18 Q. Okay, so, and, again, I'm not arguing with you --
19 A. Okay.
20 Q. -- so please don't get me wrong.
21 A. Me neither, me neither.
22 Q. But I understand, and I think probably everyone
23 understands, that, you know, given your nature, your
24 reputation, you know, your charitable works in the
25 community, that had this been to the side and you hadnt

25
1 had a matter in front of the commission and had it just
2 been normal times, had that call been made, you'd -- and
3 given the fact it was Carey-Shuler, given the fact you
4 believed it was the Dade Community Foundation, you would
5 have made the contribution; fair statement? Is that
6 what you're saying?
7 A. I hope you believe that, because that's the case,
8 yes.
9 Q. It really doesn't matter what I believe, but I
10 will tell you, I do believe that --
11 A. Okay.
12 Q. -- even though it doesn't matter, but that wasn't
13 the case, you agree?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. I mean, there was a different set of
16 circumstances.
17 A. That's it. Yes, it was unfortunate that the
18 event took place -- an event that had been previously
19 scheduled took place around the same time. That was
20 unfortunate, but --
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. -- you know, that's the way it was.
23 Q. Okay. Now, the event took place, okay, I'll
24 agree with that, but you have said -- you testified and,
25 actually, in a sworn statement to dismiss, Ms.

26
1 Spence-Jones actually stated that you were told or at
2 least you understood that the money that you had
3 solicited was at least, in part, going to be used to pay
4 for that event; is that correct?
5 A. My interpretation, remember, I had a brief
6 conversation with someone in her office. I asked for
7 the back-up. They sent me the e-mail. I read it.
8 In my mind, I was giving to what was in that
9 e-mail, so what was in that e-mail is what I was giving
10 to, and the funds were going to be administered by the
11 Dade Community Foundation.
12 I didn't get into any more detail than that.
13 Q. But I think you said -- and, again, correct me if
14 I'm wrong. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but you said you
15 thought it was going to, at least partially, if not all,
16 defray the cost of that event, that you were going to
17 sponsor that event --
18 MR. RABEN: Objection. I believe he already
19 answered that question.
20 MR. SCRUGGS: Thank you, Mr. Raben.
21 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
22 Q. Okay, that you were going to sponsor that event
23 somehow.
24 A. I thought I was providing funds for an event that
25 was -- that they were hosting honoring Barbara

27
1 Carey-Shuler that was raising money for that charity
2 that was on the flier, and I believe that's what I said
3 in my statement.
4 Q. Okay. Now, what if I suggested to you -- you
5 don't have to believe this, but what if I suggested to
6 you, though, the money did not go to that event, that it
7 was -- the check was held for several months and it
8 didn't in no way go to pay for that event?
9 MR. RABEN: Objection. He didn't say he gave the
10 money to the event. He said he gave the money to a
11 charity to be administered by the Dade Community
12 Foundation.
13 MR. SCRUGGS: Thank you.
14 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
15 Q. Now, what if you understood, though, at least
16 partially, as I understood it, that it was going to
17 sponsor that event?
18 Are you aware that the check was not deposited
19 for, well, let's see, April, May --
20 MR. RABEN: I'm going to have to object. Again,
21 your preliminary statement was not a question. It was
22 a statement.
23 You began this question with a statement which I
24 believe is incorrect, and I'm objecting to a question
25 that begins with a statement that is incorrect.

28
1 MR. SCRUGGS: Thank you, Mr. Raben.
2 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
3 Q. Mr. Codina, the check was not deposited until
4 August of that year and the check was written on
5 March 31st of that year, 2006.
6 Were you aware that the check was not deposited
7 for whatever time period, that is, between March 31st
8 and August 15th?
9 A. I was not aware until this matter happened and I
10 was told the check was not deposited. I did not know at
11 the time, no.
12 Q. Okay. Now, have you considered the fact, because
13 you had a event, at least you believed at that time that
14 you were going to have a vote in front of the commission
15 a week from the time you got the phone call, right?
16 A. Right.
17 Q. Have you ever considered the fact that, if the
18 check wasn't going to be deposited for four or five
19 months, why wasn't the call made after the vote?
20 Have you ever considered that, since, of course,
21 according to you, sir, you made the contribution anyway?
22 A. I had never considered that because I assumed the
23 check would have been deposited right away. I had no
24 problem with that.
25 It's evident now that we were recognized. I

29
1 don't know how to play what if. You know, I don't think
2 much of the Miami Herald. They were writing a story
3 about me giving the money later in exchange for a
4 previous vote, so there is no win, no win on this.
5 Q. Mr. Codina, I can't answer for the Miami Herald.
6 I don't know why they do whatever it is they do --
7 A. Okay.
8 Q. -- but let's get back to the facts that we have
9 here.
10 A. Okay.
11 Q. Is that, at the very least, wouldn't it have
12 caused you a concern if you knew that the check was not
13 going to be deposited for four or five months?
14 I mean, wouldn't that have put some question in
15 your mind?
16 A. Look, you're asking me a hypothetical.
17 Q. Yes, I am.
18 A. If I knew it, I may have said I'd rather give you
19 the check when the thing is formed. However --
20 Q. You mean after the vote is what you're saying,
21 right?
22 A. No, sir, not after the vote. After the charity
23 gets formed, I said.
24 Q. Okay, that's fair, okay.
25 A. But, in all frankness, giving the money -- the

30
1 fact that the money was going to be deposited at the
2 Dade Community Foundation, I wouldn't have a problem
3 writing the check if the Dade Community Foundation was
4 going to disburse all the funds.
5 I have a very high regard for the process that
6 they go through in disbursing money. That's what they
7 do and they do it well, so --
8 Q. Well, let's go back, then, and I'll come back to
9 that in just a second.
10 A. Okay.
11 Q. And, listen, I don't want to argue with that. I
12 wont argue with that. Dade Community Foundation is a
13 reputable outfit.
14 A. Okay.
15 Q. No means to discredit them at all, but at the
16 time, if you can just assume for me the fact that the
17 State believes it will prove at trial --
18 A. Okay.
19 Q. -- that, at the time the phone call was made,
20 number one, you had a matter in front of the commission,
21 right?
22 A. Yes, sir.
23 Q. And when the phone call was made, you realized
24 the phone call was related to that matter, at least in
25 some fashion, because you turned around and called Mr.

31
1 Glas, your, I wouldn't say partner, but your friend,
2 business associate on this particular vote.
3 You called him to pay half the money, right?
4 A. Can I answer -- can I go back to the first part
5 of your question?
6 Q. Well, you can answer, did you, in fact --
7 MR. SREBNICK: There are two questions there,
8 so --
9 MR. SCRUGGS: You know something? I agree with
10 you, Mr. Srebnick.
11 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
12 Q. Yes, you can go ahead and answer whatever you
13 want.
14 A. I was going to ask you, which do you want me to
15 answer, the phone call or --
16 Q. Okay, I'll let you answer one at a time.
17 MR. SCRUGGS: Fair break-up there, Mr. Srebnick?
18 MR. SREBNICK: (No response.)
19 THE WITNESS: Okay.
20 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
21 Q. First of all, when the phone call was made,
22 certainly you knew you had a matter in front of the
23 commission?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Second question is, did you relate that phone

32
1 call, then, to the matter in front of the commission?
2 Because you, in fact, called Mr. Glas and asked him to
3 pay the other half.
4 A. Can I answer the first one first?
5 MR. RABEN: Wait a second. That question, again,
6 it contains a statement wherein you said, "You asked
7 Mr. Glas to pay the other half."
8 I don't believe that that has been established,
9 and that's a statement, not a question.
10 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
11 Q. Did you ask Mr. Glas to pay?
12 A. Can I answer your question one at a time?
13 Q. Please do. Answer what half you want.
14 A. I'm going to only answer them the way you gave
15 them to me. I'm not picking or choosing.
16 Q. Sure.
17 A. The phone call first.
18 Q. I'll let you answer however you want.
19 A. The phone call first.
20 I got a phone call. I'm told it's her office
21 calling. My antennas went up immediately. I've got a
22 matter pending, and what was on my mind, Mr. Scruggs,
23 was, is she going to talk to me about the Brickell
24 matter? Which I don't -- I don't even think I'm allowed
25 to chat with her while this matter is pending about the

33
1 Brickell matter, so my antennas went up because I
2 thought she was going to have a discussion with me about
3 the Brickell matter or the Brickell vote. I don't know
4 if I can do that.
5 I get on the phone. I chatted with someone from
6 her staff. They talked about an event coming up for
7 Barbara Carey-Shuler, all of these things.
8 I asked a couple of questions. I asked if they
9 have a 501(c)3. They tell me -- I said, "Send me the
10 certificate."
11 They say, "We don't have the certificate yet, but
12 all the money is going to be deposited at the Dade
13 Community Foundation," so I'm partly relieved that the
14 conversation is about this. I finish the conversation
15 and that's the end of the conversation.
16 I was somewhat relieved and my antennas were more
17 relaxed, so that was the telephone conversation. Now
18 you want to know about Mr. Glas?
19 Q. (Nodding head.)
20 A. So I did call Mr. Glas, and I told you before
21 that Ricardo Glas is a very good friend. We were
22 representing him on the leasing of his project, as you
23 know, and Ricardo Glas and I spoke frequently, and I
24 told Ricardo Glas, "I got a call from Commissioner
25 Spence-Jones's office. I was worried. I received all

34
1 of this material, went through it. Ricardo, this is an
2 event that I would normally have to give to anyway, so I
3 am going to write a check."
4 I don't recall exactly or I would tell you, but I
5 think I told him, "I'm not going to do a full
6 sponsorship, like Burger King. I'm going to do half,"
7 and Ricardo offered to do the other half. That was the
8 Ricardo Glas phone call.
9 Q. Okay, but my question, though, perhaps a little
10 more refined, though --
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. -- is the fact that you subsequently, if not
13 immediately, called Mr. Glas and asked him or at least
14 suggested, perhaps, that you -- since you weren't going
15 to pay the full sponsorship of $25,000, that he pay a
16 portion of it, doesn't that, in fact, in and of itself
17 tie your thoughts to the matter pending in front of the
18 commission?
19 A. No. I didn't ask, nor request, by the way. I
20 told him the facts. I told him what I had gone through.
21 I told him what I was doing, no.
22 But the matter, when I called Ricardo, the matter
23 was in my mind because I had arrived -- I had made a
24 decision about what I was going to do, so I was okay
25 with that.

35
1 Q. Okay, but I'm still -- you know, I think I
2 understand what you're saying, but the fact that you
3 called Mr. Glas as opposed to Mr. Anybody Else or Ms.
4 Anybody Else, that means, does it not, sir, that, at
5 least the matter was pending, in your mind, when you
6 called Mr. Glas?
7 A. When you say call somebody else, who am I going
8 to call? The matter -- I wasn't asked to fundraise. I
9 wasn't asked to do any fundraising.
10 I didn't call Ricardo to fundraise. I called
11 Ricardo because my antennas went up because we had a
12 matter pending, and I went through the process that I
13 went through.
14 You may think I arrived at the wrong conclusion,
15 I accept that, but I thought, with the information that
16 I had at the time, and given the fact that this is
17 something I would have given to anyway, I was perfectly
18 okay with it then and I'm perfectly okay with it now.
19 Q. And, again, don't get me wrong, because whatever
20 I think in terms of what you did doesn't mean a thing,
21 okay, so --
22 A. It did mean a lot to me after the last time we
23 met and I thought you thought I had willingly done this
24 with a fake charity and no event, so --
25 Q. Well, I didn't, sir, but, again, that's, you

36
1 know --
2 A. Okay.
3 Q. -- neither here nor there, I suppose, but why
4 didn't you pay the entire -- it was twenty-five that was
5 asked for, right?
6 A. Yes. I could easily have done that instead, but
7 I --
8 MR. SREBNICK: Excuse me. Listen to the
9 question.
10 THE WITNESS: Okay.
11 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
12 Q. Why didn't you pay the full twenty-five?
13 MR. SREBNICK: And your question was, twenty-five
14 was asked for?
15 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
16 Q. Let's take them one at a time. Twenty-five was
17 asked for, right?
18 A. They didn't tell me to write a check for
19 twenty-five.
20 I believe what they said to me, from my
21 recollection, is Burger King is a sponsor, you know, and
22 Burger King is paying 25,000.
23 Q. Okay, and so did you take that to mean that was
24 the amount being suggested to you?
25 A. Yes.

37
1 Q. Okay, so why didn't you pay the twenty-five?
2 A. Burger King's name was already on the flier. I
3 thought I was going to do somewhat less than that.
4 My recollection is, I told Ricardo, "I'm going to
5 do a level below," and he agreed to do the same.
6 Q. Okay.
7 A. He wanted to do the same.
8 Q. Let's go back, take that step by step.
9 A. Okay.
10 Q. You could have easily paid twenty-five if you
11 wanted to? Again, your finances are none of my
12 business, but I think that's what you just said, right,
13 had you chosen to do so?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Okay, and you could have easily just paid twelve
16 five, if you wanted to, right --
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. -- since that was going to be the amount that you
19 did?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. So why didn't you just pay twelve five and let it
22 go?
23 A. That's what I did. I paid twelve five.
24 Q. Why did you call Ricardo Glas, unless it was
25 related to the matter pending before the commission?

38
1 MR. RABEN: Objection, asked and answered.
2 THE WITNESS: I called Ricardo because Ricardo
3 had the matter pending, and I told you that I called
4 him because the matter was pending.
5 MR. SCRUGGS: Okay.
6 THE WITNESS: And I told you, Ricardo is my close
7 friend.
8 We were handling the matter for him. Of course
9 I'm going to call him, and we spoke often, so I don't
10 recall if I called him or he called me.
11 I think I called him and I told him, "Ricardo, I
12 got a call from Michelle Spence-Jones's office. We do
13 have this matter pending.
14 "Here is what they asked. Here is what they sent
15 me. I went through all of this, and I think this is a
16 legitimate charitable contribution.
17 "The event must have been set long before this
18 hearing. I would have given to this anyway, so I'm
19 going to make a contribution," and that's it, Mr.
20 Scruggs.
21 BY MR. SCRUGGS:
22 Q. Okay. Did he tell you whether or not he was
23 going to contribute also?
24 A. I believe he said, "I'll make a contribution
25 too," yes.

Saturday, August 29, 2009

Miami-Dade County: There Could be Trouble Brewing. By Geniusofdespair

Every time I see a County Commission Meeting notice in the newspaper I shudder. I wonder what is hidden in the announcements. On first look, the highlighted ones earn further research. I don't have time right now, but the implications of some of these could be far reaching -- such as "Amending consequences of a tie vote" and "Modifying vote requirements to delete or modify a restrictive covenant" (If they are increasing number of votes: Good, if they are decreasing: Bad). Also, "Modifying Notice Requirements" on DRI's -- I have to ask: "Why?"

I believe the first one highlighted was a property sold by Armando Codina's company to a company he appears to have ties with but not ownership in...see comments. This has to do with filling in wetlands.

When people complain about the Mayor's salary raises, I look at these and worry more. This is where the news is, our rights are being chipped away by the County Commission's unreformable majority. (See comments, I looked at some of these more closely there).

Sunday, November 30, 2008

Armando Codina: Director, General Motors... by gimleteye


"Anatomy of a Meltdown" in the recent edition of The New Yorker ((Dec 1, 2008) begins, "Some are born radical. Some are made radical. And some have radicalism thrust upon them." The article probes the federal response to the financial crisis, through which formerly free market acolytes in the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve responded with the most sweeping federal intervention in US economic history. It occurs that the point about radicalism is largely missed.

What is truly radical is the idea that government, itself, is the problem. The Reagan Revolution laid the foundation of the idea, that blossomed with the Republican Reformation through the 1994 Congressional mid-term elections. It reached full bloom with ascendant Bush political fortunes in Tallahassee in 1998 and in Washington, DC, in the November 2000 election.

Then Florida Governor Jeb Bush articulated the cause in his 2003 inauguration address when he said: “There will be no greater tribute to our maturity as a society than if we can make these buildings around us empty of workers; as silent monuments to the time when government played a larger role than it deserved or could adequately fill.”

The workers he meant to get rid of-- the meaning was clear to the invited audience-- were regulators. And, mainly, regulators charged with roadblocks to economic growth. The Bush assault against environmental regulations represented the high water mark for a Forty Year War; exhausting itself not through any act of environmentalism but because of the economic crisis. Still, the war is visible most clearly in places like South Florida where the trampling of rules and intimidation of regulators goes on throughout local government without criticism or penalty.

Today General Motors Corp.’s board is meeting in Detroit to discuss a rescue plan to present to Congress that may determine, according to Bloomberg News, "if Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner can save the company and keep his job." I wonder why the board of directors of GM should keep their jobs.

Among GM's board of directors is Miami's Armando Codina, who brought Jeb Bush into the real estate industry where he made his fortune and one of George W. Bush's strongest supporters. Codina joined the GM board in 2002. According to the GM website, Codina is also a board director of Merrill Lynch.

The fall of GM has its roots in a business model that none criticized beyond environmentalists who pleaded with Congress and the states to stop selling cars and trucks by the pound of metal; the more pounds, the more profit.

More suburbs, more cars. More cars by the pound, more environmental destruction. What these easy-to-grasp formulas fail to capture is how fiscal stewardship of the largest publicly owned corporations used "government is the problem" to spurn protections of the environment while encouraging credit based on unregulated, toxic debt and derivatives; the undoing of Merrill Lynch.

Today, the Wall Street Journal speculates on whether Rick Wagoner, GM chief, will be able to keep his job. It focuses on the legacy cost of pensions, healthcare, executive compensation and union agreements hammered out in times when even union leaders could ignore the peril of financial gerrymandering. If taxpayers bail out GM, its board of directors should be asked to leave by Congress, as should the boards of any publicly held corporations that receive the blessing of taxpayer bailouts from free market economic ministers now turned radical government interventionists.


General Motors

MARKET CAP HAS DECLINED:

1954 - 1973 GM was ranked Number 1
1985 - 1999 GM was ranked Number 1
2003 - GM ranked Number 61
2004 - Ranked #173

Sept 23, 2008-- Junk bond status. Fitch, the credit ratings agency, said it reduced GM's issuer default rating one notch to "CCC" from "B-." Both ratings are noninvestment, or junk, grade.

November 20: CNN, "General Motors has a market capitalization of less than $2 billion. The stock, which now trades for a little under $3 a share, hit a 70-year low of $1.70 on Thursday morning before recovering a bit. Normally, when a blue-chip company sinks to such depths of despair, it gets tossed from the S&P 500. But not only is GM still a member of that index, it remains a component of the granddaddy of market barometers: the venerable Dow Jones Industrial average. Why? Or in the words of mid-'90s self-help guru Susan Powter, "Stop the insanity!" The editors of The Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones Indexes, who decide who's in and who's out of the Dow, soon have to come to grips with reality and remove GM from the DJIA."

And so, too, the directors should be removed from their stewardship of a fallen giant.