Connect with us

EDA in Focus

Op-Ed: County, EDA officials cited for failed oversight – why not the Town?

Published

on

The status of the ITFederal project and the $10 million loan that facilitated it is likely to be under increasing scrutiny by EDA civil attorneys contending that loan was acquired under false pretenses. Royal Examiner File Photos/Roger Bianchini

Many have wondered when or even if prosecutors and state investigators guiding the Warren County Special Grand Jury’s look into criminality tied to the Economic Development Authority financial fraud investigation would expand its focus beyond a tightly knit circle surrounding former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald.

On Tuesday, September 24, they got an answer, if not precisely the one many citizens critical of the political and economic status quo here were hoping for.

That answer was a total of 42 indictments, three each against 14 new players, including the entire elected Warren County Board of Supervisors, the top county administrative official and recently departed County and EDA attorney, as well as a mix of former and sitting EDA Board of Director members.

The disappointment for some was that those indictments were all misdemeanor charges related to an absence of due diligent oversight of EDA affairs, specifically over the last four months of 2018 regarding the continued administrative authority of Jennifer McDonald. (See linked story below)

The bookings at the Magistrate’s Office of the Rappahannock-Shenandoah-Warren County Regional Jail (RSW Jail) didn’t even generate the orange jail jumpsuit mug shots many social media denizens would have likely framed for posterity.

No mug shots today – County and EDA officials charged with misdemeanor failures of due diligence in the conduct of their office were not booked into the jail, as any defendant in similar circumstances released on their own recognizance would not be RSW Superintendent Gilkison has explained.

But while County officials rightfully face scrutiny for their failed due diligence, the Town of Front Royal governmental apparatus has thus far escaped unscathed, at least regarding criminal liability and even the level of public criticism aimed its way.

No Front Royal Town official has yet been indicted for criminal negligence regarding financial oversight of EDA operations; and to our knowledge there is no “recall them all” petition being circulated against the Town Council.

Why?

Three years ago, it was an overwhelming majority of Council that threw a defensive and protective shield around both McDonald and two of the more implausible projects she was instrumental in bringing forward.

This mid-2016 photo perhaps shows varying levels of disinterest expressed by all of Bébhinn Egger’s Town Council colleagues over her claims about ITFederal at the time.

In fact, those two projects, ITFederal and Workforce Housing, account for nearly $11 million, $10 million and $650,000 respectively, of the $21 million in EDA assets alleged to have been either misdirected by McDonald or moved under false pretenses during her executive oversight.

But some Town officials have claimed Front Royal has nothing to do with EDA operations since the County took over the Town’s portion of the EDA’s annual operational funding in 2012.

But as Royal Examiner has reported previously, that notion is questionable at best with much of the EDA’s work being done on behalf of the Town on projects inside the town limits. ITFederal, Workforce Housing, the Afton Inn and new police headquarters construction project come to mind.

If that wasn’t the case how do Town officials explain filing suit against the EDA to recover as much as $15 million in Town assets they contend were misdirected, lost or acquired under false pretenses? Do they think McDonald snuck into a secret town vault to pick the lock or hacked into Town bank accounts and sent their $15 million to a secret offshore location?

No, if experience tells us anything chances are that if McDonald had asked the Town Council for $15 million they would have just given it to her with a pat on the back.

In fact, that’s exactly what Council did in 2015 when McDonald came and asked for a $10 million “bridge” loan to help prop up the EDA’s case with First Bank & Trust to finance a $10 million loan to ITFederal through the EDA. Council was even kind enough to extend that initial one-month loan taken out of an investment account generating nearly $4,000 of monthly interest for two additional months without fee compensation for lost interest revenue beyond the first month.

It seems very possible that without that three-month Town handover of the desired ITFederal loan amount the bank loan for ITFederal would never have been achieved, reducing the EDA’s claimed losses by almost half.

But when Councilwoman Bébhinn Egger warned her colleagues that ITFederal did not appear to be what it was purported to be financially or from a business standpoint by McDonald, Congressman Robert Goodlatte and the company’s CEO Truc “Curt” Tran the reaction was not one of cautious due diligent verification.

Rather, the unanimous consensus of Egger’s colleagues was to either ignore or berate her, not to mention your then newly created online news source, for telling them things they didn’t want to hear – even if as it turned out, they were verifiably true at the time – as in no $140 million government contract basis upon which to create 600 high paying tech industry jobs as part of a $40 million ITFederal investment in this community.

From left on Nov. 28, 2016, Councilmen John Connolly, Hollis Tharpe, Bébhinn Egger, Gene Tewalt, Bret Hrbek, Mayor Tim Darr, and Jacob Meza at far right, bid farewell to Town Manager Steve Burke, second from right. Only one of this group, you know who she is, performed due diligent oversight of EDA affairs. It was a majority state of affairs that lasted on council for another year and a half.

Revisionist History?

The day after the County and EDA misfeasance and nonfeasance misdemeanor bookings the Town of Front Royal issued a pat-us-on-the-back press release in which Interim Mayor Matt Tederick lauded the town government’s role in launching the Virginia State Police investigation into EDA finances.

“Due to the watchful eyes of the Town Government, potential financial irregularities involving the EDA were discovered in the late spring and early summer of 2018. The Town Council swiftly turned their findings and suspicions over to the Virginia State Police, who in turn immediately commenced an investigation,” Tederick states, adding, “The citizens need to rest assured that the Front Royal Town Council will continue to pursue its lawsuit against the EDA and any others in order to hold those responsible for the Town’s losses accountable. The public’s continuing confidence in Town government is greatly appreciated and I might add, warranted.”

Pals – then EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald and private citizen Matt Tederick pose before start of Sept. 25, 2017 Town Council meeting. It was a meeting at which Council voted against a Board of Architectural Review recommendation to deny the EDA request to allow demolition of the Afton Inn to facilitate redevelopment at the site.

As far as ascertaining responsibility for any Town losses, both current and past councilmen and mayors over the past five years might begin by looking in the mirror.

As for “continued confidence”, as mentioned near the end of our story on a Council initiative to explore creation of its own EDA, if Tederick is referencing the work of town staff, as opposed to all but one of its elected officials (Egger) in recent years, he may be on to something.

After all, in June 2017 Town Police investigators began to develop suspicions that some reported criminal actions targeting the EDA offices and its then executive director had been staged from the inside.

And about a year later Town Finance Director B. J. Wilson did discover an eight-year history of over $291,000 in Town debt service overpayments to the EDA that finally set the process of EDA financial scrutiny in motion.

But that scrutiny was a long time coming, about 2-1/2 years after council was warned by one of its own that things appeared horribly amiss in some EDA projects. And the scrutiny of 2018 did not generate from any Town Council initiative targeting the EDA, but as noted above from staff discoveries while exploring Town finances that landed a “smoking gun” of precise evidence on Council’s lap.

It was Wilson, Town-contracted auditors and the Town Attorney who took the point in confronting McDonald, EDA Board Chairman Greg Drescher and EDA Attorney Dan Whitten over those debt service overpayments of nearly $300,000 on August 23, 2018. It was at that meeting during which the term “fraud” may have been first broached regarding EDA finances.

Greg Drescher and Jennifer McDonald appeared grumpy at times under questioning by Tom Sayre and Archie Fox at June 2017 joint work session on the EDA’s Workforce Housing Project.

That mid-2018 meeting between Town and EDA officials led to Drescher’s resignation as EDA board chairman the following day. It was also likely a driving factor in the County’s hiring, on behalf of the EDA, an investigative public accounting firm, Cherry Bekaert, to begin a probe into irregularities within EDA finances.

It was also a meeting that, as Tederick observed, led to the launching of a State Police investigation. But by that point, not to forward staff’s information on EDA financial irregularities to law enforcement for scrutiny might have eventually been seen as indictable as a more serious felony charge of complicity in a cover up of financial fraud.

As for that State Police investigation, one might contend it was begun a year earlier by the Front Royal Town Police. But that investigation was allowed to be shut down in 2017 at the request of EDA Board Chairman Drescher to allow, first the EDA board, then its executive director to control the investigation of alleged crimes targeting the EDA and its chief executive through a hired private investigator.

It was a request and decision that allowed the alleged EDA financial subterfuge, whatever its source, to go unchecked for an additional year and a half.

Accountability – where?

But beyond an honest self appraisal of its past complicity in throwing a protective shield up against scrutiny of EDA projects and its executive director’s assertions about them, should town officials be vigilant about past EDA activities that may have targeted more of its assets versus those of the County? – Certainly.

But why not continue the joint reform process the interim mayor and council propelled forward, rather than just withdraw from it? After all, new EDA Executive Director Doug Parsons has promised full cooperation in determining an accurate appraisal of the Town’s losses within those EDA losses financial fraud investigators have reported being misdirected through EDA operations over a number of years.

And we would suggest the interim mayor and council not continue a course of self-delusional praise and finger-pointing that tries to minimize the Town Council’s own long-term lapsed due diligence regarding EDA affairs it was directly involved in facilitating.

In mid-2016 Bret Hrbek, left, was Jennifer McDonald’s staunchest defender among many, when Bébhinn Egger, right, raised concerns about assertions about EDA projects, particularly ITFederal.

And speaking of that involvement, the media asked former EDA/County Attorney Whitten why the $10 million ITFederal loan the Town was so instrumental in helping achieve was included in the EDA civil litigation for recovery even though it is current on its rather lax terms.

“Because it was acquired under false pretenses,” Whitten replied following an EDA board meeting three months ago.

Whitten’s response echoed the above-referenced, ignored and even vilified warnings three years earlier that something appeared amiss in the EDA’s representations about ITFederal.

So “warranted continued confidence” may be a stretch, at least as it applies to elected Town officials over the past three to five years.

Nonetheless it appears Town officials may avoid the embarrassment of criminal charges, not to mention a high degree of public anger, for their long pattern of failed due diligence regarding oversight in their dealings with the EDA.

Why?

The answer we believe is two pronged legally: first, a statue of limitations on misdemeanor offenses; and second what we would contend was an unnecessary relinquishment of the Town’s authority to appoint two of the seven EDA board members based on the EDA’s fair funding formula split on Town-County investment in EDA operations.

As for a potential third prong in the Town’s escaping the extreme level of public scrutiny and recall petitioning aimed the County’s way, a primary social media purveyor of that public anger has not threatened to sue the Town for millions of dollars, so a public shaming there may have less interest.

But back on the legal side, note that the three indictments filed on the 14 County and EDA officials on September 20 for which they were booked on September 24 and 25, all involved EDA transactions between September and December 2018. Those charges involve only $309,000 of the allegedly misdirected or embezzled $21.3 million being sought for recovery by the EDA in civil litigation.

What about liability for a lack of due diligent oversight during the movement of the other $20.99 million, particularly that $10 million ITFederal loan the EDA now claims was acquired under false pretenses?

There is likely to be none – because misfeasance, nonfeasance and even malfeasance in the conduct of public office are misdemeanor criminal offenses. And there is a one-year statute of limitations on misdemeanor offenses. Also in the September to December 2018 timeframe, the Front Royal Town Council did not have appointment authority of EDA board members.

That is because when the County assumed responsibility for the Town’s 34% portion of the EDA’s annual operating budget in 2012, the Town Council allowed its appointment authority of two of the seven EDA board members to be withdrawn.

Was it a necessary condition? – We would contend not.

Because that County assumption of full annual operational funding from the previous 66%-34% County-Town split was made as part of the long and ongoing negotiations on two fronts: double taxation of Town citizens on certain services provided countywide; and compensation to the Town for its extension of central water-sewer utilities into the North Commercial-Industrial Corridor outside the town limits without annexation.

North Corridor commercial development was enabled by the Town’s extension of central water sewer outside the town limits without annexation. Many believe the Town continues to suffer from lost commercial tax revenue after a judicial striking down of agreed upon PILOT fees tied to utility bills as the Town’s major compensation for that lost tax revenue. Photo Roger Bianchini/Courtesy CassAviation

So if the County is essentially saying either, “We are going to stop the double taxation of Town citizens for countywide services” or “We owe you more compensation for your lost commercial tax revenue due in large part to a Town-County North Corridor compensation arrangement struck down by a Circuit Court judge, and this is part of how we’ll do it,” why would the Town Council agree to withdraw or reduce its past oversight of EDA operations it remained deeply involved in?

Whatever the reason, in 2012 the Town Council did agree to relinquish its EDA board appointment authority, and thus direct supervisory authority over EDA operations. In fact, that relinquishment is referenced in motions filings surrounding the EDA’s claim of sovereign immunity in response to the Town’s $15 million civil action against it.

“That the Town of Front Royal voluntarily waived its right to control the EDA, contrary to the statutory mandate, does not create an actionable fiduciary duty to (the Town’s) benefit,” EDA attorneys wrote in reply to the Town’s opposition filing on the EDA claim of institutional sovereign immunity.

However those arguments play out at a November 8 motions hearing and whether that “voluntary” waiver of its EDA oversight right was a bad decision or not, it has paid off for Town officials in an unexpected way.

Because by allowing the County to assume full EDA board appointment authority, that 2012 Council may have saved its 2015 to 2018 successors from legal liability for the absence of Council’s own due diligence in its oversight of its EDA affairs. And while like the County and EDA officials who were indicted, that misdemeanor liability would have only extended back a year and involve an estimated $309,000, it was a long-term failing the Town itself alleges led to the misdirection of up to $15 million in Town assets.

Regardless, unlike County and EDA officials, in the absence of direct authority to limit the EDA executive director’s conduct of her office over those last four months of 2018, the Front Royal Town Council appears poised to skate home free of any legal liability for its own lapses of judgment regarding its business dealings with the EDA in recent years.

And without “smoking gun” evidence of payoffs to look the other way or shared profiteering from the alleged EDA financial fraud under legal and civil scrutiny, it would appear the worst offense those not indicted for illegally moving or receiving EDA assets can be charged with is failed due diligent oversight, and that within that one-year misdemeanor statute of limitations. And for the above cited reasons it would appear that such charges could only come on the County and EDA sides of the equation, as it did on September 24.

So more than any proactive due diligence by elected Town officials generating “continued confidence”, legally on the failed municipal oversight front you might say it just pays to be lucky timing wise; not to mention have a voluntary withdrawal of EDA board appointment authority in your pocket. I guess you could also say that County generated initiative to acquire additional control of EDA board appointments for its added operational financial contribution kind of backfired long term – because misery loves company, right?

Criminal and non-criminal dereliction of public duty: Where might they apply in the EDA financial scandal?

Grand Jury indicts 14 County and EDA officials for lack of EDA oversight

Council divided on move toward second, Town-controlled EDA

Defense attorneys move to quash grand jury misdemeanor indictments

Share the News:

EDA in Focus

Town skirts EDA request for FRPD construction back payments

Published

on

The Front Royal Town Council passed a series of four motions Monday, November 25, authorizing expenditures totaling $1.02 million dollars related to its civil litigation against the Economic Development Authority, as well as payments to contractors regarding construction of the new Front Royal Police headquarters across Kendrick Lane from the EDA office complex.

Of that million dollars plus total, $527,800 approved in a series of three motions is for legal and auditing fees related to the Town’s civil suit against the EDA. The $492,284.34 approved in the last of the four motions is for vendor (contractor) payments recently come due on the FRPD construction project.

The motions were all approved by 5-0 votes, with Mayor-Elect Gene Tewalt not voting as Mayor Pro Tempore as he was declared at the meeting’s outset. As noted above, over half of the authorized payments are for attorney and auditing fees for services related to the Town’s attempt to recover “as much as $15 million” from the EDA. The $492,284 was approved to cover direct payments to contractors on the Front Royal Police Headquarters construction project.

The motions were all approved by 5-0 votes, with Mayor-Elect Gene Tewalt not voting as Mayor Pro Tempore as he was declared at the meeting’s outset. Photos and video by Mark Williams, Royal Examiner.

However with its litigation still pending as the EDA struggles to right its financial situation, the Town did not make good on an EDA request for back payments totaling over $8 million dollars for vendor/contractor payments it has made on the FRPD headquarters project on behalf of the Town.

In a letter from EDA Board of Directors Chairman Ed Daley to Town Finance Director B. J. Wilson dated November 15, 2019, included in the agenda packet on the final of the four EDA-related payment authorization requests, the EDA appears to attempt to force the Town’s hand on making up those back payments to the EDA.

After informing Wilson of the EDA’s receipt of FRPD project Requisition (invoice) “# 45” dated October 22, 2019, Daley wrote, “After speaking with our Board of Directors, I write to advise the Town that we will hold this pay requisition without paying until the Town of Front Royal pays the principal and interest due on this project.

“The principal, legal fees and draw fees paid by the EDA for the Town to date is $8,440,797.17,” Daley continues, adding, “The interest amount is $291,856.21 which covers interest on the previous 44 pay requisitions, up to October 31, 2019.” The recently-installed EDA Board Chairman closes by informing the Town, “Once we receive the past amount due on this project, we will process pay requisition # 45 accordingly.”

The Daley letter seeking reimbursement on the $8.44 million in police headquarter construction payments indicates an FRPD project payment and interest accrued history attached. But in the council motion on authorization of vendor payments there is no amount attached to Requisition # 45. However, in the “Revised Item # 15 motion made by Jacob Meza, seconded by Chris Holloway, an amount of $492,284.34 is cited to cover payments directly “to vendors Dustin Construction, Mosley Architects and JTS LLC for construction of the Police Department Project.”

The motion continues to cite the use of money “previously budgeted for the Police Department Project” and notes the Dustin Construction payment will be released “after signed waiver of lien is obtained.”

Contacted by phone on Tuesday, EDA Administrative Assistant Gretchen Henderson said that Dustin Construction ($243,843.48) and JTS LLC ($893.84) were included in payment Requisition # 45, but not the Mosley payment which may be from a separate invoice.

So it appears that the Front Royal Town Council has decided to respond to the EDA’s most recent request it make good on its $8.4-million FRPD project payment debt to the EDA by bypassing the EDA on that debt as the Town’s civil suit against the EDA moves forward; while simply making future invoice Requisition payments directly to the vendors.

The first EDA-related Council payment authorization of Monday’s meeting was $282,800 for “attorney fees and auditing services related to the Town’s civil suit against the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority (EDA)”.

The funds for that payment were requested to be transferred from scheduled FY 2019 and FY 2020 Town debt service payments to the EDA on a number of projects. Those projects and transferred amounts were cited as Success Farm ($10,370), Baugh Drive Extension ($6,535), Happy Creek ($6,845), Stephens Industrial Park ($11,725), Leach Run Parkway ($105,925), and “Appropriated Funds Forward ($141,400), totaling the $282,800 authorized for attorney and audit fees related to the Town lawsuit against the EDA.

The now $21.3-million EDA financial scandal revolving around former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald began unraveling in late spring to early summer of 2018 when Town Finance Director Wilson discovered about eight years of Town debt service overpayments to the EDA. EDA officials told Royal Examiner they have not yet seen a number on those believed Town overpayments.

Might one take a guess based on that $282,800 transfer of future scheduled debt service payments to the EDA; or might one look at the fact that transfer comes within $9,056 of the disputed FRPD interest payments of $291,856.21?

Hey, guessing is always a gamble, isn’t it?

As those keeping a scorecard on the now multi-faceted EDA financial scandal and related civil and criminal litigation know, the Town Council authorized its legal department to file the aforementioned civil action against the EDA seeking recovery of “as much as $15 million dollars” of allegedly misdirected Town assets as a precaution against unknown variables, including possible statute of limitation issues. Included in the Town’s suit for recovered assets is exactly what interest rate the Town should be paying on the FRPD construction project.

The EDA is paying 3% interest on the FRPD construction project. However, the Town is holding out for a 1% rate that would coincide with what it contends was promised to it by the EDA, or at least by its then Executive Director McDonald, as part of the New Market Tax Credit Program for which the project did not qualify because it was not a job-creating economic development project.
In fact as Royal Examiner has previously reported, then Town Manager Joe Waltz and Finance Director Wilson, as well as People Inc. regional administrator of the NMTC Program Brian Phipps all advised Council against “gambling” on competing for the NMTC funding versus accepting a guaranteed, 30-year fixed 2.65% interest rate offered to the Town in late 2017 through a private sector bank.

Town Attorney Doug Napier and Interim Town Manager Matt Tederick.

Contacted Tuesday, Town Attorney Doug Napier said that after Phipps’ early January 2018 work session appearance before council, Town officials contacted McDonald, who assured them Phipps “didn’t know what he was talking about” and that the NMTC bond issue had been achieved to include the FRPD project.

Consequently a council majority decided to take that gamble on the best case scenario of nine years of interest-free payments significantly reducing the total interest due on a project bond issue.
The other two EDA-related payment authorizations unanimously approved by council Monday evening were “up to $45,000 to Mitchell & Company PC for auditing services to support litigation in the Town’s civil suit against … (the EDA)” and “payment not to exceed $200,000 to Damiani & Damiani for legal services related to the Town’s civil suit against the …(EDA).”

Contacted Tuesday for a reaction to the Town Council’s response to the EDA board’s request the Town make good on its FRPD payment debt, current EDA Executive Director Doug Parsons said,
“What the Town does is their business, what they chose to pay, what they chose not to pay it’s entirely up to them. We feel confident in the figures we provided on the invoice for the Front Royal Police Department. We would love to work out this difference of opinion with them; and we’re always ready to work with them on other projects while we work out our differences.”

Watch the entire Front Royal Town Council meeting of November 25th here:

Share the News:
Continue Reading

EDA in Focus

Sunday afternoon matinee: What do Dixon, Illinois, Front Royal and Warren County have in common?

Published

on

A sizeable crowd gathered Sunday afternoon at 2 p.m. at the Villa Avenue Community Center for a viewing of the documentary film “All The Queen’s Horses”. The film about a city financial official in Dixon, Illinois, who is currently serving a nearly 20-year prison sentence for embezzling $53.7 million dollars over a 20-year period, seems to be of particular interest locally due to our own developing municipal-EDA financial scandal.

Melanie Salins, who was instrumental in bringing filmmaker here, introduces Producer-Director Pope to Sunday audience for her film on small-town municipal embezzlement. Royal Examiner Photos/Roger Bianchini

Rita Crundwell was arrested by the FBI in 2012 on what is to date the largest municipal embezzlement in U.S. history. Film producer/director and public accounting professor at DePaul University Kelly Richmond Pope was present to introduce her film and do a post-viewing question-and-answer session centered around what similarities she does or doesn’t see between the Dixon, Illinois situation and Front Royal and Warren County’s Economic Development Authority financial scandal.

And based on what she heard in questioning or perceptions from locals, as well as what she may know about the 15-defendant EDA civil suit and related criminal charges against multiple defendants surrounding principal defendant and former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald, Pope said the local situation may be more similar to the one Dixon dethroned as the largest U.S. municipal embezzlement scandal, a $48 million dollar one in Washington, D.C.

That similarity is based on the fact that the evidence assembled indicated that Dixon Comptroller, or Chief Financial Officer, Crundwell is believed to have acted alone, whereas the D.C. situation involved multiple people.

Kelly R. Pope gives some pre-viewing background to her documentary ‘All The Queen’s Horses’ on a $53.7-million municipal embezzlement in Dixon, Illinois.

Yes, Pope told the local audience, Crundwell’s family members did benefit from her spreading her wealth around, but no hard evidence was produced that any were legally complicit in Crundwell’s crimes. Of course, those charged civilly or criminally here have yet to have their day in court to contest the allegations against them.

If locally McDonald spread the story that her high cash flow was based on an improbable three-year run of luck on the slot machines at Charles Town, West Virginia’s Hollywood Casino, Crundwell had a variety of “rumors” floating to cover her family generosity and high-dollar quarter horse stable operation. Among those were an inheritance from rich, former boyfriend who passed away years earlier; and high-dollar horse sales from her high-profile, 400-quarter and show horse operation that took her around the country.

But nearly $54 million dollars out of a small city of around 16,000 residents’ annual budget for so many years – the question lay heavy on that community as a similar one now does on ours: “How did a high-school educated municipal clerk pull it off?”

Well, Crundwell was an attractive, gregarious, well-though-of local girl the community was proud of, and upon which the city’s mayor and council relied heavily on to conduct Dixon’s financial operations.

“It’s human nature to trust them,” one Dixon resident told Pope’s documentary camera of the local girl making good in an $80,000 a year city position.

The Sunday Matinee crowd awaits the film’s introduction and showing

Another question asked was how could so much money be removed from a small city budget over such a long period of time without somebody noticing?

Well, someone did notice – a municipal financial official from a neighboring city, Sterling, Illinois. In fact, the Sterling official wrote to Dixon officials citing the similarity in the two cities’ annual operational budgets, citing a RED FLAG in that while Sterling carried a surplus, Dixon carried a “huge” deficit of around $20 million. However, that warning was filed away without action, as the rationale that Dixon was doing a lot of borrowing at the time was self-generated to explain the difference.

Another factor in how it happened to Dixon was cited as its “Commissioner” form of government, which essentially does not carry multiple administrative and financial staff positions. Dixon’s staff was small with no direct oversight of Crundwell’s activities, other than by a poorly-paid, part-time elected council and mayor.

“Rita was the checks and balances,” one person told the documentary camera.

So, when she added seven bank accounts to facilitate her fraud to the City’s six legitimate bank accounts, no one noticed – for a long time.

Dixon, Illinois City Comptroller Rita Crundwell supported a 400-horse stable of quarter and show horses with a significant portion of the nearly $54 million she embezzled over a 20-year period, hence the film’s title.

However in November of 2012, after finally-alerted Dixon municipal officials notified the FBI of possible financial crimes in their midst, Crundwell eventually pled guilty to federal money laundering and wire fraud charges. The 19-year-and-7-month sentence handed down was above guidelines and near the maximum 20 years she faced. Crundwell is scheduled for release from prison on March 5, 2030.

And much as locally here, as McDonald’s alleged embezzlement schemes were uncovered essentially by accident when Front Royal Finance Director B. J. Wilson was asked by his elected council to find a way to make a half-million dollar, interest-free internal loan to fund a new town police radio system; in Dixon a Crundwell assistant Kathe Swanson uncovered some questionable financial transactions while covering for Crundwell during an absence from the office. It is noted in the film that Crundwell took four months a year off, apparently to take care of her horse operation, and maybe to spend some of her embezzled funds on some additional personal expenses.

Above, a blurry shot of Rita Crundwell, cowboy hat, from a showing of ‘All The Queen’s Horses’ in her auctioned-off home in Dixon; below, ‘We all have one,’ says film director Kelly Richmond Pope of that person all trust without question. In addition to her foray into documentary filmmaking, Pope is a professor of accounting at DePaul University. Her film is available on various streaming TV-movie sites.

And while it took a while to get to it in the film, once uncovered and successfully prosecuted, public outrage targeting Dixon’s elected officials saw a total turnover of the city’s elected leadership.

Towards the end of her Q & A with the audience, which included Mark Egger’s recounting of his daughter’s experience of outright vilification at times in trying to raise questions about EDA operations and projects while on the Front Royal Town Council in 2016-17, and other audience assertions of municipal and even law enforcement cover ups, filmmaker Pope told the crowd she might well return to explore the local dynamics of this community’s unfolding experience.

One interested observer of Sunday’s matinee was New York Times reporter Abbey Ellin, who apparently hooked up with Pope at the airport on the way into Front Royal. In fact, as the Q & A was breaking up around 5 p.m. from the 2 p.m. showing, Ellin was being maneuvered toward the airport return trip with the filmmaker by local transport service operator Michael Williams to assure Pope did not miss her return flight out of the D.C. area.

So, as the involved numbers of sought assets for recovery climb, along with the number of both civil and criminal defendants, along with conspiracy theories about how it happened, it seems national interest in Front Royal and Warren County’s slice of what Pope described as a $3.7-trillion-dollar national embezzlement problem is rising as well.

Looks like us local first chroniclers of our town and county histories better get cracking on those side projects …

Share the News:
Continue Reading

Crime/Court

Removal Petition hearing on County Board continued to December

Published

on

An as-yet undetermined date in December was set for the continuation of a hearing on the citizen-launched Removal Petition against the five sitting Warren County Supervisors. The hearing was on the Warren County Circuit Court docket Friday morning, November 22, at 8:45 a.m.

Judge Bruce D. Albertson heard motions and the reasoning for the continuance by video hook up from his home courtroom base in Harrisonburg. When a suggested date of December 6, when Albertson will be in court on EDA-related criminal hearings, did not work for one of the two defense attorneys, James Cornwell, the judge said he would like a specific December date agree upon within two working days.

As he had the previous day during hearings on EDA-related criminal charges, Commonwealth’s Attorney Bryan Layton notified the court of his intention to remove himself from EDA prosecutions with a newly-elected Commonwealth’s Attorney John Bell slated to take over at the turn of the year, prior to any EDA-related trials getting under way. And with Bell planning to recuse himself from EDA prosecutions to assure there is not even a perception of possible conflicts of interest that might impact future EDA legal proceedings, Layton suggested that despite his desire to continue with the EDA cases, that they, like yesterday’s criminal cases, be turned over to the office of Rockingham County Commonwealth’s Attorney Marsha Garst.

Rockingham Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Michael Parker appears poised to take on the bulk of cases Layton has been working, along with the EDA Special Grand Jury investigation. Layton again noted Parker needed time to get up to speed on the background of the various cases he is taking on.

See you again in December – primary motions arguments on the Removal Petition targeting the WC Board of Supervisors will be heard on an as-yet determined December date following Friday’s continuation. Royal Examiner File Photos/Roger Bianchini

Defense co-counsel Cornwell and Acting County Attorney Jason Ham had no objection, by remote phone hook up, to Layton’s call for the continuance of the Removal Petition hearing.

During Friday’s hearing it was reported that notice of certification of the required amount of signatures had been received from Warren County Voter Registrar Carol Tobin. That certification, which came despite the loss of 107 signatures that could not be verified as registered county voters, allows the Petition for Removal from office of the supervisors to proceed.

The filing required a minimum of 10% of the number of registered county voters who voted in the last election. That number is cited as 6,958, requiring a total of 696 countywide. Even with the 107 lost signatures, the petition contained 835 verified signatures.

The petition was filed October 18 as part of the grass roots public reaction to the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority financial scandal that has led to a number of dueling civil litigations surrounding the EDA’s attempt to recover $21.3 million dollars in allegedly misdirected or embezzled EDA assets. The EDA civil litigation alone has already cost the County and its taxpayers $1.31 million dollars in legal and investigative financial audit costs.

And with a $750,000 cap on attorney’s fees payable to the Sands Anderson law firm of Richmond removed by the supervisors on Tuesday, that number is anticipated to keep climbing over the coming year or more as the civil cases proceed and what is anticipated to eventually be in the neighborhood of a million pages of related documentation is submitted for those civil, and related criminal, cases.

The Removal Petition contends the County’s elected Supervisors were directly negligent and in dereliction of their official duties in allowing the alleged EDA financial embezzlements to develop under their indirect stewardship since at least 2014-15.

After the Front Royal Town Council voluntarily abdicated certain oversight functions several years ago when the County took over the Town’s operational funding of the EDA, the County Board alone now appoints EDA Board of Director members. It is those appointed members of the quasi-governmental EDA that have direct oversight authority of EDA staff, a defense motions filing in the Removal Petition case states.

Commonwealth’s Attorney Bryan Layton, left, with FBI and VSP during April 16 search of EDA offices. Leaving the office in January, Layton is fazing himself out of EDA cases and Commonwealth’s Attorney-Elect John Bell is recusing from them. So the Rockingham County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office will take over those prosecutions.

The Removal Petition cites the board members’ three misdemeanor criminal indictments on misfeasance and nonfeasance charges filed September 20 as one primary legal basis of the recall. Those charges targeted the supervisors, along with current and former EDA board members, for an absence of due diligent oversight of the actions of former Warren County Economic Development Executive Director Jennifer McDonald in the final four months of 2018.

However, the fact those indictments were dismissed by Judge Albertson as non-criminal by Virginia Statutes, even dating to English Common Law under which they were filed, may complicate the petitioners’ argument.

Just two days before Friday’s hearing defense co-counsel Cornwell and Ham filed a Demurer with the court seeking dismissal of the petition. Grounds cited for dismissal include a lack of jurisdiction for the filing; a lack of legal authority for the supervisors to act directly to limit the activities of EDA staff; and “Legislative Immunity” precluding the Judicial Branch of State Government from a “quasi-criminal” investigation of a Legislative body such as the county supervisors regarding how they conduct their business.

It would appear that while the timing of the defense Demurrer filing might have precluded proceeding with arguments Friday, a December hearing date could see arguments on these crucial legal points of contention.

On October 28, Judge Albertson denied a petitioner’s motion to immediately remove the five sitting supervisors prior to any arguments on the legal dynamics of the Removal Petition.

Warren County’s incumbent supervisors continue to await a decision on a citizen-filed Removal Petition – for three of them it will soon be a moot point.

Targeted by the Removal Petition are Daniel J. Murray of the North River District, Thomas H. Sayre of the Shenandoah District, Tony F. Carter of the Happy Creek District, Archie A. Fox of the Fork District, and Linda Glavis of the South River District. As of the turn of the year in the wake of Murray and Glavis’s retirements and Sayre’s defeat at the polls in November, only Carter and Fox will be impacted by the Removal action.

See Related Stories:

County Supervisors removal petition filed with 941 signatures

County officials, EDA board members have good day in court – will it last?

Share the News:
Continue Reading

Crime/Court

Delays in EDA criminal cases due to transfer of prosecutorial authority

Published

on

On Thursday, November 21, four Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority criminal defendants saw preliminary hearings, and in one case trial dates over the objection of Donald Poe’s attorneys, continued to future dates. Those defendants were former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald, her husband Samuel North, former EDA small business client B&G Goods principal William Lambert, and former EDA solar panel contractor Earth Right Energy principal Donald Poe.

A date of January 10, at 1 p.m. was set for motions hearings and possible trial date settings on joint defense-commonwealth motions in McDonald’s, North’s and Lambert’s cases. Only Poe co-counsel William Ashwell objected to the delays, noting his client was in a somewhat different position that the other defendants.

That position is trial dates on all four charges against Poe already set for December 6 (perjury to the grand jury) and three financial charges of obtaining or conspiring to obtain money by false pretenses set for a three-day trial January 22 to 24.

Ashwell told the court his client was “pretty anxious to clear his name” adding, “I think we need to get things going now.”

Noting the defendant’s objection, Judge Bruce D. Albertson included the Poe cases in the continuations granted Thursday to the 1 p.m. docket on January 10.

The Warren County Courthouse will see both new and familiar faces in coming hearings and trials related to the EDA financial scandal. Royal Examiner File Photos/Roger Bianchini

As explained by Commonwealth’s Attorney Bryan Layton, primary among the reasons for those continuations is the naming of a new prosecutor’s office to handle the EDA-related criminal prosecutions. Layton has been leading the Special Grand Jury empaneled to investigate potential criminality tied to the $21.3 million dollar EDA civil litigation since former Warren County Commonwealth’s Attorney Brian Madden left the office to assume a judicial appointment in Frederick County.

However, with a newly-elected Commonwealth’s Attorney, John Bell who was hand to observe Tuesday’s proceedings, poised to take office at the turn of the year Layton notified the court he was withdrawing as special prosecutor for the EDA grand jury investigation into EDA affairs.

And Bell told the court due to peripheral past legal representations or political affiliations, he would recuse himself from EDA prosecutions to “avoid any appearance of impropriety so the people of Warren County are assured there are no thumbs on the scales (of justice).”

Chief 26th Judicial District Circuit Court Judge Albertson, himself a replacement after all Warren County Circuit Court judges recused or left for higher court appointments prior to pending recusals, accepted Layton’s recommendation of the Rockingham County Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office to take over the EDA criminal prosecutions.

Rockingham Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Michael J. Parker was present to represent the office of Rockingham Commonwealth’s Attorney Marsha Garst. Courtroom discussion indicated Parker would take the point for Rockingham’s work on the EDA cases.

Related to various motions hearings scheduled for Thursday afternoon’s 4 p.m. docket, Layton noted the “voluminous material” related to the EDA cases and asked the court for “an extra period of time to get Mr. Parker up to speed.”

That voluminous material was referred to as a “terabyte” of digitized information ordered by the Virginia Supreme Court to handle what has been referred to in previous hearings as 700,000 to one million pages of related documentation.

Despite his counsel’s objection and Poe not joining the other defendants in waiving their rights to speedy trials, Earth Right Energy principal Poe will join the other three defendants in court for hearings on January 10 on the 1 p.m. docket.

Donald F. Poe outside the courthouse following an earlier hearing.

Judge Albertson continued Poe’s scheduled jury trial on his perjury charge from December 6, to the previously scheduled first day of an anticipated three-day trial on the EDA financial fraud charges, January 22, with the following dates available were that trial to go beyond one day.

Albertson also set a hearing for the aborted December 6 perjury trial date to set a new date for Poe’s now in limbo financial charges trial.

Albertson also granted North attorney Frank Reynold’s request for a Bill of Particulars on the three charges his client faces related to actions cited as occurring “on or about August 1, 2015” to be responded to by January 8, two days prior to the newly scheduled motions hearing date.

Reynolds, like Lambert attorney Phil Griffin, told the court he and his client did not want to have to navigate the perhaps digital planetary-sized “terabyte” of EDA financial fraud-related documentation for information on a limited, yet thus-far unspecified accusation against his client.

McDonald is facing 32 felony financial fraud indictments; her husband North three; Lambert three, and Poe four, including the perjury charge, related to information contained in the $500,000 County-EDA contracted Cherry Bekaert financial fraud investigation of EDA financial affairs during McDonald’s executive directorship of the EDA.

Jennifer McDonald on the job, here circa 2016 with then EDA Board Chair Patty Wines, during her decade long tenure as chief executive of the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority.

Share the News:
Continue Reading

EDA in Focus

EDA authorizes litigation to recover Workforce Housing parcel or its value

Published

on

Following an hour-and-a-half Closed Session Friday morning, November 15, the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority Board of Directors unanimously approved a motion to authorize litigation to sue Cornerstone, LP, LLC, its principals and affiliates to recover “EDA land improperly conveyed to Cornerstone without EDA authority or collect the full value of the conveyance and such other damages to the EDA”.

The land in question is the 3.5-acre Workforce Housing parcel sold to the Cornerstone group on November 28, 2018, at a price of $10 dollars.

After initially receiving the parcel as a $10 gift from the aunt and uncle of former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald, local realtors Mr. and Mrs. Walter Campbell, the EDA Board agreed to purchase the property for $445,000 in April 2017 after missing a previously undisclosed developmental deadline that would have enabled the Campbells to pursue tax credit compensation for the gift of the land to a public purpose.

It is believed that Cornerstone, LP, LLC, is a branch of regional developer the Aikens Group. Aikens was cited by former EDA Executive Director McDonald as a behind-the-scenes, private sector player in the Workforce Housing financial riddle from its inception in late 2014.

The property in question lies at the end of Royal Lane, stretching to the right toward Remount Road. Royal Examiner File Photos by Roger Bianchini. Video by Mark Williams.

When contacted in April about the transaction Gray Blanton, who signed the Deed of Sale to Cornerstone for the EDA as board chairman in November 2018, told Royal Examiner he had only seen the final signature page of the four page document. Blanton seconded the motion made by Greg Harold to authorize the litigation.

Local real estate attorney Joe Silek Jr., who represented the EDA due to the recusal of then EDA Attorney Dan Whitten for a potential conflict of interest as EDA and County Attorneys, told us in April there was no price on the deed of sale when it was forwarded from the EDA to the Winchester law firm of McCarthy-Akers for completion.

Asked why the EDA would agree to take a $444,990 loss or even a $651,690 if disputed EDA developmental and peripheral purchase costs are included, Silek said, “I don’t think they did,” and referred us to attorney Doug McCarthy of the McCarthy-Akers law firm for further information.

As we first wrote in April, as of publication there has been no response to a phone-message inquiry about the transaction from the attorneys who represented the buyer in the now legally-disputed sale.

Of the transaction, the initial March 26 filing of the EDA civil suit says, “When interviewed on December 6, 2018, Defendant McDonald continued to maintain that the Aikens Group would refund the Warren EDA the full cost of the Royal Lane Property and any improvements, when she knew said property had been conveyed by the Warren EDA on November 28, 2018 to Cornerstone for consideration of $10.”

That transaction came as scrutiny of McDonald’s executive leadership of the EDA was intensifying as the Cherry Bekaert financial fraud investigation progressed. Following several hours of closed session discussion of the Cherry Bekaert findings and her job performance on December 14, 2018, McDonald had her contract, check-writing and administrative authority over EDA bank accounts stripped by the EDA board.

Facing a second closed session on the same topics a week later, McDonald submitted her resignation by email, and according to the EDA lawsuit attempted to cap her financial liability to the EDA at $2.7 million dollars.

Then EDA Board Chairman Greg Drescher and Executive Director Jennifer McDonald found themselves facing hard questions from two supervisors, Fox and Sayre, about how the Workforce Housing Project had evolved during a June 2017 joint EDA-County Board work session.

As previously reported, in initial defense motion filings McDonald’s now former civil case attorney Lee Berlik claimed his client was being vilified and scapegoated for past bad decisions of the EDA Board of Directors.

However, the EDA civil action alleges a lengthy pattern of gaps, conflicting or misinformation from McDonald to the EDA board regarding what is termed the “Royal Lane Property Embezzlements” among other allegations of financial fraud that have led, not only to civil liability claims against the former EDA chief executive, but also 32 felony financial fraud indictments from a Special Grand Jury empanelled to investigate potential illegalities tied to the EDA civil suit.

And now it seems the Aikens Group finds itself on the perimeter of that EDA civil litigation regarding what has been a twisting and often inexplicable, five-year saga surrounding the attempted transfer of the Campbells’ 3.5-acre Royal Lane parcel to a public use.

See if you can make any sense of this – on May 19, 2017, the EDA released this 383-page explanation of the Workforce Housing Project after Councilwoman Bébhinn Egger sought answers on the project’s shifting financial dynamics.

Also unanimously approved after the Closed Session, on a motion by Jorie Martin, seconded by Blanton, was authorization for Executive Director Doug Parsons to forward Adjusted Journal Entries developed by retired County Finance Director Carolyn Stimmel and Hottel & Willis’s Heather Tweedy to the Yount-Hyde-Barbour accounting firm for use in development of the EDA’s 2018 Audit Report; and on a motion by Harold, seconded by Tom Patteson, acceptance of the Commission Agreement for the sale of the EDA-owned McKay Springs property, subject to receiving the Agency Agreement within 14 days.

Open Session Business
The pending McKay Springs property transfer and a County Planning Commission Public Hearing two days earlier on Wednesday, November 13, were topics discussed During County Administrator Doug Stanley’s Report during the open portion of Friday’s meeting.

That open portion of the meeting was eventful as the full EDA Board received monthly reports and six-month Strategic Priorities Lists from the EDA’s Asset Management, Finance, Communications and Executive Committees; as well as the monthly report on County business; and Executive Director Parsons’ Strategic Priorities List.

Major topics included the status of the Afton Inn as far as the developer resuming work on site; the status of removal of the Earth Right Energy-installed solar panels on the EDA’s Kendrick Lane Office Complex to allow roof repairs to facilitate empty space rental marketing; and the status of resolving payment issues with the Town of Front Royal on the new Police Station across Kendrick Lane.

As part of the Asset Committee Report Jorie Martin told the board that there had been three replies on the solar panel RFP, with one of particular interest. That one was from a non-profit with the expertise to remove the panels, and then market them for resale at no cost to the EDA. Martin added that it was possible the EDA could even see some revenue from the arrangement.

The EDA is abandoning the idea pushed by McDonald to provide sustainable solar power to the EDA Office Complex, ostensibly as an incentive to help attract a high-end commercial client to the county, supposedly Amazon according to one former board member. Issues include a lack of individual unit metering equipment and the fact the Town has sole authority to charge for the provision of power inside the town limits.

Removal of the EDA Kendrick Ln. solar panels will not be as difficult or costly has first thought. It was discovered the panels are not bolted to the roof, and removal might even turn out to be profitable.

During discussion of the Kendrick Lane roof-solar panel situation it was noted that one positive was that the solar panels were not bolted to the roof in any way, and rather are just sitting on the roof on the panel row bases. Executive Director Parsons pointed out that it had been established that the roof damage did not come from the solar panel installation, but was a consequence of “faulty roof work ages back”.

Also during the Asset Committee Report Harold said the committee “was sad to report that the majority of current bad debt and aging receivables is owed by the Town of Front Royal for their municipal projects”. Primary among those projects is the $8 million to $11 million Town Police Station project financed through the EDA.

Interim Town Manager Matt Tederick was present and in response to a question told the EDA that “the Town is in receipt of the invoice that was most recently sent” regarding the police station and that it would be discussed at a coming council work session.

Tederick also said the Town had received an EDA FOIA request and that the Town Finance Director had scanned relevant material which should be forthcoming shortly. The Interim Town Manager said he had discussed with the Town Attorney setting up a conference call for 3 p.m. Monday to discuss Town-EDA issues.

The Town has filed civil litigation against the EDA to collect “as much as $15 million” in assets it believes were misdirected or lost by the Town during McDonald’s executive leadership of the EDA.
Talking to the press after the EDA went into Closed Session Tederick said he believed the referenced FRPD project invoice was for $8.7 million dollars, with assessed interest calculated at 3.5%, which he added, “differs from the agreed-upon terms the Town was originally offered by the EDA.”

How are we paying for this thing? – Someone may have been thinking at the Nov. 1, 2017 groundbreaking for FRPD headquarters, or not …

Tederick confirmed the Town’s perceived agreed-upon interest rate on the FRPD project involved New Market Tax Credit Program (NMTC) financing, which is believed to calculate at about 1% over the life of the bond payback.

“So it’s all coming to a head and we’re trying to figure out how to best move forward,” Tederick said. Asked if the Town and EDA were trying to make the financing dispute less adversarial, the Interim Mayor replied, “Make it less adversarial, of course. But we have to agree upon what we can agree upon. And what we can’t agree upon we have a judge to determine what the right numbers are.”

As Royal Examiner has previously reported, a council majority decided to gamble on a best case New Market Tax Credit scenario brought forward by McDonald during consideration of a bond issue on a number of Town or County Capital Improvement Projects. That NMTC Program would have offered a seven to nine-year interest free payback term over an estimated 20 or 30 year payback.

However, that gamble was made over the advice of then-Town Manager Joe Waltz, Town Finance Director B. J. Wilson and NMTC Regional Administrator People Inc. representative Brian Phipps.

Due to uncertainties with the NMTC Program’s future, as well as municipal competition for limited regional funds controlled by People Inc, Waltz, Wilson and Phipps all recommended to Council that a bank-offered, locked-in 2.65% interest rate over a 30-year payback term was the best bet because its favorable interest rate was locked in and the money was not subject to being lost in a municipal competition for funding.

People Inc. NMTC Program Administrator Brian Phipps tells Town Council that private-sector 2.65% interest locked in for 30 years sounds pretty good, without the gambling aspect of vying for the government funds involved. But a council majority decided to go the ‘casino’ option on a project that didn’t even qualify for the tax credit program.

It was also later established that the FRPD headquarters project didn’t qualify for the NMTC program because it was a capital improvement project that did not create jobs, a primary goal of that federal and state overseen program.

“Here comes the judge,” as comedian Flip Wilson used to say.

Watch the entire open session EDA Special Meeting, with the above-referenced discussions and reports, among others of high interest in the exclusive Royal Examiner video:

Share the News:
Continue Reading

EDA in Focus

Earth Right Energy countersues EDA for $20 million in damages

Published

on

According to a November 7 filing with the Warren County Circuit Court Clerk’s Office Earth Right Energy (ERE) has joined in countersuing the Front Royal-Warren County Economic Development Authority for damages it claims the company incurred as a result of cancellation of a contract it asserts was validly put in place during the tenure of former EDA Executive Director Jennifer McDonald.

As previously reported attorneys for EDA civil defendant ITFederal and its principal Truc “Curt” Tran filed $13.5 million countersuit against the EDA on October 9. The EDA is seeking recovery of as much as $12 million in EDA assets from Tran and ITFederal.

Along with Tran and his company, Earth Right Energy and its principal Donald Poe and Managing Partner Justin Appleton were among defendants named in both the original EDA civil litigation of March 26 and the Amended EDA civil complaint of October 4.

The EDA is seeking recovery of a total of $21.3 million from what has climbed to a total of 15 defendants alleged to have been involved in, or beneficiaries of fraudulent financial schemes surrounding the former EDA executive director. McDonald is now facing 32 criminal felony financial fraud indictments related to the EDA civil litigation and the County and EDA-contracted Cherry Bekaert public accounting investigation of EDA finances at the base of that litigation. Poe is scheduled for a three-day trial January 22 to 24 on three criminal felony charges – two “obtaining money by false pretenses” and one “perjury” – related to the EDA litigation.

Earth Right Energy principal Donald Poe outside the Warren County Courthouse following a recent hearing – Royal Examiner File Photos/Roger Bianchini

The Amended EDA complaint states that ERE, Poe, Appleton “and others, entered into multiple agreements with Defendant McDonald purporting to oblige the Warren EDA to pay for solar installation at Warren County Public Schools, even though Defendant Poe knew, that the Warren County Public Schools did not approve of any agreement to purchase and install solar power equipment from Defendant Earth Right Energy for any Warren County Public School properties.”

While that $27.3 million dollar solar contract for the schools was never acted upon the EDA civil suit cites payments authorized by McDonald to ERE “without permission or authorization by the Warren EDA” totaling $1,279,888. The EDA litigation notes an August 27, 2018 reimbursement payment made by ERE at McDonald’s request to the EDA of $334,851, reducing the total sought for recovery from ERE to “at least $945,037”.

However in its countersuit, ERE attorneys allege that the public schools solar contract was legitimately negotiated and confirmed at some levels in a mid-August 2018 phone conversation witnessed by “Earth Right’s representatives and Mrs. Michelle Henry”. Henry is also facing criminal charges and civil liability in the EDA case.

“Earth Right extended a formal offer in August in the form of an unexecuted written agreement memorializing the terms of the offer.

“In mid-August (2018), representatives from Earth Right, met in person with Jennifer McDonald, then the Executive Director of the EDA, to inquire as to (1) whether the EDA had approved and agreed to the terms in the Offer, and (2) whether the Warren County School Board was amenable to being a third-party beneficiary of the agreement and would endeavor to aid Earth Right and EDA in fulfilling the terms of therein.

“Jennifer McDonald, as Executive Director and in the presence of Earth Right’s representatives and Ms. Michelle Henry, telephoned Mr. Greg Drescher, then Chairman of both the EDA and the Warren County Public School Board (writer’s note: actually Drescher was superintendent of schools, not a member of the School Board).

Jennifer McDonald and Greg Drescher during signing of authorization of the purchase of the Workforce Housing property once believed to be a $10 ‘gift’ at a cost of $445,000. That expenditure has also come under question in the EDA civil litigation.

“Mr. Drescher confirmed to Jennifer McDonald during the above-mentioned telephone conversation that the EDA had approved the agreement and that the Warren County School Board would endeavor to take whatever reasonable steps the EDA and Earth Right needed to have solar installed on the Roofs of the schools subject to the agreement,” four consecutive paragraphs of the ERE counterclaim contend, adding that “on September 4, 2018, Jennifer McDonald … on behalf of the EDA, formally executed the agreement with Earth Right …”

Of the agreement the ERE Counterclaim states, “The intent of EDA and Earth Right though not written was to secure third-party grants and other sources of funding such that the EDA either did not have to make any capital outlays required by the School Solar Agreements or such that the EDA would be recoop all monies paid (grammar in context).”

As a consequence of what it claims was a legitimately enacted contract, Earth Right Energy asks the court for a judgment of $20 million in damages; court costs; “and any other relief deemed just and appropriate.”

And so the legal wheels continue to spin around EDA civil and criminal litigation now estimated to have generated between 700,000 and a million pages of related materials being accumulated by the Warren County Circuit Court Clerk’s Office.

Good thing there is such a thing as ‘digitization’ of paperwork in the 21st Century or court files would be spilling out of all the Courthouse windows.

Share the News:
Continue Reading