The Joplin Globe took particular joy in parroting Seibert and saying there was nothing Prime could do to get back the $5 million it loaned to former master developer Wallace-Bajjali. When the city terminated its contract with Wallace-Bajjali, they said, it ended any debt the city might have owed to Prime despite the fact that the loan agreement included signatures from Mark Rohr, who was city manager at the time, and from a member of the Joplin Redevelopment Corporation.
KOAM's Jordan Aubey is reporting today that Prime may very well sue the city to get its $5 million back:
We asked Seibert if that was a fact or opinion by city hall.
"Well, I think we have legal opinion on that," says Seibert.
"It gets into some legal technicalities, but there are certain provisions which survived the termination of that agreement (Wallace Bajjali agreement), which are expressly set forth in that agreement (financial collateral agreement)," says (Prime attorney Richard) Walters.
Joplin could face litigation over this matter.
"That has not been determined yet," says Walters. "And we're looking for more of a positive solution to that, as opposed to litigation."
4 comments:
I think they should go after both thieves who pocketed the money. Those two plan to go on, start over, and make money. They need to be held accountable. I'm hearing DW has plans up his sleeve. Sue them. Dont let them off the hook thst easily. Call attorney general. They need to be held accountable. Pay up. Joplin has been railroaded by those two.
Joplin has no defense. Prime entered into that agreement with the understanding that it was with the City of Joplin. Just shut up and pay Prime the money and next time do not elect a bunch of dipsticks to represent you. I did notice that the former City Manager managed to skirt away just in time.
Someone's about to get a seven figure beatdown.
Opinions obviously differ.
Who has it right?
Who is smarter?
My money is not on Joplin.
and Sam Anslem commented a week or so ago on a post that Joplin is in no way shape or form liable for any of that money, to which I replied , is this true or are you blowing sunshine up our a** again? well looks like I have my answer although not from Sam!
Post a Comment