|Checkpoint Charlie: Berlin or Southwest Ranches?|
This vote well reinforces a whole series of absolutely selfish, despicable, and very questionable legislative practices by this 12 years old town named Southwest Ranches.
|Checkpoint Charlie: Berlin or Southwest Ranches?|
Since I was just asked, there are 2460in the Town. 16 households spoke against the CCA Facility, or .0065%.
keith_poliakoff Keith Poliakoff
Keith is negotiating our contract but apparently doesn't understand basic mathematics. He claims that 16 households our of 2460 residential households equals a percentage of 0.0065%. Of course, even an elementary school student knows this math is wrong.16 total SWR households spoke against CCA Facility at Town's meeting. Town asks CCA to reach out to households not spoken to yet.
"The mayors of many cities, including Appleton, MN, Eloy, AZ and California City, CA, have found themselves with jobs at the CCA prisons they host." -- Privateci.orgIt's not like the current council will be re‐elected once the people in the town figure out that this prison holds nothing but problems, and causes yet another drain on the town's delicate revenue stream.
"Back in 2004, researchers at Washington State University came out with a report
debunking many of these claims. Their report found 'no evidence that prison expansion has stimulated economic growth,' and that bringing private prisons to town actually impedes economic growth. They followed up this report with another that came out late last year, reaffirming the findings of the original report. The researchers found that not only is economic growth hindered by bringing a private prison to town, but 'a negative relationship [exists] between the growth of new prisons and growth in private employment.'"
"The town of Littlefield, Texas is suffering the repercussions of funding a private prison on a bond venture. The GEO Group cancelled its contract to run the facility in January of last year, and the town has not been able to secure a new contract to bring prisoners in. Because the facility there has sat empty for so long, the bonds used to finance it have dropped in value. So now Littlfield becomes a higher investment risk, meaning future bonds investments will likely cost more. This is another unforeseen consequence of bringing a private prison to town; people get so excited by the prospects of new jobs that they fail to think about what might happen when the private prison company leaves town. So the next time you hear about all the economic benefits that come with a private prison, take that advice with more than a grain of salt."
... that the facility would affect property value, traffic, and noise to the area, utility consumption, fire department response times, and their overall quality of life. In addition, the potential site is less than five miles from more than a dozen schools...In addition, he encouraged input from residents:
I would strongly encourage you to seek the input of nearby residents that could be directly impacted by the facility before moving forward on a decision.We Thank the Congressman for standing up for his constituency in this matter. For him to take the time and personally listen to his constituents concerns and act upon them is highly commendable and is appreciated among the community.
|Sample Card from November 5, 2011 ICE Informational Meeting|
As you probably have seen we have remained incredibly quiet and have been working diligently with our legislative leaders on this matter without pushing the press angle.As such, I have been fully advised by our DC contacts that we should remain fully quiet on this one and to let our DC Leaders help without sparking a fire that will make it more difficult for them to assist.
DWS: You know, what I did was wrote a letter... a sort of cursory letter of support because...
DWS: Southwest Ranches for many years has been planning on the property already zoned for things like a dump and a MAXIMUM security prison.
DWS: There have been many many hearings lots of input.This is patently false which is why Debbie wrote a letter admonishing Mayor Jeff Nelson for a paucity of public information on the prison. Keith Poliakoff is well noted for gagging his Town's elected officials with a cone of silence and threats that their constituents may even have to register as LOBBYISTS to speak with their Councilmen about the prison.
DWS: And now I have urged and now it has been done for the Town to create a citizen's advisory council which will be both in Pembroke Pines affected and Southwest Ranches residents too as the facility moves forward give them input and feedback on what they think needs to be addressed.This is outrageous sham. What part of WE DON'T WANT A PRISON does this tin-eared politician not understand? Further, it's NOT made up of we citizens, it's made up of the ELITE. Not the proverbial 1%, but the 0.01% who are HOA presidents! None of the opposition to the prison has been included in ANY of these meetings. This is addressed in the article Announced Advisory Council... Who does it represent?
DWS: ..that many years ago when the town was first incorporated, that property was brought into the Town of Southwest Ranches and it was already zoned for things like a maximum s... there's a prison right next door to the facility...Debbie, did YOU have anything to do as an elected legislator from the State of Florida for that special dispensation which allowed the town to bring in a non contiguous parcel? We believe you did. Your office believes you did as well. You were an original part of the problem and you still are part of the problem. Directly.
But Poliakoff -- who manages Becker & Poliakoff, one of the largest legal and lobbying firms in the state -- is just as much to blame for the town's blatant brand of corruption.You can read the entire New Times article here: Bob Norman's Cash Cow 2
With guys like Poliakoff running Southwest Ranches, the town will never get much better...
Section 3.07. Town Attorney [appointment; removal; terms].The Town Council has 5 voting members including the Mayor. So, Gary Poliakoff ensured his control of the Town by requiring a SUPER MAJORITY to fire the Attorney. The charter requires 4 out of 5 votes rather than the traditional simple majority of 3 to 5 votes. The bar is raised from requiring 60% of the governing body to remove the Attorney to an unrealistic 80%. This aspect of the Town Charter MUST be amended so that we have a shot of removing this corrupt force from our presence.
The Council shall appoint the Town Attorney for an indefinite term by an affirmative vote
of at least four Council members. The Council members may remove the Town Attorney
at any time by an affirmative vote of at least four Council members. The compensation
and benefits of the Town Attorney shall be fixed by the Council. [underline added]