HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.f. Investigation of Councilmember Activity Report � ,
.. � � � . . . . � . � ' � 1
� � . . � �.. . � .� � ��
1l�tVESTIGATipN
OF C�UNC���"�'�MBER
ACTiVt71ES
RE�ARDty�
�����aUNT q
RN�pRY/C�M�UNt,�
CE�r�'R P��,���,�.
: FEBRtJ,qF�Y Y 993
. .
� ,
BACKGROUND
On January 22 , 1993, Mr. David Keller af the law firm of Grannis,
Grannis, Hauge, Eide, Anderson & Keller submitted a Ietter of
cornplaint to Rosemount Mayor E. S. McMenomy, the members af the
Rosemount City Council, its city administra�or and city attarney
( �ppendix A) . The principal thrust of Mr. Keller' s letter, as it
affects the City of Rosemount, were allega�ions that Mr. Harry
willc�x , Rosemount City Councilmember, allegedly contacted twa of
��r. Keller' s clients and advised them that they needed "be�ter
legal representa;.ion" and that they should take the initiative and
"su� the City of Rosemount . " These statements were allegedly made
to '�:�ss;-s . Earl Tourdo� an� Rick Battaglia , both of whom own
pi-c����-�rt.}- w}iich i5 being condemned for the Rosemount
�rn;o�y,/C,>:nmunit.y :.anter Project .
A� its rLg�lar C:�y Council mPeting of Tuesday, February 2, 1993,
?•'ayor �:c�:�nomy, •s:�th the sLpport of Councilmembers Klassen, Staats
and �v; ��ermann , ':irected the City Attorney to investigate the
� 11.4=gati•�ns n�ade by :�r. Kwller and report back to the Council.
CONTENTS
The contents of �he remainder of this xeport are as follows:
• The methodology` or basic approach used in conducting this
inquiry .
• Nan�es and pertinent information of individuals
inter•.•:ewed .
� A sun�r�:��-y of th� facts ot�tained from the investigati�n .
• An ��.���:,d: x. c���mrc,sed of th� f.ollcwing sections :
A . ,;Gr.uary 22 , 1993 letter from David Keller to the
��.•�y ��f Ro�emouiit .
B. N�t�s regarding interviews with all witnesses
contdcted ,
C . February 14 , 1993 letter from Mr. Harry R. Willcox
regarding Nr. Keller' s allegations .
2
� f .. ; . � . �.
` �
METH�DOLOGY
INTERVIEWS•
The principal apgroach used in this fact-finding effort was to
cr�nd�ct �nterviews with all persons thought to have pertinent
information r.eg�rding Mr, Keller' s allegation:.
VERI�CITY OF TIIF�RMATION:
Al1 p�rs�ns interviewed either expressed a willingness to sign an
af f idavi� as to the veracity of the infc�rmation they gave or stated
that, if they were deposed, they would provide exactly the same
ans•��2rs .
rACTUAL nISPUTES:
As •..i11 be ncted ir. the section ent�.tled "Summary of Facts " below,
;s n ��,,r�_:�r ri facts germane to this ir.qui.ry are not in dispute.
Hr�•w-=�,T�_,r, sc�v�ral i;ey factual matters are the subject of
:ii sac�r-•^�:r^ent . �;here d.isput.es exi st, the summary of facts sets
f��rti� c`.::� •��arious v�rsion of the al �eged facts and the per5ons to
wi�ich th�:�e ��ersions are att_ri.buted .
PERSONS tNTERVIEWED
Jahn An�'erson David Keller
Rick Battaglia Sparky McRoberts
Jerr.y Fluegel Al Monk
De�,bi:� Nalbert Earl Tourdot
J��� i Ha : b�r:. Harry Willcox
SUMMARY OF FACTS
, . In �h�= la�e aft�:�rn��c�n of `.uesday, January 12, 1993 , Mr.
Iiar.r j t•r i : ] co� rnet wi.th a grou�; of conc�rned Rosemount resident5
r��yzl-�in� ��th� �3rm�ry;commua�ity �enter pr.oject .
2 . =The Fneeting took place at the office of Mr. Albert Monk,
13�05 South Robert Trail in RGsemount, Minnesota .
3 . Arrangements for this meeting were made by Mr. John
And�rson .
� . The persons present at the meeting were Harry Willcox,
S�arky L'cRoberts, John Anderson, A1 Monk, Ear1 Tourdot, Rzck
3
F�Uege� '
lb��� a�d �e��Y 5i t�e 8na�t�
�e�ble �`� 1 tc`e�tl Will��� "nl�Y
�ef� H�lbert , al citY atuwh�-�5 the arm°��lcamm
a , any form lY °ne dis�"s .�aG�
_ �X�ludln9a5 trers°s m�t �p , cussl°n tne ��y t
J j�ve�re��en�ed P mee�ing � a f f��t�d en�x Px°�ec
- o�e�t � 12 � 1993 ��son unitY , t� t�d �Y
_ pr JanuarY tlon °f marY��c�mm 5 inl a
�— �t th� resent� th� �� tio� ""Ta
- �, . .�eq o f p�oPertY f°r 1e9a1 rePzese�ta . d a�d bY t''th�
re�ar�nation 510,� of s s��- arY of
��n�em e dis��s to what wa A sumn'foll°ws �
� • �McRobert� ts �a�Y a enta�l�� m are as t1�e
If.z . SPa�kY fa�tU��- f Cle9a1 ttesting tO t�e ons �ffe��a�bBr�-��"
The iss,�e ° ��o'�s a at pers o f Sieq ob fln th a
re9a a�n ac�°Unts and pe mendea t tr� f'�xm a g°°a � �e�f an
o��s �rts re��r hirl�g t�ad d''n�son� �Onk ,
var1 �r._cR�b �onsia� t�PY At�der
a . s� d n,.��� �uf f�y�'` $rn(�r�c;Rcc n� `"l���ta�lla� i�l r G��ap M nk `
r,r�,t:p�` �on d n'� ��,ou-�`' e e l , B r a�t a 9�i
ti��wh�.r�� tiV�4;.��r�- � �he Si e��ed lB
'•��t��� c(JX ag�eP dbl��and exPerl QPertY a�a le
�,�1�1 �5 cap pr ava
�,'-r ' + r f ; Lm w a f f��ted �ounsel
b • vuf:.� 1
To�r�ot 1 ' Su9ge�ea per�e�ce� le�� sh�ul�o be
�i�l�oxes��mos attorneY o� cz
� . ��tait� �ilb oxl • d that for purp°5es
�+onk , enae ro�P & lerl
� reComn' �ire q Eide K e�- C1,�,�
1�0� e �n
d' �ir , �t�d by t�'W il l�o�c l • is � Kauge��entea t w�� was
e
ffe�tiveness l nis � �ra�� haa re and �ha�"gatta9�la
Q ��e f lr�alca��a n�at�ter se w�propertY �
el ,
e , �,r t�,�i 1 i�.�c�meT't �f�,n sOn�je�ne er y o`^'�'e.
t �i
�in th� �'1� � o�at�d , pr°p the
d n
"'�=riLuallY 1 th�' af�Ecta�i e�1 �Ke11ex) •
t�,nu:��°t' . chat � .�esen 11 .
, _ ted al r P � Ke d t
�.r • �'"� y �ta1rsLbPnis� �a ge 1 �lde • 11�°X r et�����e ��c
�
f • �a�� � �ran ,cr • `�1 dif fer
��f� G�anni� ' � o f whPtr�itY:� � tw° ex�
� iS;:,U �e the � ovm
9 A5 e`�tY own d as foll°W5 � at the Pr�M nk MGR�bE
r�,p late ted th ��5on►
a�.�e��a s Were re � e.� 5"gTQuxd°� ` Ana
e�
tre a M� �Ci�Y`Ba�taqlia � �
t1�
Jeff Halbert, Der�bie Halbert, Fluegel and Willcox) .
b. Mr. . Willcox did recornmend that the affected property
owners sue the City (Keller) .
10 . Mr. Willcox generally discussed the nature of municipal
condemnation actions with the affected property/business owners and
expressed concern zegarding their situation (Jeff Halbert, Debbie
HalbPrt, :�'onk, Andersan, Battaglia , Tourdot, Fluegel, McRoberts and
;�il.lcox ) .
FNVESTIGATION SUMMARY
To the knowledge of the undersigned, all persons with
pertinent knowledge regarding the allegations in Mr. Keller's
letter o£ ,7anuary 22 , 1993 have been interviewed and an aecount of
their view set forth in this report. To the extent that there are
disagreements as to the actuai facts , it is the province of the
Rc�semount City Council to review and arrive at conclusions
rcgarding the disputed issues . Piease contact me if you have any
questi��rls .
ua t E� : F��:�z-u�:r}� 2.4 , l 9 9 3 PREPARED BY:
s�'�,�/�.,,-
J . Michael :�iles
City Attorney
_ 5 !
APPENDIX ,�A��
January 22, y 993 Letter from David Keller
to the City of Rosemount
� GRANNIS, GRANNIS, H.qUGE,
EIDE, ANDERSOI� 6. KELLER, P.A.
.�ttorn��:�.�n.i C:�n�ns�•lorc az Luu•
3�h''Tc,��•n Centrr Profrssicrnai Bl�fi.
oau.� �;v.;=_ 13601:�n1:re Doodle Raad ti+�c�+ae.�M�v�F
v�*.cs=_ GR�ANts..�Q• Ea€ar..;+tinnesota �e$a�.� s�++►a�a:
r.f�•t:�:=t :7I_'1-_'=4�1 9RWOy l vr—T=Hr:;• =_c
�a�;.G ^E�5n Ttl:(bl�'I s�f+-4J� �c�.�_: a�
G +r•:t5 Sp
vl:.e�P. t•,��=SRA 'J•C��nse
•r.�sr aeR�:�e::o o�a::�cr�r t:�scons�r. :s, �5;i.:�:-c23;
January 22; i993
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Rosemount City Hall
28?5 - 145th Street
� Rosemount, .NII�T 55068
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
- As you may be aware, we had signed Retainer Agreernents with
two of the landowners whose properties are to be condemned for the
Armory site adjacent' to Highway 3, in the City of Rosemount. We had
also been approached by a third landowner to represent him.
We were very disturbed �o learn from our clients that our
clients had been contacted by a representative of the Rosemount City
Council, Mr. Wilcox, who approached our clients and advised them that
they needed "better legal representation" and that they should take
the initiative and sue the City of Rosemount! our clients further �
stated that Mr. Wilcox went so far as to specifically recommend
Gerald Duffy and Josiah Brill as the attorneys they should obt�in.
Although this in itself might constitute tortiaus interference
�*ith contract, we are not interested in raising that issue. The
purpose of this letter is to simply inquire as to why the City of
Rosemount believes we are not capabie of representing its citizens,
and why a Cauncil member would ercourage actions against the City he
represents,
Our office not only has a long history of representing
municipalities in condemnation matters, but has represented many,
many private landowners in condemnation actions instituted by both
the State of Minnesota and various governmental agencies. We believe
that we are eminent2y qua'!ified to handle any condemnation actian
that may be braught against our clients. That is why we are very
concerned that a client of ours would understand a City Council
Member ta say that the client needs a ��better attorney�' in order to
be adequately represented in an action brought by the City to condemn
the client's property. Is the City willing to give a ��better deal"'
, . •
i
Honorable Mayar and City Council
January 22, 1993
Page Two
to people represented by ano�her law firm? We certainly hoge this is `
not the situation, and suggest you discuss this entire matter with
your City Attorney.
We believe we are entitled to a prompt explanation of why th�
City did not want us representing our client.
Sincerely yours,
GRANNIS, GRANNIS, HAUGE, EIDE,
ANDERSON & KELLER, P.A.
BYs
David G. Keller
DGK/svk
cc: Michael Miles / .
Stephen Jilk �'� �
s
APPENDIX ��B„
Notes regarding Interviews with
All Witnesses Contacted
{in chronological order by date of interview)
� `
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Rosemount City File - Councilmember Investigation
�ROM: Mike Miles
UATF.z February 3, 1993
RE: PrPliminary Interview with N:r . Harry Willcox
Ar. a�proximately 8 : Q0 a .r�. , Wednesday, Febr�,�ary 3, 1993 , I spo�;e �y
tE�l<�phc�ne wi.h Mr . Harry Willcox regarding his knowledge of �he
allf�gations contain�d in ?�r . Keller ' s letter of January 22 , 1953 ,
I indicated to :�r. willcox that this was a preliminary inquiry and
that I would be making further inquiry of him as my investigation
of the facts proeee�ed .
In response to my questions �r. Willcox provided the following
information :
l . H� met with a group of business owners affected by the armory
building project at approximately 4 :45 p.m. on Tuesday, January 12,
1993 .
2 . Present at the meeting were Sparky McRoberts, A1 Monk, Al
?�"onk ' s daughter and son-in-law, John Anderson, Rick from Rick' s
�uto F3c�dy ana Earl Tourdot .
3 . Th� me�ting took place at A1 Monk ` s office.
-� . `Ph� meeting was called at the beh�st �f the }�usiness owners
aff��tE�d �y thf� armory projec: , Speci�i.caliy, John Anderson aske�
'".r . tivi l lcox to come to Zhe meetina .
5 . ^:r. . Wi ! lcox indicatec� that the affected btlsiness owners at �fie
n,eet:i��� initiated all cori,�-ersations r�garding the armory project.
6 . They pointed out that they were having numerous problems wi�h
t:he Rcsemc�urzt Port Authority and asked what they should do N;th
respect to t.t�ose problems .
7 • In response, Mr. Willcox suggested that they obtain a lawyer
to r�pr�sent them. Mr. Willcox further suggested that they should
interview potential attorneys and select the best they could find.
8 . The affected business owners asked ?�`.r. Willcax who Ariin
I�ope ' s attorney was, and Mr, Willcox advised them that Mr. Kope was
represented by the Duffy law firm.
1
9 . Mr. ctiilleox never suggested or implied that they should obtain
a better legal representative.
lU . Mr. tvillcox never suggested or implied that they should sue
the City of Rosemount .
11 . Collaterally, Mr. Willcox surmised that Sheila Klassen was
referring to developer Jim Allen at the February 2 , 1993 City
Council rne�ting when she indicated that a developer taXd her that
Mr. willccx advised him to sue the City. Mr. Wi11cQx indicated to
me that, in faet, Mr. Allen had told him that he felt that his firm
could sue the City, but that Mr. Willcox never gave that advice to
All.en .
, :
2
M E M � R A N D U M
TO: Rasemount File - Councilmember Investigation
FROM: Mike Miles
DATE: February 8, 1993
RE; Interviews with Earl Tourdot and Rick Battaglia
DATE/TIME•
Rt approximateiy 2: 00 p.m. on Fxiday, February 5, 1993, I met with
Mr. Earl Tourdot and Richard Battaglia, regarding the above-
referenced investigatian. Their attorney, Mr. Jerry Brill, a2so
requested ta be and was present at the meeting I conducted with
riiessrs , Tourdot and Battaglia .
iNTERVTEW PROCEDURE:
At the outset of the meeting, which lasted approximately 40
minutes, I presented Messrs . Tourdot and Battaglia with a copy of
the January 22, 1993 letter from David Keller of the Grannis firm
and asked them to read it before proceeding with the interview. I
also advised them that their responses to my questions were
entirely voluntary and they were not required to meet with me, and
could terminate the interview at any time. I also advised them
that no aspect of the "investigation" was intended to or would
resul.t in any liability on their part.
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND ANSWF.RS:
(?�:ess�-s . Tourciot an� 3attagli.a gave identical answers to the
ioll�•�iny questions and thus I have prEpared only one interview
she�t f�r them � .
i . DID �i'GU EVER MEET WITH MR. HARRY WILLCUX REGARDING ANY OF
THE ^:ATTERS RAISED IN MR. KELLER' S LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 1993? ,
�
YES, WE MET WITH MR. WILLCOX AND OTHER CONCERNED BUSINESS
OPEI2ATORS FOR APPROXIMATELY AN HOUR.
2 . WHERE AND WHEN DID THE MEETING TAKE PLACE?
THE MEETING TOOK PLACE AT AL MONR'S OFFICE AT APPROXIMATELY
4 :45 P.M. ON TUESDAY, JANUAF2Y 12, 1993 .
1
3 . WHO CALLED FOR OR ARRANGEb THE MEETING?
SPARKY McROBERTS AND JOHN ANDERSON.
4 . WHO WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING?
SP�I2KY McROBERTS, JOHN ANDERSON, AL MQNR, EARL TOURDOT AND
RICK BATTAGLIA. WE QON'T RECAZ,L WHETHER QTHER PERSONS, ( I .E. JE�'F
AND DEBORAH HAI,BERT) WERE PRESENT.
5 . WAS THIS THE ONLY MEETING YOU ATTENDED AT WHICH MR.
WILLCOX DISCUSSED :�IATTERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION OF, YOUR.
PROPERTY AND YOUR LEGAL REPR£SENTATI�N?
YES, THIS WAS THE ONLY MEETING.
6 . .vHAT DIS:�USS��N, IF At�Y, TOOK PLACE REGARDING LEGAL
RFPRFSENTATION nF THE �;JSINESS OWNERS RELATIVE TO THE C�NDEMNATION?
`I'HF. FIR�T COMMENTS REGARDING LEGAL I2EPR�SENTATION WERE BROUGHT
UP �3Y SPARKY McRQBERTS, WHO MENTIONED THAT HE WAS THINRING OF
RETAINI.NG THE FIRM OF DUFFY AND BRILL.
MR. WILLCOK RESPONDED BY INDICATING THAT HE THOUGHT THAT THE
DUFFY-BR7LL �'IRM WAS A GOOD LAW FIRM. HE ALSO INDTCATED THAT HE
UNDERSTOOD THAT TNE GRANNIS FIRM HAD REPRESENTED THE CITY IN fiERMS
OF PLACEMENT OF T�iE NEW WATER TOWER AND THAT THE WATER TOWER WAS
� EVENTUAI,LY LOCATED �N SOMEONE ELSE`S PROPERTY. MR. WILLCOX NEVER
STATED THAT THE BUSINESS OWNERS SHOULD SEER A BETTER ATTORNEY OR
F I RM TI iAN Gt�1NN I S, GRANN I S & HAUG E, ETC.
7 . DI� MR. WILLCOX, AT ANY TIME, SUGGEST THAT THE BUSINESS
O�aNERS "SUE THE CITY -0F ROS£:�OUNT? "
NO, }IE NEVER MADE THAT STAT�MENT.
8 , DI[� N!i? . �tiII,i,C.:�X I�IITI�`:E THE D?SCUSSLON REGFiRDING LEGRL
COi1NSrT, FC)R 'I'HE BIJSINT;�� Ov�NERS?
Nt), `I'i�AT I�ISCUSSION WAS INI`PIATED BY SPARKY McROBERTS.
9 . DID ?�R . �NILLCOX 4'AKE AN'f OTHEI� STATEMENTS OR COM'�ENTS
RELATIVE TO THE ARi�:ORY PROJECT. AND THE CONCERNS OF THE BUSINESS
OWNERS?
IN RE�PONSE TO QUESTIONS BY VARIOUS BUSINESS OWNERS, MR.
WILI.COX OUTLINED THE PROCESS THAT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE
CONI3EMNATI�N, INCLU�ING SPECIFIC MENTION OF THE SUM �F
A.F�PROXIMATELY $6Q0,00�.00 WHICH WAS AVAILABLE FOR BOTH PROPERTY
ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION PAXMENTS.
2
M E M 0 R A N D U M
TQ: Rosemount File - Councilmember investigation
FROM: Mike Miles
DATE: Februaxy 9 , 1993
RE: Interview with A1 Monk
DATElTtME:
At approximately 2 : 40 p.m. on Monday, February 8, 1993, I me� with
Mr, Al Monk regarding the abave-referenced investigation.
INTERVIEW PROCEDURE:
At th� outset of the meeting, which lasted approximately 20
minutes, I preserited Mr . ^^:onk with a copy of the January 22, 1993
lett�r f rom David �;e11er of the Grannis f irm and asked him to read '
it befor� proceeding with the inter�iew. I also advised him that
his responses to my questions would be entirely �.�aluntary, that he
was not required to meet with me and to terminate the interview at
any time. I also advised him that no asp�ct of the investigation
was intended to or would result in any liability on his part .
1NTER1JlEW QUESTfONS AND ANSWERS:
1 . DID YOU EVER MEET WITH MR. HARRY WILLCOX REGARDING ANY 0�'
THE MATTERS RAISED IN MR. KELLER' S LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 1993?
YES .
2 . WHERE AND WHEN DID THE MEETING TAKE PLACE?
MY OF�'ICE STARTING AT APPROXIMATELY 4 :30 P.M. ON TUESDAY,
JANUARY 12, 1993.
, 3 . WHO CALLED FOR OR ARRANGED TI�E N:EETING?
I 'M NOT SURE BUT I THINK IT MAY HAVE BEEN SPARRY McROBERTS:
4 . WHO WAS PRE5ENT AT TH'E i✓�EETING?
SPARKY Mc}2UBERTS, J�HN ANDERSON, EA.RL TDURD�T, RICR BATTAGLIA,
JEFF AND DEB F�ALBERT AND ME.
1
5 . WAS THIS THE ONLY MEETING YOU ATTENDED AT WHICH MR.
WILLCOX DISCUSSED NiATTERS RELATIVE T0 THE CONDEMNATION OF YOUR
PROPERTY AND YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATIDN?
YES.
6 . WHAT DISCUSSIpN, IF ANY, TOOK PLACE REGARDING LEGAI.,
REPRESENTATION OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION?
SPARKY MCROBERTS �ISCUSSED HIRING THE FIRM OF DUFFY & BRILL �'0
R�PRESENT HIM, SINCE THEY HAD DONE A GOOD JOB ON THE HAWRINS PQND
MATTER IN ROSEMOUNT. MR. WILLCOX EXPRESSED HIS AGREEMENT AS TO THE
CAP11I3ILITIE5 QF THE DU�'FY & BRILL FTRM. MR. WILLCOX ALSO ASRED THE
GROUP IF WE HAD RETAINED ATTORNEYS AND SUGGESTED THAT WE GET THE
BEST LEGA.L COUNSEL AVAIL.ABLE.
I DON'T R�MEMBER MR. WILLCOX SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT THE GRANNIS
& HAUG E LAW �'I F�M.
7 . DID MR . k'ILLCdX INITIATE THE DISCUSSION REGARDING LEGAL
COUNSFI� F'OR �;iE �JSI"7ES5 0`r�'NE�25?
NO, AS I SAID, SPARRY McROBERTS STARTED TALKING ABOUT LEGAL
COUNSEL.
8 . DID MR. WILLCOX, AT ANY TIME, SUGGEST THAT THE BUSINESS ,
OWNERS "SUE '"HE CITY OF ROSEN!OUNT? "
NO.
9 . D I D �!R. w I LLCOX MAK E ANY OTHER STATEMENTS OR COMMEN^1 S
REGARDING T}:E iiR�:ORY PROJECT AND/OR THE CONCERNS OF AFFECTED
BUSINFSS OWPJ£RS?
MR. WrLLCOX SAID THAT HE SAW NO NEED TO REMOVE US FROM OUR
�3USINESSES ON HIGHWAY 3 SINCE TNE PROPOSED ARM(3RY DTDN'T NEED THE
SPACF. W� WERE OCCUPYING.
** MF2. MONK INDICATED THAT, IF THE CIZ'Y OF RUSEMOUNT DESIRED AN
A�FIDRVIT 1�ROM tilM, HE WOULD f3E `WI.LLING TO EXECUTE ONE VERIFYING
`I'HE STATI:MF.NTS AT`I'R I BUTED T� Fi IM AAOVE.
JM^' :;9so °
2
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Rosemount File - Councilmember Investigation
FROM: Mike Miles
DATE: February 9 , 1993
REs Interviews with Jeff and Debbie Halbert
DATE/Ti M E:
At approximately 3; OS p.m. on Monday, February 8, 1993, I met with
Mr. Jeff Ha2bert and Ms . Debbie Halbert regarding the above-
referenced investigation.
INTERVIEW PROCEDURE:
At the outset of the meeting, whi�ch lasted approximately 15
minutes, I presented Mr. Halbert and Ms . Halbert with copies of the
- January 22, 1993 letter from David Keller of the Grannis firm and
asked them to read it before proceeding with the interview. I also
advised them that their responses to my questians were entirely
voluntary, that they were not required to meet with me and could
terminate the interview at any time. T also advised them that no
aspect of the "investigation" was intended to ar would result in
any liability for them.
INTERVfEW QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:
(MR. HALBERT AND MS. HALBERT GAVE IDENTiCAL ANSWERS TO THE
fOLLOWiNG QUESTIONS AND THUS ! HAVE PREPARED ONLY ONE INTERVIEW
SHEET FOR THEM).
1 . DID YOU EVER `MEET WITH MR. HARRY WILLCOX REG.ARDING ANY OF
THE MATTERS RAISED IN MR. KELLER' S LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 1993?
YES.
. �
2 , WHERE AND WHEN DID THE MEETING TAKE PLACE?
THE MEETING Tt�OK PLACE AT AL MQNR'S OFFICE. WE CAN`T REMF.MBER
THE EXACT DATE, BUT IT WAS IN J.ANUARY, LATE IN THE FiFTERNOON.
3. WH0 CALLED FQR OR ARRANGED THE MEETING?
WE THINR IT WAS SPARRY McR�BERTS.
1
� . WHO WAS PRESENT AT 7'HE MEETING?
�il. MONK, SPARRY McR0�3ERTS, JOHN ANDERSON, EARL TOURDOT, RICR
BATTAGLIA, HARKY WILLCOX AND JEFF AND DEBBIE HALBERT.
5 . WAS THIS THE ONLY MEETING YOU ATTENDED AT WHICH MR.
wILLCCX DISCUSSED MATTERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION OF YOUR
PROPERTY AND Y�UR LEGAL REPRESENTATICJN?
YES.
., . WHAT DISCUSSION, IF ANY, T�OK PLACE REGARDING LEGA:.,
REPRE��NTATION OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION?
SPARKY McROBERTS BROUGHT UP THE FACT THAT HE RNEW AN
EXPERIENCED FIRM (DUFFY & BRILL) THAT SP�IRKY WAS THINKING OF HIRING
TO ItEPRESENT HIM ON CONDEMNATIlJN MATT�RS. WE DON'T RECALL HARRY
WTI.LCOX TALKING ABOUT THIS SUBJECT AND WE SPECIFICALLY REMEM$ER
THAT HE UIQ NOT SAY ANYTHING BRD ABOUT GRANNIS & HAUGE.
• t�IU "�:R . iy'ILLCOX INITIAT�' THE DISCUSSION REGARDING LEGAL
C:aUf�Sc:� F'OR THE E3USINESS Ot�NERS?
N0.
' �s . DID MR . WILLCOX, AT ANY TIME, SUGGEST THAT THE BUSINESS
OLvN�R� "SUE THE CITY �F ROSEMOUNT?"
NO.
° . DiD .�IR . WILLCOX MAKE ANY OTHER STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS
REGARDING THE ARMORY PROJECT AND/OR THE CONCERN5 OF AFFECTED
FUSINESS nWNERS?
MR. WILLCOX SAID THAT HE WAS ATTENDING THE MEETING TO GET
INFORMATTON AND FIND OUT THE CONCERNS OF THE AFFECTED BUSINESS
OWNERS . IT WAS OUR IMPRESSZON FROM HIS QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS THAT
WE KNEW MURE ABOUT W�iAT WAS GOING ON CONCERNING THE CONDEMNATION
7'HAN Ei E D I I�.
** MR. IUVp MS. HALBERT INDICATED THAT, IF THE CITY OF ROSEMOIJNT
DF,SIRr'n AN AFFTD1�,ViT FROM THEM, THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO EXECUTE
ONE V}�RIFYING THE STATEMF.NTS ATTRIBUTED TO THEM ABOVE.
,J��:4�:E::t�
2
M E .M 0 R A N D U M
T0: Rosemount File - Councilmember Investigation
FROM: Mike Miles
DATE: F�bruary 9 , 1993
RE: Interview with David Keller
DATE,�TiME:
At approximately 9 :00 a .m, on Tuesday, February 9, 1993 I met with
Mr. David Keller regarding the above-referenced investigation .
INTERVtEW PROCEDURE:
At the outset of the meeting, which lasted approximately 45
minutes , I gave Mr. Ke11er a summary of the events leading up to
the in���stigation . The summary included: the fact that Mayor
McMenomy had raised Mz . Keller' s letter of January 22, 1993 at the
reg�alar Rosemount City Council meeting of February 2, 1993; the
��xpression of concern about Mr . Keller' s allegations by the Mayor
and sF:veral councilmembers, and the directive given to me to
investigate the all.egation� . ,
INTERVIEW QUESTtONS AND ANSWERS:
1 . T��E PRINCIPAL ALLEGATIONS IN YpUR LETTER OF JANUARY 22,
1993 ARE THAT MR . HARRY WILLCOX ADVISED CERTAIN FORN.ER GLIENTS UF
YOURS `1'HAT THEY NEEDED "BETTER LEGAL REPRESENTATIQN" AND FURTHER
ADVIS�D THE'� "TO SUE THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT. " WHERE DID YDU OBTAIN
'PHIS INFORMATION?
I HAD INDIVIDUAL TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH EARL TOURDOT AND
RICK BATTAGLIA.
2t '�URNING T0 YOUR TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH MR. TOURDOT,
DO YpU RECALL WHEN YtJU HAD THAT CONVERSATION?
NC}, I DON'T. I DO RF.CALL THAT EARL ZNITIATED THE CONTACT BY
CALLING ME.
3 . FOCUSING ON THE PRINCIPAL ALLEGATI-0NS IN YOUR LETTER,
WNAT DID MR. TOURD�T SAY REGARDING HIS CONVERSATION W�TH MR.
WILI�COX?
1
EARL TOURDOT TOLD ME THAT HARRY WILLCOX TOLD HIM THAT HE
NEEDED BETTER LEGAL REPRESENTATION AND THAT HE SHOULD SUE Z'HE CITY
(OF ROSEMOUNT) .
4 . ARE THESE THE EXACT WORDS OF MR. TOURDOT?
NO, MY f2ECOLLFCTION IS AN APPROXIMATION OF WHAT HE SAID TO ME.
5 . DI� �`R . �3ATTAGLIA CALI, YOU AS WELL?
NO, AFTER MY CONVERSATION WITH MR. TOURDOT, I CALLED RICR
BATTAGLIA.
6 . 'WHAT DID MR. BATTAGLIA HAVE TO SAY REGARDING STATEMENTS
BY ?`�R . k'ILLCOX OF WHICH BATTAGLZA WAS AWARE?
ESSENTIALLY, RICR BATTAGLIA VERIFIED WHAT EARL TOURDOT HAD
TOLD ME AS TO HARRY WILLCOX'S STATEMENT.
7 . DO YDU RECALL EXRCTLY WHAT MR. BATTAGLIA SAID THAT '.yIR.
�vILLCOX STATED?
NO; I CANNOT RECALL WHAT QUOTES MR. BATTAGLZA ATTRIBUTED TO
M�2. WILI,COX, BUT MY RECOLLECTION IS THAT HE ATTRIBUTED ESSENTIALLY
PHE S1�MF. STATEMENTS TO MR. WiLLCOX AS EARL TOURDOT DID.
8 . i�G YOJ KNOiti II� '�vHAT SETTING ( IN A MEETING, BY TELEPHONEr
ETC . ) ?�R . WII.LCC�:�C IS S?JPPOSED TO HAVE RELAYED HIS STATEMENTS TO MR.
,I'ntfKDCaT i�P3;� :�4R . BAT`iitG�Ir'�?
NC).
** MR. KELLER INDICATED THAT, IF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DESrRED AN
AFFiD1�VIT FROM HIM, HE W�ULD BE WiLLING TO EXECUTE ONE VERIFYING
THE STATEMF.N`PS ATTRIBUTED T0 HIM ABOVE.
J;f._Ni:d s o
2
M E M O R A N D U M
T0: Rosemount File - Councilmember Investigation
FROMs Mike Mi1es
DATE: February 9 , 1993
REs Interview with John Anderson
DATE/TIME:
At approximately 10: 30 a .m. on Tuesday, February 9, 1993, I met
with Mr. ,Tohn Anderson regarding the above-referenced
investigation.
1NTERVIEW PROCEDURE:
At the outset of the meeting, which lasted approximately 15
_ minutes, I presented Mr. Ander-sc�-�----wi-�h--a--capy- of _the.-J-a�uary_ 22, _ ._
1993 lettex from David Keller of tl�e Grannis firm and asked �im to
read it before proceeding with the interview. I also advised him
that his respanses to my questions were entirely voluntary, that he
was not xequired to meet with me and could terminate the interview
at any time. I also advised him that no aspect of the
"investigation" was intended ta or would result in any liabi7.ity on
his part,
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS•
1 . DID YOU EVER MEET WITH MR. HARRY WZLLCOX REGARDING .�NY OF"
THE MATTERS R.AISED IN MR. KELLER'S LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 19'93?
YES.
- 2 . WHERE AND WHEN `DID THE MEETING TAKE PLACE?
WE MET AT AL MONR'S OFFICE AT APPROXIMATELY 5:00 P.M. ON
JANUARY 12, 1993.
3 . WHO CALLED FOR OR ARRANGED THE MEETING?
I DID, AT THE SUGGESTION OF SPARRY McROBERTS. INCIDENTALLY,
I ALSO CAI,LED SHEILA RLASSEN AND DENNIS WIPPERMAN TO INVITE THEM TO
SIMILAR MEETINGS.
1
4 . WHO WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING?
SPARRY McROBERTS, AL MONR, EARL TOURDOT, RICR; BATTAGLIA, JEFF
AND DEBBIE HAI.,BERT, HARRY WILLCOX AIJD ME:
5 . WAS THIS THE ONLY MEETING YOU ATTENDED AT WHICH MR,
WILLCOX DISCUSSED MATTERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION QF Y�UR
PROPERTY AND YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION?
YES.
6 . WHAT DISCUSSION, IF ANY, TOOK PLAGE REGARDING LEGAL
REPRESFNTATZON OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION?
SFARKY McROBERTS SAID THAT HE MAY BE HIRING THE DUFFY & BRILL
LAW FIRM TO REPRESENT HIM. HARRY WILLCOX SAID IT WOULD BE IN ALL
UF OUR E3EST INTERESTS TO CONSIDER IIAVING THE SAME LAWYER,. I
DISTINCTLY REMEMBER THAT MR. WILLCOX DID NOT SAY ANYTHING
DEROGATt7RY ABOUT THE GRANNIS, HAUGE LAW FIRM.-
7 , DID MR. WILLCOX INTTIATE THE DISCU5SION REGARDING LEGAL
COUNSEL FOR THE BUSINESS OWNERS? - -'
____ ___..__ ___ -- _____ _
NO, SPARKY McROBERTS DID.
8 . DID, M�2. WILLCOX, RT ANY TIME, SUGGEST THAT THE BUSINESS
OWNERS "SUE THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT? "
N0. IN FACT, THAT WOULD NOT HAVE MAnE ANY SENSE SINCE WE WERE
ALREADY TN THE MIDDLE OF THE CONDEMNATICIN ISSUE.
9 . DID !�`R . WILLCOX MAKE ANY OTHER STATEMENT5 OR COMMENTS
RE:LATI�'E TO THE ARNORY PROJECT AND THE CONCERNS OF THE AfiFECTED
E3U5INF.SS OTr�'NERc'
HARRX ANSWERED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONDEI�IATION PROCEDURE THE
BEST HE COULD. HAFtRY ALSO SAIll THAT, IF WE WANTED TO FIGHT A
QUiLK—`PAKE ACTION, WE WOULt3 HI�VE TO MOVE VERY QUICKLY,
** MR. 1�NDERSQN INDICATED THAT, IF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DESIRED AN
AFFIllAVIT EROM HIM, HE WpULD BE WiLLING TO EXEC[1TE �NE VERIFYING
:
_.._....._�:�....._ ---------- -
TNE STATEMENTS ATTRZBUTED `PO HIM ABOVE.
JMM:dso
2
MEMORANDUM
T0: Rosemount File - Councilmember Investigation -
FROMz Mike Miles
DATE: February 22, 1993
RE: Preliminary Interview with Sparky '�:cR�berts
DATF•
At a�proximately 9 : 00 a .m. on Tuesday, February 16 , 1993, I met
with Mr. Sparky N!cRoberts regarding the above-referenced
investigation .
INTERVIEW PROCEDUREc
At the outset of the rneeting, I asked Mr . McRoberts whether he was
familiar with the January 22 , 1993 lett�r from David Keller of the
Grannis firm, Mr. McRoberts indicated that he had both seen and
read the letter from Mr. Keller, I alsa advised Mr. McRoberts that
his respons,es to my questions were entirely valuntary, that he was
nat required to meet with me and could terminate the interview at
any time. 3 also told him that no aspect of the "investigation"
was intencied to or wauld result in any l�abiiity an his part.
TNTERVIF'W QUESTIONS 1�ND ANSWERS:
1 . Dl7 YOU EVF.R MEET 4r'ITH MR . HARRY WILLCOX REGARDING ANY OF
TF?E t�'A`PTE:RS RAISEL} IN MR . k:ELLER' S LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 1993?
Y F;S.
2 . `,tiHERE AND WHEN DID THE "`EETING TAKE PLACE?
AT AL MONK' S OFFICE LATE IN TH�: DAY. I DON'T REMEMBER
�
THE EXACT DATE BUT IT WAS EARLY IN JANUARY OF THiS YEAR.
3 . WHO CALLED FOR OR ARRANGED THE MEETING?
I ADVISED JOHN ANDERSON THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO
HOLD MEETINGS WITH COUNCILMEMBERS. TO THE BEST OF MY
KNOWLEDGE, HE ARRANGED THE MEETING WITH HARRY:
4 . WH� WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING?
EARL TOURDOT, RICR BATTAGLIA, AL MONR, JOHN ANDERSON,
HARRY WILLCOX, JERRY FLUEGEL AND ME. I 'M NOT SURE IF
1
JEFF AND DEBBIE HALBERT WERE THERE, BUT THEY COULD HAVE
BEEN.
5 . WAS TNIS THE ONLY MEETING YOU ATTENDED AT WHICH MR.
WILLCOX DISCUSSED MATTERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION (�F YOUR
PROPERTY AND YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATION?
YES.
6 . WHAT DISCUSSION, IF ANY, TOOK PLACE REGARDING LEGAL '
R�PR£SENTATION OF THE BUSTNESS OWNERS RELATIVE TQ THE CONDEMNATION?
I SUGGESTED TO THE PEDPLE AT THE MEETI�IG THAT THE DUFFY
6 BRILL LAW FIRM HAD GOOD SUCCESS WITH THE CITY OF
ROSEMOUNT AND THAT THEY HAD DONE A GOOD JOS ON THE
HAWKINS POND MATTER. I ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT THE PEOPLE
AFFECTED BY THE CONDEMNATION CONSiDER HIRING ONE LAWYER
TO REPRESENT AI,L OF THEM. MR. WILLCOX AGREED WITH THE
IDEA OF GETTING THE SAME LAWYER FOR EVERYB�DY.
7 . DID MR . WILLCOX INiTIATE THE DISCUSSION REGARDING LEGAL
�OUNSEL FOR THE BUSINESS O�ti'NER?
�.__.._ �. ___ _.___ _---__ _
- - ..�,.�. .._,�_.,;--.._
-_..._._.,�.-_-:
N�, I DID,
�3 . D1D MR . ���ILI,COX, AT ?ANY TI:�:E, SUGGEST TI-�AT THE BUSINESS
��.tiNERS StJF `I'Hr: CITY OF ROSE!_JUN`T'?
HE DID NOT.
9 . QID .^�R. WZLLCOX MA.KE ANY OTHER STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS
FiELATIVE TO THE AR"!QRY PROJ£CT AND THE CONCERN5 OF THE AFFECTED
3USINESS OWNERS?
HA.RRY GENERI�LLY OFFERED HIS SUPPORT TO US. HE ALSO SAID
THAT HE CAME TO THE MEETING TO "GET UP TO SPEED" ON WHAT
THE PORT AUTHORITY WAS DOING.
** NOTE: MR. McROBERTS INDICATED, THAT IF THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
WANTED AN 11FFIDAVIT FROM HIM, HE WOULD BE WILLING T� EXECUTE ONE
VERIFYING THE S`1'ATEMENTS ATTRIF3UTED T0 HIM ABOVE.
2
MEMORANDUM
T0: Rosemount File -- Councilmember Investigation
FROMs Mike Miles
DATEz February 22, 1993
RE: Preliminary Interview with Jerry Fluegel
DATE/TIME:
At approximately 10 : 3� a .m. on Monday, February 22, 1993, I
conferred by telephone with Mr. Jerry Fluegel regarding the above-
referenced investigation .
INTERVTEW PRO�EDURE:
I first reached Mr. Fluegel on Friday, February 19, 1993 and asked
him if he would be wiiling to visit with me about a meeting he was
alleged to have attended in early January reqarding the
armary/community center condemnation pro}ect. He indicated that he
was willing to visit with me . I then asked if he had seen a copy
of the January 22, 1993 letter from David Keller of the Grannis
firm regarding actions of Mr. Willcox. Mr. Fluegel said he had
`not. And on Fehruary 19 , 1993, I faxed a copy of Mr. Keller'S
letter to Mr. Fluegel .
On February 22, 1993, I called Mr. Fluegel and asked him if he had
received and read Mr. Keller' s letter of January 22, 1993 . Mr.
Fluegel indicated that he had received and read this
correspandence. T also advised Mr. Fluegel that his responses to
my questions were entirely voluntary, that he was not required to
visit with me and could terminate the interview at any time. I
also advised him that no aspect of the "investigation" was intended
to or would result in any liability on his part.
INTERL�TEW OUESTIONS AND ANSWERS-
1 . DID YOU EVER MEET WITH MR. HARRY WiLLCOK REGARDING ANY OF
THE MATTERS RAISED IN MR: KELLER'S LETTER OF JANUARY 22, 1993? - --
I RECALL ATTENDING A MEETING WITH A GROUP OF BUSINESS
OWNERS REGARDING THE A.RMORY PROJECT. MR. WILLCO% WAS PRESENT AT
THAT I�tEETING.
2 . WHERE AND WHEN DID THE MEETING T.AKE PLACE?
, THE MEETING WAS AT AL MONR'S OFFICE, BUT Y DON'T REMEMBER
1
THE DATE OR ,TIME.
3 . WHO CALLED FOR OR .ARRANGED THE MEETING?
I'M NOT SURE, BUT I THINR IT WAS JOHN ANDERSON.
4 . WHO WAS PRESENT AT THE MEETING?
HAR.RY WILLCOX, JOHN 1�NDERSON, SPARRY MCROBERTS, AL M{}NK
AND ME. THERE WERE OTHER PEOPLE PRESENT BtTT I DON'T KNQW
WHO THEY WERE.
5 . WAS THIS THE QNLY MEETING YOU ATTENDED Am WHICH MR.
WILLCOX DZSCUSSED THE ARN:ORY PROJECT?
YES.
6 . WHAT DISCUSSION, IF ANY, TOOK PI,ACE REGARDING LEGAL
REPRESENTATION -0F THE BUSiNESS OWNERS RELATIVE TO THE CONDEMNATION?
I DON'T HAVE ANY RECOLLECTION OF DISCUSSIONS REG.ARDING
LEGAL REPRESENTATION. THE ONLY REASON I WAS AT THE
..- :--_ ��- .�---.__, MEETING IS. IN RELA�IOI�- T0 WHETHER JOHN ANDERSON '�+1�U�,D- $E----.�
MOVING HIS BUSINESS TO MY PROPERTY AND I WAS NOT
PARTICULARLY CONCERNED WITH OTHER ISSUES BEING TALRED
ABOUT.
? , DID MR. WILLCQX, AT ANY �TIME, SUGGEST THAT THE BUSINESS
OWNERS "SUE THE CITY OF ROSEMOUNT?"
NO.
8 . DID MR. WILLCOX MAKE ANY OTHER STATEMENTS OR COMMENTS
RELATIVE TO THE ARMORY PROJECT AND THE CONCERNS OF THE AFFECTED
BUSINESS OWNERS?
MY ONLY RECOLLECTION IS OF A GENERAL DISCUSSION REGA.RDING
THE ARMORY PROJECT.
** NOTEz MR. FLUEGEL INDICATED THAT IF THE CITY OF RQSEMOUNT
DESIRED AN AFFIDAVIT FROM HIM, HE WOULD BE WILLING TO EXECUTE QNE
VERIFYING THB 'STATEMENTS ATTRIBUTED Tt7" �iIM ABOVE. -"`-
2
APPENDIX "C"
February 14, 1993 Letter from Mr. Harry R: Willcox
regarding Mr. Kelfer's Allegations
_��.,.�:�. _,:�:
��.����..��,,. : _ --..�..,�. ;_�.._-- _ ._._..�_. _ .._
FEEs 14, 199�
SUHJ�CT: DAVID KELLER'S ALLEGATIONS.
THE FOLLOWING FACTS WILL CLEAR UF THE AHSU�iD ALI.EGATIONS MADE HY
DAV I D EtiELLER:
1 . ON JANUARY 9TH AT ABOU7 10: 3� AM I F,ECEIVED A FHONE CALL
FFOM JOHN ANDERS�N AND SPAFtN;Y MC ROBEFtTS `S ASKING ME TO STOP OUT
AND TflL�: W I TH THE 5US I NESS OWNERS AND THEMSELVES. WE hiADE Altl
AF�F'DINTIhENT FOR JAN. 1�TH AT 4; 45 PM.
:. WHEN I AFFi I VED THEY SHAFED W I TH ME THE PRpB1rEh1S THEY WEr^�E
HAVIIV(; WITH FELOCATION, SUCM AS TWO OFFICIALS FROM THE POFtT
AUTHORITY HAD CONTACTED ONE OF THE HUSINESS OWNEFtS AND SAID THEY
WOUL.D GIVE TH�M :�SUc�O MORE THAN THEY DID THE OTHER RENTE�S IF
THEY WOtJLD 7AfCE I T AND NOT TELL AlVYOI�E ELSE. AL MONt: GAVE ME THE
ATTACHED LETTER. AF7EF� SEE I NG AIVD HEAR I NG 0�' THE I R F'RO�LEMS I
, ADVIS�D TNEM TNAT AS A CQUNCIL MEMPEFt I COULD NO"f HELP THEM: THE
ISSU� W�S IN THE Fq�,T AUTMORITIES HANDS. AS A CITIZEN CON�ERNED
APOUT THEIR F'LIGHT, THE �NLY THING THAT I COULD DO WAS Tp
�,F'COMM�"ND THkY HAVE AN ATTORNEY 7HA7 WAS WEI.L VE�t5ED IN
-„ `_ �flNDCt`1N�TION 1.,AW._�D�l-ISE—T'}-IEM DF_ THETR fiiI�HTS. I=-�L:��3 REC(7MMEIV�3Ei� ="
THaT THEY INTERVIEW SEVERAL LAW FIRMS AND PXCF; WHAT THEY FELT WAS
tHE BEST ONE TO fiE��ESE:NT THEM. I ALSO ADVISED THEM THAT THEY
SH�ULU F'I Ct; 1 ATTOFiNEY FOF� THE GRDUF', AS TH I S WOULD BE THE MOST
COST �FFEETIVE.
THTS NOW MAF�ES ME WONDEI� WHY DAVID KELLE}� WROTE SUCH A LETTER AND
WHY THE MAYt7�i PUT I T ON THE AGENDA, W I THOU7 ASH;I NG ME I F THE
Ct•tAF;GES WEF,E 7FUE, HE AL50 PUT I T ON THE F'�RT AUTHO�,I�Y AGENDA.
THE COUNCIL WENT ALONG WITH I7 BEING PUT ON THE AGENDA, WHEN pNE
MEM�ER OF THE COl}hIC I L 1.:NEW TMERE WAS N0 T�,UTH I N THE CHARGES ON
FEB 1ST THE DAY HEFOFE THE COUNCIL MEETING,
COU�D IT BE THAT DAVID h'.ELLE� HAS A VENDE7TA AGAINS7 ME DUE TO
THE �'ACT 7HAT I WAS ON THE COMM I TTEE Tt] F'I CK A NEW L.AW F I RM I N
1991 AND Hi8 FxRM WA5 NOT CHOSEN?
C�ULD IT HE THAT 7HE MAYOR IS UNHAPPY THAT I DO N�T SUF'PO�iT HIS
INDEMNIFICATIQN AS SOME PEQFLE HAVE SUGGESTED�
-_-
_�_.___
SHEILA, THE COUNCIL MEETII�G IS NOT THE PLACE OF FORUM FQR YOUR
PONTIFICATION AND SCOLDING SUCH AS YOU HAVE DONE IN THIS MAfi7ER.
I T�tUST TWAT THIS CLEARS UP THIS MATTER AND SINGERELY HOPE MY
�,ES�'OhISE GETS THE SAME F�ONT PAGE COVERAGE THA1' THE FALSE
ALLEGATiQNS DID.
kESP LLY YOURS
� Zl/
1" L���
Hp�,RY F�. WILLCOX
NOVFI�'�IIt 12, 1992
ROSII+ZOiJNT PQRT AUTHORITY
CITY �F ROSII�lOUNT
DAKO�FA COtJI�ITY H.R.A.
DEAR SIRS:
IN REPLY TQ OUR ONGOING CONVF�tSATIONS AND I,E'ITERS RE: PUR{�iASE AND/OR
RELAC'.ATION OF MY PROPII2TY, YOUR OFFEE2 IS FOUND TO BE' QtJITE LJNACC�P`T'ABI+E ! ;
YOU FAILID T� COr1SIDER THAT 'THE FQLI,OWING ITEMS P.RE INCZUDID WITH THE 'Ii���
BUILDZNGS:
1 } built in 2 hour, fire r3ted, paint booth and sprinkler S�rsi trti�
2) frame rack floor anchors
3} complete liner panel in buildings
4) extra insulation for energy efficiency
5) 4" well
6) segtic system
7) 3 phase wiring
__ .:_8_1 extr�__wi��.ng for machi.nes--and welde.�s_----_. _ _ ------___
_ _ _ � .__
9} site wqrk
10) office spaces and many other features
I 7�M A LIC�ISED CON�RCIAL REALTC)R, APPRAISE�, AND C�QAL CON'rRACTOR
F'OR PRE-IIVGINEQtED BUILUINGS. I HAVE BEII�T BUILDING MY BCJSTNE.S�ES IN ROSF�'IQUNT
FOR 15 YEARS. BY LOSING MY PRIME LOC'ATION, MY R�,'rII2II�lIIV''� INC.`QME PL�P:NNF� FRQM
MY RF�I'I'AIS(CURR.IIV'IZY $3140./month PLUS 5$INCRF,ASE P� YF.ARj---PLUS U5E dF MY
I�1D AS AN ASSET FOR FINANCING OTI�R BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS - -- YOU IN$ULT MY
PROF'ESSICxVAL ,7UDG��VT p,ND My IN�j�LI,II�1(�T� BY OFF'�.T23G ME ONLY $165,000. : !
I HAVE ESTIMATID THE OOST Z1� REFLACE MY BUILDINGS WITH 3�-IE SAME N1AT'E�tIAIS AS
CtJRRENI�Y USID, PLUS I,ANU, WELL, SEWII2 SYS'I'F:M, AND ALL E?�'I'RAS WOULD BE
$355,000. YOUR RIDICZWS OFFEft TS GNLI' 45� OF t�OST TO RF�tJILD AND CON�ENSATE
FOR IASS OF INCbNIE,
T HAVE NOt RESPONDID Tp ypUR OF�IIt AS I FELT IT WAS NOT WQFtTHY OF A RESPONSE ! !
I F'EEL YOU ARE TRYING TO !'ST�,.AL" MY PROPERTY AND LIVLIHOOD TO ACOUMODATE YOUR
(74�TN PII2SQNAL CAUSE! !`
LEr'S BE REAL! ! ; TAI� YC)iJR FiEAD,S (�T OF TfiE SAND AND C�T RF'.ALISTIC : ! !
QONTACT ME WF�1 YOU ARE RF�DY TO NEGC7rTATE.
SINCERII,Y,
ALBERT MONK
�7;-� �,91�- f�.�P�l.�- ��' .-g,.__ :
���'� `''' �
/ /`7 �,�