Missourinet

Your source for Missouri News and Sports

You are here: Home / Archives for Moberly

Kansas City area highway shooting suspect identified, charged

By

The Jackson County Prosecutor has announced 18 felony charges stemming from 9 shooting incidents on highways in the Kansas City area against 27-year-old Mohammed Pedro Whitaker of Grandview.

Mohammed Pedro Whitaker (photo courtesy, KSSZ in Columbia)

Mohammed Pedro Whitaker (photo courtesy, KSSZ in Columbia)

Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker has filed 9 counts of shooting into a vehicle and 9 counts of armed criminal action against Whitaker. Whitaker could face life in prison if convicted.

Peters Baker says more charges could be filed later.

Three people sustained non-life-threatening wounds in the shootings that began March 8. Authorities believe 12 shootings are related, mostly in Kansas City but other happened in Lee’s Summit, Blue Springs and Leawood.

Whitaker is a 2004 graduate of Moberly Senior High School and a former Columbia resident.

 

KWIX in Moberly and KSSZ in Columbia contributed to this report

See more: Law enforcement, elected officials & a former classmate react to arrest and charges of suspected KC-area highway shooter

 

Attorney General’s Office: Solution for grant loss to domestic violence shelters could come next week

By

See the updated story from Friday afternoon

The Attorney General’s Office says it expects the Missouri Housing Development Commission staff to have a proposed solution next week for the domestic violence shelters it turned down for a grant last month.

A shelter for homeless veterans in Columbia revealed on Thursday it had also been denied for that grant.

At least 15 domestic violence shelters were told their applications for the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) had been rejected but were not told why. Missourinet has been told that the Commission has not voted on the final decisions on how the grants will be awarded this cycle.

The members of the commission include Governor Jay Nixon, Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder, State Treasurer Clint Zweifel and Attorney General Chris Koster. When Missourinet reached out to their offices about the situation, Koster Press Secretary Nanci Gonder issued this statement:

“Funding is critical for our state’s domestic violence shelters. After learning of the cuts in emergency shelter grants, we discussed the issue with MHDC staff and expect they will present a proposal at next week’s meeting.”

The Commission will meet at the Stoney Creek Inn in Columbia Friday, March 14 at 9:00.

After learning about those domestic violence shelters, a shelter for homeless veterans in Columbia reached out to Missourinet to say it had also lost the ESG.

Executive Director of Welcome Home, Inc, Aneisa Sherrill-Mattox, says Welcome Home Inc. has been approved for about $18,000 each of the 8 years she has worked there. Last year the shelter was approved for $50,000.

Like the domestic violence shelters, she has not been told why Welcome Home’s ESG application was turned down and instead was told the shelter is on a list to receive its evaluations.

Sherrill-Mattox says the shelter has already cut two caseworker positions and is cutting programs. She says much of what Welcome Home used that grant for was to provide emergency motel stays for homeless female veterans and veterans with small children.

“Female veterans are one of the fastest-growing parts of the homeless population and there are virtually no services available to them,” says Sherrill-Mattox. “Our shelter, by virtue of how small we are, we couldn’t provide safe housing for them in the shelter so we had relied on the ESG for them to be placed into a motel until a more permanent housing solution could be identified.”

The Nixon Administration has also told Representative Chris Kelly (D-Columbia) and other legislators it is looking for a funding source for those shelters, perhaps using money from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

The Office of Administration told Missourinet Wednesday the Administration’s office of Budget & Planning and the Department of Social Services are looking at multiple possible solutions, but have not nailed down any mechanics.

Earlier stories:

Domestic Violence Shelters still waiting for replacement of lost grant

Nixon Administration moves swiftly to back domestic violence shelters after loss of grant

Domestic Violence Shelters still waiting for replacement of lost grant

By

Workers at 15 domestic violence shelters are anxiously awaiting word on whether funding will be available for those shelters after learning that they had been turned down for a grant.

The Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) is in its second year of being administered by the Missouri Housing Development Commission. The Commission’s staff rejected the applications of those 15 shelters, most of them in rural parts of the state, and has not yet released explanations of the rejections. The Commission has not yet voted on the awarding of those grants.

The shelters whose applications had been rejected are in Cape Girardeau, Clinton, Harrisonville, Lebanon, Moberly, Bolivar, Doniphan, Sedalia, Sikeston, Lexington, Nevada, Parkville, Portageville and one each in St. Louis and Kansas City.   A shelter in Springfield had an application for shelter funds rejected, but was approved for other ESG grant money.

When the administration of Governor Jay Nixon (D) was informed of the situation by state lawmakers whose districts included those shelters, it began looking for ways to make sure they would be funded. The Office of Administration says several options are being considered but a mechanism hasn’t been decided on.

That’s encouraging news to Kelly Pedigo, Co-Director at Safe Passage in Moberly, but it’s still a long way from a solution.

“This is far from over,” she tells Missourinet.

The ESG reimburses recipients for expenses already paid. The grant coverage cycle begins April 1. Pedigo says her shelter can’t go very long paying bills without confidence that money is coming for that reimbursement.

“Locating replacement funding is a have-to thing. There’s nowhere else in (our) budget to cut,” says Pedigo.

Safe Passage applied for more than $28,000 dollars, but like most shelters, didn’t anticipate receiving the full amount. Getting cut completely was a shock.

“When your entire annual budget is around $250,000 and you just took out $20,000 of your essential expenses, that hits pretty hard,” says Pedigo.

She says the loss of that funding at Safe Passage would cause employees to be laid off, but it could also result in the loss of matching federal funds.

“Once you start having to lay people off because you can’t afford the general revenue portion of their salary,” Pedigo says, “then you have to start turning down government funding as well, so it’s a really slippery slope.”

See our earlier story on these shelters’ loss of the ESG

Ann Gosnell with House of Hope, Inc. in Lexington says local fundraising efforts are an option, but can only go so far in rural areas.

“It becomes burdensome on our community, which is very supportive of House of Hope,” says Gosnell. “We have a lot of supporters, but … going to the same people over and over again to ask them for money to help run our program can sometimes put a barrier up between us and our community, and we absolutely don’t want that.”

She says it also puts the shelters at a disadvantage to not yet know why they lost the grant.

“It’s frustrating, then, to go into our community and say, ‘We need your help, but I can’t tell you why our funding was cut. I can’t tell you why other shelters are funded at 100-percent and we’re funded at zero.'”

Both Gosnell and Pedigo hope members of their communities will work to raise attention about the issue.

“Please go to your legislators and ask them what their plan is,” says Gosnell. “Ask what’s going on and ask what the solution is.”

Sale of Mamtek property at Moberly approved

By

The sale of what was to be the site of a sugar refinery in Moberly has been approved by a federal bankruptcy judge.

The Mamtek facility sits empty at the north end of Moberly.

The Mamtek facility sits empty at the north end of Moberly.

The former Mamtek, International property has been bought by Columbia-based MFA Oil, a farmer-owned cooperative with more than 40-thousand members. It includes 33 acres of land and the uncompleted shell of what was to have been an artificial sweetener plant.

The former president and CEO of Mamtek is charged with multiple counts of fraud and theft for stealing money from the 39-million dollars in bond funds borrowed by the City of Moberly to back the plant. Cole remains on house arrest in his home in the State of California.

The investment banker that backed the bonds, Morgan Keegan, and 10 of its employees, have been sued by the state Securities Commissioner for $30-million in restitution, fines and penalties.

Monte Schisler, KWIX, contributed to this report

Former Mamtek CEO arrested and charged with stealing, fraud (COURT DOCUMENTS)

By

The former chairman and CEO of the failed Mamtek sugar refining plant at Moberly, Bruce Cole, is in custody in Orange County, California. This morning, the Attorney General’s Office along with Randolph County Prosecutor Mike Fussellman, filed five charges in Randolph County against him related to the $39 million dollar deal.

Former chairman and CEO of Mamtek, Bruce Cole, was arrested at his home in Dana Point, California this morning.

Those felony charges are: one count of stealing with a punishment of 5 to 15 years in prison and four counts of criminal securities fraud, that each carry up to 10 years imprisonment and up to a $1 million dollar fine. Attorney General Chris Koster would not comment on whether prosecutors would seek the maximum penalties.

See the complaint and the probable cause statement.

The charges allege Cole took at least $700,000 from the $39 million in bond money for personal use. According to the probable cause statement, Cole had an invoice created that appeared to come from “Ramwell Industrial, Inc,” requesting payment of over $4 million for Ramwell’s services, though that company never existed.

The next day, Cole had a Mamtek bookkeeper wire $700,000 to Cole’s wife, Nanette. She then made a mortgage payment of over $243,000 to stop foreclosure proceedings on the Cole’s home in Beverly Hills, California.

Koster says Cole “misrepresented or failed to disclose important facts related to the construction project.” That includes claiming that the sucralose manufacturing process to have been conducted at the Moberly plant would have created no hazardous materials, when in fact it would have.

Attorney General Chris Koster (at the podium) announces the charges against Cole, along with Moberly Mayor Bob Riley (left) and Randolph County Economic Development Director Corey Mehaffey.

The charges filed today also allege that Cole told Moberly that Mamtek had a fully operational sucralose plant in China when it did not, and only four to six months would be needed to build the Moberly facility when Cole believed it would take longer.

Koster says the process begins today to extradite Cole to Missouri to face the charges. Cole is being held on $500,000 bond in Orange County, California.  Koster would not comment on whether additional charges might be filed or whether more people could face charges, but says the investigation is continuing.

Koster says these criminal charges have little to do with any money being recouped from the Mamtek deal, but adds, “I think that the likelihood of financial recuperation coming out of this still remains less than likely. The bankruptcy proceeding will determine that.”

The site of the Mamtek plant and all equipment there is scheduled to be auctioned off at 10:00, October 24.

Barnes: what patent attorney knew might have stopped Mamtek deal (AUDIO)

By

The Chairman of the House Committee studying the failed deal to bring a Mamtek sucralose plant to Moberly says there are many who could have halted that deal before its collapse, but did not.  Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) says the City of Moberly relied on a series of third-party professionals and the Department of Economic Development to back the project and do due diligence on it.

Patent attorney Michael Wise testified by video conference from California at Thursday's hearing.

One person Barnes says could have stopped the project is Michael Wise, a patent attorney for Los Angeles, California-based law firm Perkins Coie. 

Wise testified under subpoena Thursday afternoon before the Committee on Government Oversight and Accountability. He said that he had been to Mamtek’s production facility in Wuyishan City in Fujian Province, China on three occasions: in November 2007, November 2009 and August 2010. The existence and status of that plant has been at question for those investigating the situation.

Wise says on the first visit he observed a production line capable of making 18 tons a year. By the second visit, a larger line had been added that was capable of putting out 60 tons a year. When he returned in August 2010, neither line was in operation and a cooling tower was being added to the larger line.

What those lines were making was less clear.  Wise says the Mamtek executives he worked with said it was sucralose, adding he drank tea they said was sweetened with product made there.  A sample was later sent to his firm in Los Angeles via its Shanghai office.  Wise says he never confirmed sucralose was being made at the site, however.

“I never questioned my client’s (Mamtek) representation to me that they were making sucralose because that’s the nature of the relationship.  I’m a patent attorney.”

It was before his last visit, Wise testified, and before the Moberly deal closed that he learned the plant’s future operation was in question. He explained the area had been put under a protected status he equated to that of a national park in the U.S. “The central government had decided that Wuyishan (City) was a protected area, kind of like Yosemite, and as a result of that they weren’t allowing new factories or new lines to be allowed to produce anything in that area, and I assumed it was because of the national park-like status of that area.”

Representative Jay Barnes (right) is joined Thursday by Senator Jim Lembke, who chairs the Senate version of Barnes' committee.

Barnes says, “If Michael Wise would have told people … the Chinese government has some problems with Mamtek’s operation it’s very likely possible that none of this would have happened.”

Wise noted in his testimony the disclaimer that he offered the City of Moberly in a letter to its attorney Tom Cunningham, making clear that he was working for Mamtek and suggesting that the City should do its own due diligence with its own patent lawyers, independently.

Barnes also points to Standard and Poor’s as an entity that could have delayed or stopped the project if it had evaluated the status of Mamtek’s China operation before giving Moberly’s bonds an A-minus rating. S&P Managing Director Geoffrey Buswick, also under subpoena, said the rating was based on Moberly’s promise to pay off the bonds.

The Chairman is now weighing whether to move on to considering legislation related to the Mamtek situation, or to call at least one more witness: former Mamtek CEO and project point man Bruce Cole.

“The conundrum is: our role as a legislative committee is to figure out what we can do to prevent this from happening in the future. I’m not sure what exactly Bruce Cole adds to that question. Given that we’ve spoken to so many other different fact witnesses, I think we’ve got a general idea of what the facts indeed were.” Barnes says he may call Cole if other committee members, or “Maybe I change my mind and think that maybe he (Cole) has something to say that maybe we need to propose X.”

AUDIO: Listen to the testimony of attorney Michael Wise – 1 hour, 26 minutes

Proposals would slow down Mamtek-like bond arrangements

By

Two measures have been proposed in the House by a member of the committee that has looked at the Mamtek situation that would take some grease off the wheels in future, similar deals.

Representative Chris Kelly (D-Columbia)

Representative Chris Kelly (D-Columbia) says right now when communities want to issue bonds for industrial development, bond advisors & lawyers might advise the city’s credit be used, such as what happened in Moberly with Mamtek. His proposals target such arrangements.

“That is a, I think, kind of a sneaky method to avoid the Missouri Constitution, because what it does is it requires that one city council effectively bind the appropriations of further city councils without a vote of the people, and the Constitution prohibits that.”

The plan regarding communities would require a change to state statute, found in House Bill 1304, while the prevention of such state-backed bond deals requires a constitutional amendment found in House Joint Resolution 58.

Kelly acknowledges his proposal would put communities in Missouri at a disadvantage when competing with those in other states to bring in new industries, because those deals sometimes develop very quickly. Having to put certain elements before a vote of the people will significantly slow the process down. “That’s one of the things that the cities won’t like about this, but if the only thing that my bill does is it makes cities more aware of this problem, I will think that that in-and-of-itself is a good thing.”

On that line of thought, Kelly says his bill would not have to pass to sound an alarm. “I want to raise the consciousness about the danger here.”

Kelly says if his bill had been law when Mamtek was developing, the deal would have been aired better and might not have reached the stage it has. He notes, he is not critical of the people with the City of Moberly. “I am morally convinced that they did not realize that they were binding the credit of the City. The people I find fault with are the bond advisors and the bond lawyers.”

While discussing who was at fault in the Mamtek deal, Kelly says he thinks the state handled it “probably, actually about right. There’s a lot of political motivation to blame (The Department of) Economic Development because the governor’s a Democrat. But I think the Department of Economic Development handled this under (Governor Jay) Nixon the same way that they handled these under (Governor Matt) Blunt and it’s just handy now that this one went south, to try to find a political way to blame Nixon.

Kelly is not saying that DED could not have done better in certain areas involving communication or contributions to due diligence. “At any given time in any operation … you can find ways to make improvements.” He adds, “if there were sins here, they were pretty venial sins.”

Key figure in Mamtek deal expected in front of House Committee

By

His is testimony that has been sought for months, and at last legislators expect to hear it.

Patent attorney Michael Wise is scheduled to testify before the House Committee on Government Oversight and Accountability at its hearing on Thursday. In December, Department of Economic Development representatives told the Committee that it was Wise who in a phone conversation told Moberly officials he had been to a Mamtek production facility in China. Wise was said to have claimed he visited the facility in-person more than once and to have obtained product made there.

The House Committee on Governmental Oversight and Accountability will continue meeting through the 2012 regular session.

Wise’s claims were part of the basis for Moberly officials proceeding with the Mamtek project that has since collapsed and become the subject of multiple investigations.

Chairman, Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) said in December he had already been trying to get Wise before the Committee for over a month. Now, he’s anxious to hear what the man has to say. “‘What did Michael Wise see in China?’ is the big question for next week.”

That could also be one of the last questions the Committee asks before moving on to another phase. “We’ve had a lot of hearings. We’ve heard a lot of testimony. I think we have a pretty good picture of what happened. Next week’s testimony I think completes our picture.

Barnes says after the Thursday hearing, the body might shift focus from investigating the facts of Mamtek to dealing with legislation stemming from those facts. It is for that task that it went from being an “interim” basis to a standing special committee. “We’re going to be assigned bills relating to this topic and so we’re gonna be in existence until the end of session.”

Some such legislation has been filed, while the chairman says he and others are developing more. “Stay tuned,” Barnes suggests.

Read about one bill filed in relation to the Mamtek investigation.

He says he will talk to other Committee members about whether there is anyone else they believe it would be worthwhile to talk to.

Others are expected at the hearing but at least one name has been pulled from that list. On Monday Barnes said he was working to get Moberly attorney Tom Cunningham to testify, but he now says that will not be happening. “(The Committee is) going to have a conversation about what to do about that.”

Another notable absence will be Bruce Cole, who was Mamtek’s Chairman and CEO and announced the deal at Moberly in July of 2010. Barnes says his attempts to contact Cole have been met with no response.

Testimony is expected from financial services company Standard & Poor’s, who gave Moberly’s bonds in the Mamtek deal a high quality rating. Barnes plans to ask them how they arrived at that rating and why the viability of the company did not play into it.

Also expected is Tom Smith who was a site consultant and project manager at the Moberly Mamtek site. Moberly officials testified in December that Smith e-mailed them with pictures of the alleged China plant.

Thursday’s hearing is at 12:30 in the Capital.

See our earlier Mamtek stories.