Monday, June 22, 2015

City of Joplin's state audit 80 pages long

Mayor Mike Seibert told KZRG this morning that the state audit of the City of Joplin is 80 pages long.

It will have a few more pages before all is said and done.

The City Council will meet in closed session tonight to prepare the response to the auditors' findings. Those responses will be incorporated into the final report, which will be presented during a public meeting sometime in July.

The audit of the city could end up being close to three times larger than the recently completed state audit of the Joplin R-8 School District, which was 32 pages.

City Hall sources told the Turner Report that the audit criticizes City Councilman Mike Woolston for his involvement in buying land in the tornado-stricken area of the city on behalf of local developer Charlie Kuehn, who reportedly worked with the former master developer Wallace-Bajjali to sell the properties at a marked up price to the Joplin Redevelopment Corporation.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

You gotta ask, why is this man smiling?

Anonymous said...

I went to Parkwood with Joplin's Mayor Mike Seibert he was an idiot then and now. It is so funny to see Joplin keep electing and appointing idiots to run Joplin and its Schools. Keep it up - - The Smart People move out of Joplin - - so what does that leave you....

Dusty Roads said...

You have to have idiots in charge, so they can be controlled by the people with the real money.

I am a robot. said...

Oh yeah? What about George Bush, Sarah Palin, Dan Quale, and uh, um, oh never mind.

Anonymous said...

I still can't believe he was re-elected after the Lorraine report. Apparently everyone was to wrapped up in the Rohr controversy to pay attention to the pages that covered Woolston, Keuhn, the JRDC, and WB. That part of the investigation was every bit as scandalous as Rohr's shenanigans.

Anonymous said...

1:32 AM: Our host has reported that after the Globe used the Sunshine law to force the release of the Lorraine report, they somehow neglected to publicize the criticism of Woolston except for a watered down paragraph or two on the inside of the paper. I'd stopped reading the Globe by then, but too many other voters, at least back then, were too dependent on it for getting their local political information.

Anonymous said...

Can someone post a link to the Lorraine report?