Head, Brian W. | Testimony transcript

Transcript of the Testimony of Brian W. Head

Date: November 5, 2013Volume: I

Case: In Re: Joplin Critical Investigation

Printed On: November 13, 2013

Holliday Reporting Service, Inc.Phone: 417-358-4078

Fax: 417-451-1114Email:[email protected]

Internet:

Brian W. Head In Re: Joplin Critical Investigation

417-358-4078Holliday Reporting Service, Inc.

Page 1

IN RE: JOPLIN CRITICAL INVESTIGATION

SWORN STATEMENT OF

BRIAN W. HEAD

Taken on Tuesday, November 5, 2013, from 1:52 p.m. to 3:10

p.m., at the law offices of Juddson H. McPherson, LLC, 626

S. Byers, in the City of Joplin, County of Jasper, State of

Missouri, before

SHARON K. ROGERS, C.C.R.650,

a Certified Court Reporter and a Notary Public within and

for the County of Jasper, and State of Missouri.



Page 2

APPEARANCES

MR. THOMAS E. LORAINE

Loraine & Associates, LLC

4075 Osage Beach Pkwy., Suite 300

Osage Beach, MO 65065

[email protected]



Page 3

S T I P U L A T I O N

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED that this Sworn

Statement may be taken by steno-mask type recording by

SHARON K. ROGERS, a Certified Court Reporter, and

afterwards reduced into typewriting.

It is further stipulated that the signature of the

witness is hereby waived, and that said Sworn Statement of

said witness shall be of the same force and effect as

though said witness had read and signed said Sworn

Statement.



Page 4

I N D E X

Page/LineDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LORAINE . . . 5-4

E X H I B I T S

Exhibit #A. . . . . . . . 6-25 Advice of Rights

Exhibit #1. . . . . . . . 8-23 Handwritten noteExhibit #2. . . . . . . . 11-23 Printout of Mr. Rohr's statementExhibit #3. . . . . . . . 15-5 Press conference, Mr. ScearceExhibit #4. . . . . . . . 22-6 9/26/13 transcript of meetingExhibit #5. . . . . . . . 27-1 Packet of documentsExhibit #6. . . . . . . . 42-5 Property listingExhibit #7. . . . . . . . 42-21 Statement by Mr. Robert WoodExhibit #8. . . . . . . . 43-12 Voting recordExhibit #9. . . . . . . . 43-23 5/6/13 Council agendaExhibit #10 . . . . . . . 44-9

4/26/13 memoExhibit #11 . . . . . . . 48-23

Report on Connecticut property

Note: Exhibits in separate binder

(sic) - typed as spoken(ph.) - phonetic



Page 5

1 BRIAN W. HEAD

2 Having been first duly sworn and examined,

3 testified as follows:

4 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LORAINE:

5 Q. Sir, for the record would you state your name

6 and your occupation?

7 A. Brian Head. I'm the City Attorney for the

8 City of Joplin.

9 Q. Mr. Head, may I call you Brian?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. Brian, I have been retained to conduct a

12 Critical Investigation on two primary matters

13 and one collateral matter, if you will, but I

14 call them three issues. First we are looking

15 into I guess it's Mayor Pro Tem and

16 Councilman Scearce involving the leasing of a

17 building which involved a guy that eventually

18 was making book, if you will, on illegal

19 gambling activities and that individual's

20 name I think was Lovett, so there's been some

21 inquiries about how much Alderman or

22 Councilman - what is it, Alderman?

23 A. Councilman Scearce.

24 Q. Councilman Scearce might be involved in that.

25 The second area that we'll be looking into



Page 6

1 is the facts and circumstances surrounding

2 some release of private information

3 concerning Mr. Scearce's conduct, and that

4 may involve City Manager Rohr. Is that a

5 correct statement, that's one of the things

6 we're --

7 A. Correct.

8 Q. And let's call the third one might be some

9 involvement of Councilman Woolston and other

10 people during the banking of real estate for

11 the City's purchase of property in Joplin.

12 Would that be a fair characterization?

13 A. The City, more specifically though the Joplin

14 Redevelopment Corporation. Which while it is

15 owned by the City it is a separate

16 corporation, also.

17 Q. It would be a wholly owned city operative?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. All right, sir. So to the end of those three

20 goals I've been retained and I'm going to

21 utilize as you know some of the powers given

22 municipalities under New Jersey versus

23 Garrity. You're aware of that?

24 A. Yes, sir.

25 Q. And I want to hand you what is Exhibit #A,



Page 7

1 which is a warning and advice form. Have you

2 read that prior to coming in here today, sir?

3 A. Yes, sir.

4 Q. I've gone over that in detail with you, is

5 that true?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. I'd like to read it nevertheless for the

8 record. "I wish to advise you that you are

9 being questioned as part of an official

10 investigation by the City of Joplin. You

11 will be asked questions related and

12 specifically directed to the performance of

13 your official duties of fitness for office.

14 You are entitled to all the rights and

15 privileges guaranteed by the laws of the

16 Constitution of the State and the

17 Constitution of the United States, including

18 the right not to be compelled to incriminate

19 yourself. I further wish to advise you that

20 if you refuse to testify or to answer

21 questions relating to the performance of your

22 official duties, you will be subject to 23 departmental charges, which could result in

24 your dismissal from your official duties. If

25 you do answer, these statements may be used



Page 8

1 against you in relation to subsequent

2 departmental charges, but not in any

3 subsequent criminal proceedings." You've

4 read that and you understand that?

5 A. Yes, sir.

6 Q. And as I understand it you're an attorney?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. And you're licensed under the state law of

9 Missouri?

10 A. Yes, sir.

11 Q. And you have knowledge that you're coming

12 forward in answering questions pursuant to

13 this investigation?

14 A. Yes, sir.

15 Q. Okay. I have asked you to provide for the

16 three areas that we've talked about some

17 information prior to coming in here today and

18 you've brought some documents with you. I

19 have not seen any of these documents before.

20 Is that your knowledge, also?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. And to that end you have brought me an

23 exhibit marked Exhibit Number #1. Can you

24 explain to me what that is?

25 A. That is a copy of a note that was provided to



Page 9

1 me by an employee of the City that was found

2 in a hallway on the second floor of the City

3 Hall that has information written on it

4 relating to the FBI investigation that as I

5 understand it was conducted into Mr.

6 Scearce's activities.

7 Q. And this Exhibit Number #1 was provided to

8 you by a City employee?

9 A. That's correct.

10 Q. Would that City employee be under your direct

11 supervision in your position as attorney or

12 general counsel to the City of Joplin?

13 A. No, sir.

14 Q. Who did that employee work for?

15 A. That employee worked for the City Manager.

16 Q. Can you disclose the name of that individual?

17 A. I can.

18 Q. Do you wish to do so at this time?

19 A. I would prefer not to, however I can if

20 required.

21 Q. If there is any need to go further with that

22 I will do that. At a subsequent time if it

23 becomes necessary I will expect you to do

24 that. Will you comply with that?

25 A. Yes, sir.



Page 10

1 Q. Now do you recognize any of the hand printing

2 on this Exhibit #1, or a copy of this Exhibit

3 #1?

4 A. Yes, sir, I do.

5 Q. And you have the original of this document

6 that's been marked as Exhibit #1?

7 A. I do.

8 Q. And you have it in your custody?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. Has that been in your custody since the

11 individual discovered it on the floor?

12 A. Yes, it has.

13 Q. And that person gave it to you?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. And you've had it ever since?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. In your opinion whose printing and writing is

18 on this page?

19 A. The writing on this page I believe is very

20 distinctive and is that of City Manager Mark

21 Rohr.

22 Q. Now you're an attorney and you know there's

23 people that can testify to other people's

24 signature if they have sufficient basis. Do

25 you believe you have that basis to be able to



Page 11

1 recognize the writing on this?

2 A. I'm certainly not an expert in the field of

3 handwriting analysis, however I've seen a

4 great deal of Mr. Rohr's writing and it is

5 very distinctive and I believe this is

6 completely consistent with his handwriting.

7 Q. So you would be able to observe his writing

8 over a period of time. How long would that

9 have been?

10 A. He started with the City nine years ago, so

11 I've been City Attorney during that entire

12 period.

13 Q. So you've been watching his characters as he

14 places them on page and other documents for

15 nine years?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Have you discussed this particular Exhibit #1

18 with Mr. Rohr?

19 A. I have not.

20 Q. So he may or may not know what this exhibit

21 is about?

22 A. He most likely does not.

23 Q. All right. Thank you. Exhibit #2 says

24 "Roper Honda, Team of the Week" on the top.

25 What is this document?



Page 12

1 A. That is simply a printout that I pulled off

2 of the Internet of Mr. Rohr's statement

3 following a press conference that Mayor Pro

4 Tem Scearce had indicating his belief that

5 Mr. Rohr had released information improperly

6 to news media regarding this gambling

7 investigation. This is simply a copy that I

8 pulled off of Mr. Rohr's statement that was

9 released to the news media.

10 Q. Let's go back to Exhibit #1. Can you read

11 I'm going to call it the four lines? On the

12 left side there appears to be four large

13 categories and there are some notes on the

14 right side of Exhibit #1. Could you tell me

15 what appears on the left side of this and

16 then go to the portion on the right side?

17 A. On the left side in the upper left-hand

18 corner I believe it says "Carol Stark".

19 Q. And who is Carol Stark?

20 A. Carol Stark is the Editor for the Joplin

21 Globe.

22 Q. And what does that say next?

23 A. Underneath that has the date of 8/12 of '13.

24 Below that is the name "Lovett", and below

25 that going across the bottom is "Limit FBI



Page 13

1 request to issues", and then there is

2 something underneath that that I cannot make

3 out.

4 Q. What does it say at the top on the right?

5 A. It appears at the top right-hand corner

6 there's something in quotations that says,

7 "Address was," and then there's a word

8 underneath that that I cannot make out.

9 Below that is the word "Helpful".

10 Q. So you believe that there's some indication

11 on this document that there was something

12 concerning the FBI and this is in the City

13 Manager's handwriting?

14 A. Yes, below the word "Helpful" also in

15 quotations is the phrase "Contributing to a

16 continuing criminal enterprise", which struck

17 me because as I understood it that is what

18 Mr. Scearce was investigated for by the FBI.

19 Q. Do you have any personal knowledge of him

20 being investigated by the FBI?

21 A. The only knowledge that I have is a meeting

22 that happened late winter, early spring last

23 year with the Police Chief, myself, and Mr.

24 Rohr where this was discussed briefly because

25 Mr. Scearce believed at that time - he found



Page 14

1 out that previous Mayors had been briefed on

2 this issue and was rather upset with the

3 Chief and with the Manager for having

4 provided that information.

5 Q. What previous Mayor would have been briefed?

6 A. The first Mayor that would have been briefed

7 would have been Mr. Gary Shaw, and then after

8 that Mr. Mike Woolston would have been

9 briefed, and then the current Mayor

10 apparently as I understand it was briefed.

11 Q. And this concerns Councilman Scearce?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Now Exhibit #2 is some kind of a statement

14 that you took off the Internet that was made

15 by whom?

16 A. By Mr. Rohr.

17 Q. And that is the City Manager we're talking

18 about his handwriting?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. It seems to corroborate that Exhibit #1

21 there's some interchange of information

22 between the two documents?

23 A. The --

24 Q. Is that a yes?

25 A. Yes.



Page 15

1 Q. Okay. Do you have anything else you want to

2 --

3 A. The only thing I would say further is that

4 Exhibit #2 was in response to what is

5 included in Exhibit #3, if that's helpful.

6 Q. Yes, it will be. And let's go to Exhibit #3.

7 What is Exhibit #3?

8 A. Exhibit #3 is a copy of the statement that

9 Mr. Scearce handed out to the news media when

10 he had his press conference related to what

11 he believed was this inappropriate release of

12 information regarding the investigation. He

13 conducted a press conference. This is a copy

14 of what was handed out at that press

15 conference, and Exhibit #2 was the statement

16 that was released by Mr. Rohr in response.

17 Q. Can we indicate two pages on this document?

18 Exhibit #3 does mention the word "Carol

19 Stark" so it somehow makes reference to this

20 Exhibit #1 note?

21 A. That's correct.

22 Q. This Exhibit #3 seems to indicate that Mr.

23 Scearce had seen this note?

24 A. Correct.

25 Q. Do you have any knowledge of how he got a



Page 16

1 copy of this note?

2 A. I showed him a copy of the note.

3 Q. Did you give him a copy for his use?

4 A. I don't recall.

5 Q. But you may have?

6 A. I may have, but I don't recall.

7 Q. If you didn't there's a query as to how he

8 would have obtained a copy.

9 A. I showed him the copy. I showed him what was

10 in it. I don't recall giving him a copy, but

11 I may have.

12 Q. But he makes reference in this that he has a

13 copy.

14 A. Then I may have. I just simply don't recall.15 Q. Wouldn't that be unusual for you to give him

16 a copy of a complaint about him, would you?

17 A. I didn't feel that it was unusual because it

18 appeared to me that this was about him and it

19 was about the very thing that he had been

20 complaining about.

21 Q. Somebody leaking some kind of information

22 about it?

23 A. About him.

24 Q. And the question, you have no knowledge as to

25 what is in the FBI report or you've never



Page 17

1 seen a copy?

2 A. No, sir.

3 Q. And nobody has explained what's in that

4 report?

5 A. The only brief explanation that I had as to

6 what was known, and I don't even know if this

7 is in the report, the only brief explanation

8 that I had was from the Chief of Police

9 during that meeting that I previously

10 referenced with myself, Mr. Scearce, Mr.

11 Rohr, and the Police Chief where there was a

12 discussion about the fact that Mr. Scearce

13 had been investigated for this. Mr. Scearce

14 was very upset about it. It was explained to

15 us at the time by the Chief that he had

16 received special permission from the FBI in

17 order to brief the City Manager so that the

18 Manager could then brief the Mayor as to some

19 potential ongoing nature. I didn't fully

20 understand the purpose of that.

21 Q. Did the Police Chief claim to have additional

22 written information about this matter?

23 A. I do not recall. I don't believe so.

24 Q. Did the Police Chief tell you that he would

25 disclose any of the information concerning



Page 18

1 what his statements were about Mr. Scearce to

2 you? Did he claim to have some other

3 information that he may retain or he had the

4 right to retain?

5 A. I don't remember him saying that.

6 Q. Is there certain police documents that the

7 police won't show to City Managers or City

8 Attorneys when they claim they have some kind

9 of special privilege?

10 A. I was made aware several months ago that the

11 Police Department does now have the ability

12 to lock certain records within their record

13 keeping system electronically in order to

14 prevent access by anyone other than certain

15 authorized users.

16 Q. Who would be the authorized users according

17 to the Police Chief?

18 A. To the best of my knowledge the only one that

19 I know of is the Police Chief, but there may

20 be others. I just simply don't know of them.21 Q. Why did that matter come to your attention?

22 A. That matter came to our attention during a

23 separate issue involving Mr. Rohr. There was

24 an alleged domestic dispute at his home that

25 the Council wished us to look into and to see



Page 19

1 if there had been some pattern of conduct.

2 My City Prosecutor has what I believe to be

3 full access to those records and I asked the

4 City Prosecutor to please do a record search

5 for me because I did not feel it was

6 appropriate to ask the police at that time to

7 do the record search. She did the record

8 search, came up with a few things that were

9 not really related, and those are the only

10 records that then I reported to the Council

11 having found. During the discussion that we

12 had at that time it was disclosed by the

13 Police Chief that certain records could, in

14 fact, be locked from view by anyone other

15 than a slight few amongst the Police

16 Department and I do not know who those are.

17 Q. And it would not include your City Prosecutor

18 apparently?

19 A. I do not know. If she was granted that

20 authority she didn't know it.

21 Q. Who is your City Prosecutor?

22 A. Her name is Tricia Gould.

23 Q. Tricia who?

24 A. Gould, G-O-U-L-D.

25 Q. I might want to take her statement. I think



Page 20

1 I will want to. I'll probably need to work

2 that in. So if you would make her aware that

3 I would like to speak with her. So why did

4 the City want to look into the conduct of the

5 City Manager, Mr. Rohr, about a domestic

6 violence matter?

7 A. Motives I am not entirely sure of. I know

8 that there have been a number of rumors over

9 the years regarding ongoing conduct. I don't

10 know of any of them being true. I have never

11 been provided with any proof of any of them

12 being true. I don't know if that was the

13 thinking of the Mayor or if there was some

14 other motive.

15 Q. What Mayor was that that requested that

16 information?

17 A. I believe that was Melodee Colbert-Kean.

18 Q. As the City Attorney do you believe that was

19 a proper area of inquiry from the Mayor?

20 A. I think it is a proper area of inquiry if

21 someone - taken to the extreme if someone

22 believed that the Police Department was not

23 adequately investigating some sort of

24 domestic situation simply because it was a

25 public official or a particular public



Page 21

1 official, I believe that's an entirely

2 appropriate inquiry at that time, and I think

3 the desire was to see if there was some

4 pattern of conduct or some records beyond

5 this one incident and I did not find any.

6 Q. You did not find any in response to this

7 because you were told that the Police

8 Department has the ability to lock certain

9 areas?

10 A. I was not ever told that they had locked in

11 files that were pertinent to the

12 investigation.

13 Q. Were you told that there were no files

14 pertinent to the investigation by the Police

15 Chief in that locked area?

16 A. I made a request of the Police Department for

17 all of the files that they had. They

18 provided me pretty much exactly what I had

19 found previously. I did not ask them whether

20 that included locked files.

21 Q. Nevertheless as the attorney for the City you

22 feel that if - let me ask you this question.

23 If there were locked files on a public

24 official that the Police Chief was not

25 disclosing and the Mayor had requested it for



Page 22

1 whatever reason you believe that to be a

2 proper area of inquiry?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Thank you. I appreciate that information.

5 Now you also provided me with an Exhibit

6 Number #4. It appears to be seven pages. Is

7 that your counting of that document, seven

8 pages?

9 A. Yes, sir, I believe so.

10 Q. The court reporter has marked seven. And can

11 you give me a thumbnail description of what

12 Exhibit #4 consisting of seven pages is?

13 A. This is an excerpt - okay, it's a transcript

14 of a portion of a meeting held by the City

15 Council, a budget work session meeting on I

16 believe September the 26th of 2013.

17 Q. Yes, that's the date.

18 A. At the conclusion of that meeting there was

19 what I would consider to be substantial

20 fireworks at the end of the meeting wherein

21 Mr. Woolston asked for an investigation into

22 Mr. Scearce. There were statements made by

23 Dr. Rosenberg about Mr. Woolston's activities

24 as a realtor. There were just a number of 25 bombs thrown back and forth across the table.



Page 23

1 This I think was the genesis and the

2 beginning of this investigative process.

3 Q. You believe this is what was the seed for

4 eventually requesting the three areas of

5 inquiry that we talked about earlier?

6 A. Yes, sir.

7 Q. Now you said excerpt. Who made the

8 determination on these seven pages that this

9 is the appropriate excerpt of that meeting

10 where all this occurred?

11 A. It came from the City Clerk. I simply asked

12 her for the tail end of the meeting where the

13 discussion as to this investigation had

14 occurred. She provided the transcript of

15 that. We can certainly provide a transcript

16 of the entire meeting. The bulk of the

17 meeting, however, was just budgetary items 18 and didn't have anything to do with this

19 investigation.

20 Q. So at my request concerning whatever

21 information there was concerning the three

22 areas of inquiry this was provided to me, is

23 that correct?

24 A. Yes, sir.

25 Q. And as you see it there are various initials



Page 24

1 in here. I'm just going to briefly run 2 through these, or maybe I'll let you run

3 through them and give me who you understand

4 MW, for example, is. Go down and tell me who

5 is talking there.

6 A. MW would designated Mike Woolston. BS would

7 designate Bill Scearce. JG would designate

8 Jack Golden. GS would designate Gary Shaw.

9 Dr.R would be Dr. Rosenberg. MG would

10 designate Morris Glaze. And then MCK would

11 be Mayor Melodee Colbert-Kean. I believe

12 that's all.

13 Q. Now those names that you related, they were

14 all people that were properly in this budget

15 session?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. They were members of the budget committee?

18 A. The Council does not have a budget committee.

19 They are members of the City Council, all of

20 those individuals.

21 Q. Are there other members of the City Council

22 that were not at this meeting?

23 A. No, I believe everyone was there.

24 Q. So this is the City Council?

25 A. Yes, I don't know if everyone spoke at this.



Page 25

1 Q. But these are the guys that did speak?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. As far as you know everyone was present?

4 A. I believe so.

5 Q. So if I talk to the City Council about what

6 happened at least everyone that was there,

7 which we believe everybody, should say, hey,

8 this kind of stuff happened?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. That's Exhibit #4, correct?

11 A. Yes, sir.

12 Q. Exhibit #5, what is this, sir?

13 A. This is a packet of documents, I cannot

14 verify the authenticity or value of any of

15 them, that were simply provided by Mr.

16 Woolston that he had requested that it be

17 provided to the investigator and I was simply

18 delivering those to you.

19 Q. This appears to be a list comprised of 19

20 dates. What is that all about?

21 A. I believe that is a list --

22 Q. Closing dates?

23 A. -- of closing dates on properties that he was

24 involved with with Four State Homes or

25 Charlie Kuehn that were going into the Land



Page 26

1 Bank at the intersection, the northeast

2 corner of 20th Street and Connecticut in

3 Joplin.

4 Q. Why did he single out these 19 tracts?

5 A. I would assume that he thought those were the

6 relevant pieces because that was work that he

7 had done with Charlie on behalf of

8 Wallace-Bajjali that would ultimately end up 9 in the redevelopment corporation.

10 Q. Would you tell me the relationship that these

11 various names that you've just given me, tell 12 me this is New Horizons Realty and it's Mike

13 Woolston, broker. That's the card.

14 A. You will need to verify all this with Mr.

15 Woolston, but my understanding Mr. Woolston

16 has been a realtor in the community for quite

17 some time, several years. He has for many

18 years worked for Pro 100 Realty. A few

19 months ago, and I don't know when this

20 occurred, he went out on his own in some sort

21 of partnership or corporate, I don't know

22 what the structure is, with Charlie Kuehn,

23 which I believe is the business that you

24 noted as New Horizons Realty. I don't know

25 when that occurred with regard to these dates



Page 27

1 that are on Exhibit #5. I don't know what

2 the structure of that is. He has never

3 provided that information to me.

4 Q. I've noted a name associated with Mr. Kuehn

5 of Four State Homes. Is that another entity

6 you're aware of?

7 A. Yes, Mr. Kuehn is an owner, or maybe the

8 owner, I'm not sure again of their structure,

9 of a company called Four State Homes. I

10 believe there is also a company that may be

11 involved in some of these transactions as a

12 subsidiary that is Four States Commercial

13 Real Estate possibly. I've had that name

14 thrown at me a couple of times. I do not

15 know the accuracy of it.

16 Q. And you don't know whether Woolston is

17 involved in any of these other than New

18 Horizons Realty?

19 A. At the time I think a lot of these were done

20 he was actually involved with Pro 100. And

21 then at some time later he left there and

22 went to New Horizons Realty, but I don't know

23 the structure.

24 Q. This Land Bank, all of these pieces of real

25 estate that we have listed, 19 and I'm



Page 28

1 assuming literally hundreds of others, have

2 been placed into a 353 Corporation. Is that

3 a true statement?

4 A. Yes, it's the Joplin Redevelopment

5 Corporation, which is a Chapter 353

6 Corporation.

7 Q. Just for my knowledge what is a 353

8 Corporation?

9 A. A 353 Corporation is a redevelopment

10 corporation that allows a developer,

11 generally they're utilized by developers, to

12 purchase land and receive certain tax

13 benefits for redeveloping the property. In

14 this instance the 353 Corporation is a wholly

15 owned - it is a separate corporation, but the

16 City of Joplin owns all of its shares,

17 appoints all of its directors, and does not

18 directly control its activities, but does

19 provide those appointments and it is an arm

20 of the City for the redevelopment following

21 the tornado.

22 Q. And who are the directors of the 353, if you

23 know?

24 A. Off the top of my head I'm not sure that I

25 could name them all.



Page 29

1 Q. How many are there?

2 A. I believe there are seven. The current

3 Chairman is Gary Duncan, the immediate past

4 chair is Ron Darby. And I can certainly

5 provide you a list of all the current

6 members. The Treasurer presently is a lady

7 named Laura Delano and the Vice Chairman is

8 Brian Shaw.

9 Q. Would you make a notation to yourself that

10 I'd like you to get me something in writing

11 that lists the present members and the past

12 members during the period of complaint that

13 we have? I assume back through the tornado

14 itself, I suppose. Now at any time was

15 Councilman Woolston involved in the

16 directorship of the 353 Corporation?

17 A. No.

18 Q. Was any other councilman on that corporation?

19 A. There are no councilmen that sit as voting

20 members, however the Council has appointed a

21 liaison from the Council to the Chapter 353

22 Corporation, and I believe in the relevant

23 past it has been Dr. Rosenberg. Dr.

24 Rosenberg was diagnosed with cancer some

25 months ago and underwent some treatment and



Page 30

1 during his absence Mr. Scearce was the

2 recommended that attended those meetings.

3 Q. So Mr. Scearce would have been involved to

4 the extent, he certainly has knowledge of

5 what properties and who was involved in

6 obtaining those properties for some

7 substantial period of time?

8 A. I would say so, yes.

9 Q. Isn't one of Mr. Scearce's complaints that

10 Mr. Woolston is somehow improperly conducting

11 business with the 353 Corporation?

12 A. I think that is more Dr. Rosenberg's

13 complaint you'll see in reading that excerpt

14 from the meeting. The complaints have been

15 generally less about receiving any kind of

16 funds improperly as to conduct, just simply 17 acting inappropriately when negotiating to

18 buy property that I have heard so far.

19 Q. As far as an auditor on the 353 Corporation

20 does the City have an auditor?

21 A. The City has auditors that come in and audit

22 our books each year, but as far as an

23 individual auditor whose sole purpose is that

24 I can't say that we have one. Although, we

25 do have a finance director that watches these



Page 31

1 matters very, very closely and she has been

2 extremely active with the Joplin

3 Redevelopment Corporation as well.

4 Q. And what is her name?

5 A. It's Leslie Haase, H-A-A-S-E.

6 Q. And she's a CPA of some sort?

7 A. Yes, sir.

8 Q. And she does work full-time for the City?

9 A. Yes, sir.

10 Q. Have you had any involvement with the 353

11 Corporation as City Attorney?

12 A. Yes, sir.

13 Q. What is your involvement?

14 A. I serve as general counsel for the 353

15 Corporation. We review the legal documents

16 that come through, real estate transactions.

17 We review for the contracts and so on that

18 come through for that, prepare resolutions,

19 those kinds of things.

20 Q. Would every piece of property that's ever

21 been acquired by the land holding company,

22 I'll just call it the 353 Corporation, would 23 they all have contracts?

24 A. Yes, I believe so.

25 Q. And have you ever reviewed all those



Page 32

1 contracts yourself?

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. Have you reviewed the contracts for any

4 percentage of increased revenue as the

5 properties travel from one of the various

6 entities landing up in the Land Bank

7 Corporation?

8 A. There were I'm sure realtor fees on some of

9 them. I don't recall specifically of them,

10 but I'm sure there were realtor fees on some

11 of them. I also know that as part of the

12 land banking activities Wallace-Bajjali, the 13 City's master developer, is also paid a

14 percentage in order to acquire the properties

15 on behalf of the JRC to conduct those

16 activities.

17 Q. What is that percentage, if you know?

18 A. I believe it's 5.75 percent.

19 Q. So that would be like a real estate

20 commission or something?

21 A. Yes, it's their fee for going out and

22 negotiating and trying to purchase those

23 properties.

24 Q. Is there any other real estate fees paid in

25 addition to that percentage that you've



Page 33

1 referenced?

2 A. I'm sure on some of these properties there

3 were.

4 Q. Because they all haven't gone through

5 Wallace-Bajjali?6 A. Most all of these have gone through

7 Wallace-Bajjali.8 Q. These 19 you're saying?

9 A. Well, we purchased approximately I believe

10 about 37 individual tracts.

11 Q. During this entire period?

12 A. During the last year it's been about 37

13 tracts. And we just got started with the 14 Land Bank during that time period.

15 Q. So no real purchasing occurred prior to the

16 last year, you're saying?

17 A. Right.

18 Q. Were you involved in the management of the

19 353 Corporation throughout its existence as

20 is relevant to this matter?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Now who determined the method of purchasing

23 the property?

24 A. In what regard?

25 Q. Setting up the entire program with



Page 34

1 Wallace-Bajjali.2 A. That was largely negotiated between the City

3 Manager and the folks at Wallace-Bajjali, 4 although once the basic structure was

5 determined when we were given marching orders

6 we did create a Land Bank agreement between

7 the City, the Redevelopment Corporation, and

8 Wallace-Bajjali.9 Q. Would you mark down at some point in the

10 future to provide me with a copy of the Land

11 Bank agreement?

12 A. Certainly.

13 Q. I assume your office prepared that?

14 A. We did not prepare it. It was prepared

15 probably primarily from a law firm in St.

16 Louis, Denton's, but we reviewed it and we

17 negotiated several of the provisions.

18 Q. That would have been Wallace-Bajjali's 19 attorney that prepared it?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. When you say the City Manager was involved in

22 the formation of the methodology of purchase

23 of land, was that to your exclusion?

24 A. Not entirely. There were some meetings held

25 with experts in land banking that I was



Page 35

1 involved in, but a lot of the structure was

2 established prior to me being involved in it.

3 But there were a couple of meetings that I

4 sat in on talking about whether or not in

5 Missouri a 353 Corporation could do this

6 activity and some things like that.

7 Q. Did you find case law that indicated that you

8 could?

9 A. It seemed clear to me from the statute that

10 we could.

11 Q. When you make reference to the 353 that would

12 be 353 of the Missouri Right of Statute?

13 A. Yes, sir.

14 Q. And I assume there's some subsection to that.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Seek or something like that?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to why you were

19 excluded from some of the meetings with the

20 City Manager and Wallace-Bajjali?21 A. I don't. I would only be guessing.

22 Q. I mean it seems to me that if you're creating

23 this as an attorney you would be invited to

24 that. I mean as an attorney I would feel

25 that you should be there. Do you have a



Page 36

1 similar opinion?

2 A. I do. I tend to think there have been many

3 things that I should have been more involved

4 in and invited into. In this instance I

5 think a lot of it has to do with just a 6 difference in philosophy, that the Legal

7 Department is there only to provide legal

8 opinions when asked.

9 Q. Is that the philosophy of the governing body?

10 A. No, I believe that's more the philosophy of

11 the Manager.

12 Q. Has that ever been brought to the attention

13 of the governing body of the people that are

14 elected?

15 A. It has.

16 Q. And with what result?

17 A. Ultimately after being excluded from meetings

18 where a lot of this structure was being

19 discussed with Wallace-Bajjali I had a 20 conversation with the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem,

21 and possibly others. It's been long enough

22 it's hard to remember. And the Manager was

23 given an ultimatum any time he was going to

24 have a meeting with Wallace-Bajjali I was to 25 be invited to those meetings.



Page 37

1 Q. Has that been done?

2 A. Largely I believe so.

3 Q. But in the initial set-up stage it's my

4 understanding that you were not included?

5 A. That's true. Not to the degree that I feel

6 like I should have been. I don't know that

7 the 353 - in hindsight it feels to me like we

8 created a whole lot more hoops for ourselves

9 than we needed to when a lot of this could

10 have been done directly by the City.

11 Q. Has the City Manager shared with you his

12 reason why you were excluded?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Has he attempted to explain the hoops that he

15 did set up?

16 A. No, the only time he and I ever had this

17 discussion was during an argument and it was

18 on something unrelated to this specifically,

19 but I was told in no uncertain terms that I

20 was already involved in too much.

21 Q. By whom?

22 A. By Mr. Rohr.

23 Q. Well, Mr. Rohr would not be your boss.

24 A. No, not at all. It's however difficult when

25 you don't know when or where the meetings are



Page 38

1 to be present.

2 Q. Has the City Manager been reprimanded for

3 excluding of Council any time in the past on

4 this issue?

5 A. No.

6 Q. I believe you stated earlier that he's been

7 here nine years?

8 A. I believe he started in 2004, in November of

9 2004.

10 Q. Does he have a legal background?

11 A. Not that I'm aware of.

12 Q. Hasn't gone to law school or passed the bar?

13 A. No.

14 Q. Who is looking after the ethical

15 considerations of the matters if the lawyer

16 wasn't? Did you have outside counsel?

17 A. To my knowledge there was no outside counsel.

18 Once I became involved and began to try to

19 do those things and watch for the ethics we

20 had discussions with members of the JRC,

21 we've had conflicts, we've had people recuse,

22 and we've tried to stay on top of that since

23 that point. I was involved once the JRC

24 became involved, but the decisions and the

25 set-up leading us to that point I was very



Page 39

1 openly not involved in. But once we began

2 working with the JRC to begin this process I

3 have been fully involved since then.

4 Q. Are you normally copied in on meetings that

5 the Director set up so you have the

6 opportunity to advise the City Manager when

7 you don't want to come as opposed to when he

8 wants you there?

9 A. I would say I am not advised of every meeting

10 certainly.

11 Q. Don't you believe it's your charge and

12 responsibility legally of overseeing what the

13 city aldermen are doing in this community

14 don't you believe you ought to have the

15 opportunity to decline attendance as opposed

16 to coming to meetings only when you're

17 invited?

18 A. Certainly. Now as far as City Council

19 meetings, the official meetings of the JRC,

20 those I'm always there for those. Those I

21 don't miss. But it was the formational

22 meetings, the more informal meetings between

23 staff that were somewhat problematic early

24 on. At this point I believe I am more in the

25 loop, although we still have projects that



Page 40

1 come along that I haven't been briefed on.

2 Q. I guess I'm questioning who has the authority

3 to exclude you. I would think that all

4 projects that are started within the city you 5 ought to be given the opportunity to decide

6 from a legal standpoint whether you should be

7 at that meeting or whether it's not a legal

8 concern to you.

9 A. Correct.

10 Q. So if I'm thinking correctly as a lawyer I

11 can't imagine going to a meeting officially

12 that combines the City without any legal

13 preview or review before it's too late.

14 Sure, after something is done it's a little

15 late to, you're reactive then, you're not

16 proactive.

17 A. And example at present the Manager apparently

18 has been negotiating with a minor league

19 baseball team to come to town. To the point

20 that we are ready to roll it out to the City

21 Council as of next Monday I have never, not

22 once, been briefed or had a conversation

23 about anything about this minor league team.

24 No idea what the contracts look like, no idea

25 what the requirements for - I don't know. I



Page 41

1 haven't been brought into any of those

2 conversations.

3 Q. Has the City Manager had meetings with their

4 attorneys?

5 A. I have no idea. I don't know what meetings

6 he's had with who.

7 Q. Have you made any complaint about that

8 situation?

9 A. I haven't yet because I just learned of it. 10 Just learned of it.

11 Q. How long has that been going on?

12 A. I couldn't tell you. But apparently we are

13 far enough along that we have a minor league

14 team that we're ready to start consideration

15 of and we're ready to roll it out to Council.

16 Q. As opposed to the Cardinals being in

17 Springfield, perhaps some other team?

18 A. Something like that, or probably something a

19 little further down the minor league chain.

20 Q. Could be even the Cardinals, we don't know?

21 A. I don't know.

22 Q. Is any of the board sitting on as special

23 members of this?

24 A. Of the Council?

25 Q. Yes.



Page 42

1 A. I don't know of any if there are.

2 Q. We're getting a little bit off center, but I

3 think it's relevant to some of the areas that

4 we're talking about here. Let me ask you

5 this question. Exhibit #6 is a pretty nicely

6 colored document. Can you tell me is this

7 something that Woolston gave you?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Do you know what it's purported to be?

10 A. I believe that it is the properties that he

11 assisted with in the acquisition at 20th and

12 Connecticut.

13 Q. Probably relates to Exhibit #5?

14 A. I would say that the numbering probably

15 coincides, although I can't testify as to the

16 accuracy of any of it because I don't know.

17 Q. Well, it appears to be 19 tracts or pieces on

18 both pages. That appears to be true. So

19 that's the best of your knowledge?

20 A. Best of my knowledge.

21 Q. What is Exhibit #7?

22 A. This is a statement from Robert Wood who was

23 the President of Pro 100 that Mr. Woolston

24 did not collect any real estate commission on

25 any of the transactions at 20th and



Page 43

1 Connecticut. They indicated one where he did

2 and gives a date and I'm not sure what the

3 relevance of that is.

4 Q. Who is Robert Wood?

5 A. I believe he's the President of Pro 100

6 Realty, which was Mr. Woolston's prior real

7 estate company.

8 Q. The 1828 Connecticut would be one of these

9 items listed on Exhibit #5 or #6, is that

10 right?

11 A. Yes, I believe so.

12 Q. Exhibit #8, what is this, sir?

13 A. I don't know.

14 Q. Voting record of the City Council for the

15 period of September 12th through September

16 13th.

17 A. I don't know the relevance of that. It was

18 just provided to me to give to you.19 Q. Consists of pages 1 through 9, is that your

20 understanding?

21 A. Yes, sir.

22 Q. Again by Woolston. I'm going to hand you

23 Exhibit Number #9. These appear to be a list

24 of bills. I assume it's in relation to

25 Exhibit #8, but I don't know that. Probably



Page 44

1 a list of bills.

2 A. This is a City Council agenda for July 1 of

3 2013 and he has highlighted certain of the

4 bills, and again I don't know what the

5 significance of those is.

6 Q. Again this has been provided by Councilman

7 Woolston?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Exhibit #10 is a memorandum from the City

10 Attorney to Mayor Melodee Colbert-Kean from

11 you, relationship between Council member

12 Woolston, Charlie Kuehn, and Wallace-Bajjali. 13 Can you explain what that was?

14 A. Yes, sir, at a request from the Mayor to

15 simply look into the basic ethical

16 considerations and based upon the information

17 I had at the time with Mr. Woolston being a

18 member of Pro 100 and not accepting any kind

19 of a commission on the properties it didn't

20 appear to me that there was a violation of

21 the basic ethics of the Council, which is

22 Section 2-50 of our code. And then I also

23 made a statement that I did not know of any

24 violations of the statute as well.

25 Q. That was based on the information you had.



Page 45

1 Did you know at the time that he did take at

2 least one commission on 1825 Connecticut?

3 A. He indicated that he did, however that was

4 prior - as I understand it that was prior to

5 the Land Bank agreement being placed, or

6 prior to the master developer agreement being

7 placed, and I don't recall which. It was

8 prior to the relationship between the City

9 and Wallace-Bajjali.10 Q. So that would not have gone through the

11 Wallace-Bajjali?12 A. Well, he may have ended up with

13 Wallace-Bajjali, but it was originally 14 purchased by Mr. Kuehn. Now whether Mr.

15 Kuehn at that time was acting as an agent for

16 Wallace-Bajjali I do not know.17 Q. We know that a transaction that netted

18 Woolston a commission of some sort on 1825

19 Connecticut and we know that Wallace-Bajjali 20 later received a commission pursuant to their

21 agreement?

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. So we know there was at least two commissions

24 on that piece of property?

25 A. Yes.



Page 46

1 Q. Was there any knowledge that you have with

2 this now that would cause you to change your

3 opinion in Exhibit #10?

4 A. Yes, because now as I understand it some time

5 subsequent to the April 26th date Mr.

6 Woolston, there apparently is some direct

7 business relationship between he and Mr.

8 Kuehn, which as I understand it didn't exist

9 before other than Mr. Woolston as an

10 independent realtor working under Pro 100 was

11 assisting Mr. Kuehn to purchase properties on

12 behalf of Wallace-Bajjali.13 Q. Is Kuehn a real estate broker, also?

14 A. I don't know whether he has a real estate

15 license of any kind.

16 Q. But he works in some capacity with

17 Wallace-Bajjali?18 A. Yes, he was an agent for Wallace-Bajjali to 19 go purchase properties as I understand it for

20 the purpose of not having the Wallace-Bajjali 21 name or the City of Joplin attached to it so

22 it could be purchased without the prices

23 suddenly skyrocketing.

24 Q. So there at least is some knowledge that you

25 have as we sit here today that would cause



Page 47

1 you to change your opinion that there was no

2 conflict as shown on Exhibit #10?

3 A. At the time this was written I don't know

4 that there was any conflict.

5 Q. You're talking about Exhibit #10?

6 A. Exhibit #10. I don't believe at the time

7 that Exhibit #10 was written that there was a

8 conflict, however now if we were to go back

9 and conduct the same activities with the

10 set-up that we have now between Mr. Woolston

11 and Charlie Kuehn I believe it would cause me

12 to change my opinion.

13 Q. So would it be fair to say that perhaps a

14 subsequent opinion ought to be issued on a

15 follow-up of your memo that's marked here as

16 Exhibit #10 pursuant to any information that

17 you've gathered since that date?

18 A. I've only gathered some anecdotal

19 information. I probably do need to go do my

20 due diligence and request additional

21 information from Mr. Woolston regarding his

22 relationship at this point. Yes, I would say

23 a follow-up opinion is probably warranted.

24 Q. If you do that would you please give me

25 benefit of any information you gather and any



Page 48

1 opinions that you render?

2 A. I will.

3 Q. Thank you, sir. Is it likely that matter is

4 timely to you in view of the fact that we're

5 doing an investigation concerning some of

6 this matter?

7 A. It is timely except that there is no

8 additional land banking to be done. There

9 are no additional funds to purchase

10 additional land.

11 Q. Well, there will be, won't there, be

12 additional funds?

13 A. There may be coming in the future. If the

14 stars align properly with the Missouri

15 Development Finance Board and some other

16 sources there may be additional land coming

17 forward, or additional monies coming forward

18 to purchase land, but as of right now there

19 are no funds to purchase any.

20 Q. However, as a precautionary matter that

21 opinion still would be relevant?

22 A. Yes, I believe it would be.

23 Q. Thank you. Exhibit Number #11 appears to say

24 Full Display, 1 of 1, and it concerns County

25 Jasper, commercial property. Would you tell



Page 49

1 me what you think that is?

2 A. Well, this is a Beacon report. No, I'm

3 sorry, this is an MLS report, I believe, that

4 shows the value of property on Connecticut.

5 I don't know the relevance of it other than I

6 think it may be an attempt to show the per

7 acre or per square foot value of property in

8 that area.

9 Q. Of course it's not an appraisal?

10 A. No.

11 Q. And you don't have any insight or training on

12 real estate acquisitions, do you?

13 A. Other than just several years of practice of 14 law.

15 Q. That's enough.

16 A. But as far as actually any formal training,

17 no, in real estate.

18 Q. You think you would be able to spot a price

19 that would be greatly out of line on a

20 contract?

21 A. Yes, I believe I would be able to spot a

22 price greatly out of line.

23 Q. And you haven't really seen anything like

24 that so far?

25 A. There have been some properties that were



Page 50

1 higher than maybe you would like them to be,

2 however you're conducting a land banking

3 activity where you are attempting to

4 accumulate small tracts into a large tract,

5 and as soon as people figure out that you're

6 buying that residential property but it's not

7 going to be used for residential all of a

8 sudden it's going to get converted to

9 commercial and they're going to want

10 commercial value for it. And there may have

11 been a few that once you get near the end you

12 may end up paying more for one just in order 13 to finish it up.

14 Q. You're actually creating a different highest

15 and best use and you would expect a value

16 change?

17 A. Yes, and we have seen some of that.

18 Q. Let's use the term gouging. You haven't seen

19 any gouging?

20 A. I don't believe so.

21 Q. I notice there was a Chamber of Commerce

22 active down here that works for the City on

23 some kind of lending, is that true? Do you

24 know of anything like that?

25 A. I know the Chamber has certain programs that



Page 51

1 it utilizes to lend money to start up

2 businesses and some things like that.

3 Q. Where does the Chamber get that money?

4 A. I believe that those are all donations that

5 they receive for those funds or they've

6 received endowments for them. I'm kind of

7 speaking out of my realm of knowledge.

8 Q. Is there federal money involved in it?

9 A. Not that I'm aware of.

10 Q. So these loans then are made out of the

11 Chamber's money?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Does the City fund the Chamber?

14 A. The City does fund the Chamber.

15 Q. To what extent?

16 A. I believe it's about $300,000.00 a year for 17 operations.

18 Q. So to the extent that the City funds the

19 Chamber is there any potential conflicts in

20 your mind?

21 A. There would be.

22 Q. For city officials?

23 A. For city officials I think so. However, as

24 long as the funds are segregated and there's

25 an independent body making the decisions I



Page 52

1 have less concern about that. However, if

2 they were utilizing city funds it certainly

3 would. And of course it always is the

4 appearance of an impropriety, too, regardless

5 of whether there's actual city money flowing,

6 you always have the appearance, which is

7 often worse than the actual.

8 Q. And, in fact, lawyers have to be aware of

9 that appearance very much and so do

10 officials, don't they?

11 A. Absolutely. Certainly.

12 Q. Do we have any registered lobbyists to the

13 best of your knowledge in this area out of

14 the lobby registration statute of Missouri?

15 Are you familiar with that?

16 A. The only one that I know of is the lobbyist

17 with the City who is in Jefferson City, a

18 gentleman named Gary Burton. It's a firm

19 Burton Lessee that we utilize. But as far as

20 anyone registered with the City to lobby the

21 City I am not aware of any.

22 Q. Would Wallace-Bajjali and Charlie Kuehn be in 23 a position to direct the City and in effect

24 lobby City officials?

25 A. Well, Wallace-Bajjali is a contractor hired



Page 53

1 by the City. They're under contract to do

2 certain activities with the City so I don't

3 know that they would be directing the City to

4 do anything. Charlie Kuehn I suppose as a

5 local developer certainly could lobby City

6 officials potentially for a rezoning or

7 anything of something like that.

8 Q. He is a local developer?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And a broker?

11 A. I don't know that.

12 Q. Have you ever talked with this fellow, the

13 convicted bookie named Lovett?

14 A. I have not.

15 Q. Do you know where he's located?

16 A. I do not.

17 Q. Do you have any way of obtaining information

18 where he is located?

19 A. The only person that I know that may have

20 that information is Mr. Scearce.

21 Q. I will probably talk with Mr. Scearce pretty

22 soon, but if there's any way to start that

23 process to see if I could talk to that fellow

24 I would like you to at least look into it

25 from a City Attorney's standpoint. I don't



Page 54

1 know how successful you'll be with that.

2 I've got a couple of other names here. Ron

3 Darby, who is Ron Darby?

4 A. Ron Darby is the immediate past President of

5 the Joplin Redevelopment Corporation.

6 Q. What's his normal business?

7 A. He is retired at this point. I believe he

8 was a buyer for Walmart for many years.

9 Q. And he's President of the 353 Corporation?

10 A. He's the immediate past President.

11 Q. Who is Gary Duncan?

12 A. Gary Duncan is the current President of the

13 353 Corporation. He was the President and

14 CEO of Freeman Health Systems for a number of

15 years.

16 Q. Would either of those gentlemen have sat in

17 with the City Administrator when he was

18 forming the concept of how to buy these

19 properties back?

20 A. Mr. Darby may very well have. Mr. Duncan

21 wasn't involved at all with the 353 at that

22 time.

23 Q. Before I came here I was making some phone

24 calls. One phone call I made was to Carol

25 Stark. You know who she is?



Page 55

1 A. Yes, sir.

2 Q. She would not talk with me. Do you have any

3 knowledge as to why she wouldn't meet with

4 me? Do you have any speculation on that?

5 A. I don't know why she wouldn't meet with you

6 at all.

7 Q. Her name has come up several times to me. I

8 know she's an editor of a newspaper, but her

9 name has come up. Obviously it's on this

10 sheet of paper, Exhibit #1 I think it is that

11 we've talked about. So have you ever talked

12 with her about any of this?

13 A. I don't believe she and I have ever talked

14 about this. I've been interviewed a few times

15 over the years by Ms. Stark, but generally

16 it's one of the other reporters that I deal

17 with.

18 Q. Have you been able to glean any editorial

19 bias on any of these issues on investigating

20 from her over the past year just in looking 21 at her columns and stuff?

22 A. I would say that Ms. Stark has a very

23 definite bias. And bias, maybe just opinion. 24 She, in fact, wrote an editorial where she

25 called for Mr. Scearce's resignation.



Page 56

1 Q. Oh.

2 A. Fairly recently.

3 Q. Can I get a copy of that editorial?

4 A. Sure.

5 Q. Do you recall what she said in that?

6 A. I don't.

7 Q. But she won't talk to me so I can't really

8 find out why she - but I guess I could read

9 her column. Okay, if you could produce that

10 I would really appreciate that.

11 A. I'll do my best.

12 Q. All right. Dave Wallace is still on with the

13 City?

14 A. Dave Wallace is one of the principals in

15 Wallace-Bajjali and worked as the City's 16 master developer and the company that is

17 engaging in the land banking activities.

18 Q. As you've indicated you don't think they have

19 any money left to buy anything now?

20 A. Yeah, the funds that were available are

21 pretty well dried out.

22 Q. Are they still on retainer with the City then

23 or are they just in hold status, or are they 24 discharging their responsibilities?

25 A. No, they're still on with the City. There



Page 57

1 are two projects, I'll lump a couple of them 2 together, but there are two projects that are 3 ongoing. One of them is a senior

4 transitional living project that will occur 5 at 26th and McClelland on the southwest

6 corner. They are a developer in that. Then

7 they are also working with the City on a

8 larger scale development of a potential

9 grocery store and library theater development

10 at 20th and Connecticut.

11 Q. Are you involved in any of that?

12 A. Yes, very much so.

13 Q. And from the start?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. That's as it should be.

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. Have you actually received any complaints

18 concerning any citizens or has the hotline

19 received any complaints from any citizens

20 concerning any involvement mostly with the

21 folks that sold or were threatened to

22 condemn?

23 A. We received a complaint from an ex-mayor of

24 Joplin, many years ago ex-mayor named Cheryl

25 Dandridge.



Page 58

1 Q. Dandridge?

2 A. Dandridge. Related to her

3 daughter/son-in-law, daughter-in-law/son, I

4 forget which.

5 Q. What was the nature of that complaint?

6 A. It had to do with Mr. Woolston's activities

7 and the tactics that he was attempting to use

8 to purchase property with.

9 Q. Would she be available for me?

10 A. I'm sure she would. In fact, she requested

11 to talk with you.

12 Q. Oh, really? Could we possibly schedule her?

13 A. Certainly.

14 Q. Will you explain her name again?

15 A. Cheryl, C-H-E-R-Y-L, Dandridge I believe is

16 D-A-N-D-R-I-D-G-E. I'm not a hundred

17 percent.

18 Q. Sounds pretty good. Former mayor?

19 A. She was a former mayor in the 80's.

20 Q. Last name has probably changed since the

21 80's, I'd guess here in Joplin?

22 A. Maybe so, yes.

23 Q. What's the population presently of Joplin?

24 A. Approximately 50,000. It may be a little bit

25 less than that following the tornado.



Page 59

1 Q. Where does that put us, in front of Columbia

2 or behind Columbia?

3 A. Behind Columbia. We like to say that the

4 Jasper/Newton County metropolitan statistical

5 area is the third largest in the state after

6 Kansas City and St. Louis, however that's

7 really only because Jefferson City and

8 Columbia have separated theirs.

9 Q. Good point. Actually would be larger than

10 Springfield in that regard?

11 A. Uh-huh.

12 Q. I noticed every fast food restaurant in the

13 world.

14 A. People here eat.

15 Q. You're married?

16 A. I'm not. I'm single.

17 Q. I'm under the impression that Bill Scearce

18 has an attorney. Has that attorney voiced

19 any interest in talking with me at all?

20 A. Not to me, no.

21 Q. Does Mr. Scearce know I want to talk with

22 him?

23 A. I believe he does, yes.

24 Q. Has he said anything about his attorney?

25 A. No.



Page 60

1 Q. And it's my understanding that Mr. Lovett

2 actually did receive some time for bookmaking

3 and it was federal at the time?

4 A. That's my understanding.

5 Q. And he is now out of jail?6 A. That's my understanding.

7 Q. And he did of course rent from Councilman

8 Scearce during that period of time?

9 A. Yes, Mr. Scearce has made the statement

10 though, also, that Mr. Lovett was not

11 convicted or charged with any bookmaking

12 activities - let me restate that. The

13 bookmaking activities that he was convicted

14 of and charged with did not occur on Mr.

15 Scearce's property. While he may have been

16 making book there he was not charged with any

17 activities on that property.

18 Q. I've understood that Mr. Scearce says he did

19 not know of the bookmaking activity when he

20 rented the place to Mr. Lovett. Is that a

21 true statement?

22 A. He has said that, yes.

23 Q. And I also note that there was an article

24 that says he recanted in part and said that

25 at some point he was aware that there was



Page 61

1 some activity going on. Am I correct on

2 that?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And that's in an article somewhere?

5 A. It is.

6 Q. Could you get me a copy of that one?

7 A. Sure.

8 Q. Sorry to put this burden on you, but you're

9 the City Attorney and I think this is some

10 interesting material. I believe I'm done. If

11 there's some other material that does arrive

12 I would maybe ask you to perhaps sit in on

13 that, but I essentially think with the

14 additional materials you will be providing me

15 with I think we're done.

16 A. Okay.

17 Q. Thank you very much for your time.

18

19 (SWORN STATEMENT CONCLUDED)

20

21



Page 62

REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

STATE OF MISSOURI

ss.

COUNTY OF JASPER

I, SHARON K. ROGERS, Certified Court Reporter in the

State of Missouri, do certify that pursuant to the

foregoing Stipulation the witness came before me on the 5th

day of November, was duly sworn by me, and was examined.

That examination was then taken by me by steno-mask

recording and afterwards transcribed; said Sworn Statement

is subscribed by the witness as hereinbefore set out on the

day in that behalf aforesaid and is herewith returned.

I further certify that I am not counsel, attorney, or

relative of either party, or clerk, or stenographer of

either party or of the attorney of either party, or

otherwise interested in the event of this suit.

_________________________

SHARON K. ROGERS, CCR-650

Documents

Head, Brian W. | Testimony transcript