I don't know Charlie Thomas, but know of him. I've been reading his UF stuff for a long time and found it to be pretty objective. If worse comes to worst and UF fires him, it's their loss. Hope he got enough from PZN to thumb his nose at his antagonists. Personally, I'm glad he's on our side.
If he loses this hearing process, I guess the unions can chalk one up for themselves. The unions, of course, have set a wonderful example over the years of avoiding conflicts and pursuing fiscal prudence. In fact, the unions are so wonderful, I wish they would be more successful and take over the country, so the workers can give according to each one's ability, and we can all receive according to our need. Seems like that's been tried somewhere else.
In all seriousness, I view any union victory as repugnant to market sensibilities. Sorry, I'm an unabashed (well, slightly bashed at PZN's current price) capitalist.
04/21/1999 KRTBN Knight-Ridder Tribune Business News: The Miami Herald
University of Florida professor Charles Thomas, who helped guide
Florida's entry into prison privatization and whose national report of industry trends analysts say can "greatly influence" the stock market, has earned a reputation the top expert in the field.
But as his reputation has grown, so has his bankbook: The professor, a $84,000-per-year academic, also was on the payroll of a private corrections company, commanding a $3 million consulting fee for a January 1999 merger involving Corrections Corporation of America.
State records also show he owned an estimated $660,000 in stock in four private corrections companies and is a member of the board of directors for Prison Realty Corp., a real estate investment trust formed to provide financing for private corrections facilities.
Complaints to the state Ethics Commission followed and last week, Thomas admitted to a conflict of interest between his work as a university
researcher and his personal financial stake in the outcome of privatization efforts.
In a signed document, he offered to halt his university research, pay a $2,000 fine and resign his position as director of UF's Private Corrections Project -- a research project financed with private donations from corrections companies -- in order to settle the complaints.
"This is an appropriate settlement," said Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Scott, who acted as prosecutor for the ethics commission in this case.'
Five of Florida's adult prisons are privately run and 87 percent of the juvenile justice system is run by private companies. The state's push toward privatization, touted as a cheaper alternative to state-run facilities, began in earnest in 1993, when the Legislature created the Correctional Privatization Commission.
Mark Hodges, the commission's executive director, said the law creating the commission was written partly by Thomas, who then played a "very big" role in the first years of the commission.
"In this state and every other state, he's been the one to record the changes in the private prison industry," Hodges said. "He answered our questions, helped us understand what was going on the industry. His reports have been a clearinghouse of information."
Thomas was employed by the commission as consultant from 1994-97. Hodges said the commission ended his employment after the first ethics complaint was filed.
The research project also was financed in part by donations from private corrections companies. Stock analysts interviewed by ethics investigators said that Thomas' industry predictions could "greatly influence" the stock market.
Not every private corrections company was in Thomas' corner. George Zoley, chief executive officer of Wackenhut Corrections, called the professor's close financial relationship with CCA and others "most disturbing."
I know Dr. Thomas. He seems like a pleasant individual, but his views are definitely biased. That is not his fault. He profits from the proliferation of privatization. In that battle, there are different stakeholders. He should have no problem stepping away from his shield of public employment. As a public employee, he must remain impartial and not have certain contractual relationships with private interests. That rule doesn�t only apply to Thomas. Taxpayers shouldn�t be subsidizing profiteers that are operating under the guise of not-for-profit employment status.
You have recently posted regarding two issues (one germane to PZN, one not)in stark shades of black and white. Unfortunately, things are not quite so simple, and you need to let a little gray or some gentle pastels into your thinking.
Regarding the effect of escapes, nic is closer to fact than you. Putting all escapes into the category of Youngstown is a big mistake. From my remote vantage point, it appears that CCA was in over its head with Youngstown, or at best severly snake-bitten. Every successful business screws up at least once (remember GE and diamonds?). Yes, Youngstown affected the stock price and it should have, because there was financial consequence. There is no evidence that other incidents did. If in total these incidents indicate pervasive mismanagement, PZN will be further punished - first by the contracting agencies, then by the stock market. I don't believe it has reached that point. Again, avoiding such consequences is an incentive that public sector operators don't face.
Issue 2 is Charlie Thomas. He championed privatization long before he received any money from the private sector. He became "the" expert - so much so that analysts still trusted his research even when told of his private compensation, which he received because of that experise and his bias toward privatization. I don't believe he's ever been in a position, while compensated by PZN, to award them a contract, if ever. And, in fact, is he any less conflicted than a government employee involved in awarding contracts to private entities or monitoring them who is paid by the state with which PZN supposedly competes? Or how about Janet Reno, who issued the investigatory report on Youingstown - isn't her boss somewhat beholden to union lobbyists who fight privatization every step of the way?