ORIGINAL Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et al Deposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS STATE OF MISSOURI PAUL GUZZARDO, Plaintiff, vs. GRAND CENTER, INC., et ai, Defendants. No, 0922-CC01036 Deposition of VINCENT SCHOEMEHL taken on behalf of the Plaintiff September 18, 2012 Questions By: MR. PAPA INDEX Page: 5 Reporter: Sara Alice Masuga, CSR, CCR IL CSR No. 084-002993 MO CCR No. 1012(G) MASUGA COURT REPORTING 2033 HIAWATHA AVENUE ST. LOUIS, MO 63143-1215 Page 1 Masuga Court Reporting 314/680-2424
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ORIGINALPaul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et al
Deposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THECITY OF ST. LOUISSTATE OF MISSOURI
PAUL GUZZARDO,
Plaintiff,
vs.
GRAND CENTER, INC., et ai,
Defendants.
No, 0922-CC01036
Deposition of VINCENT SCHOEMEHLtaken on behalf of the Plaintiff
September 18, 2012
Questions By:
MR. PAPA
INDEXPage:
5
Reporter: Sara Alice Masuga, CSR, CCRIL CSR No. 084-002993 MO CCR No. 1012(G)
MASUGA COURT REPORTING2033 HIAWATHA AVENUE
ST. LOUIS, MO 63143-1215
Page 1
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
PAUL GUZZARDO,
Page 2
For Defendants:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THECITY OF ST. LOUISSTATE OF MISSOURI
No. 0922-CCOI036
Callis, Papa, Hale & Szewczyk, PCBy John T. Papa, Esq.1326 Niedringhau5 AvenueP.O. Box 1326Granite City, IL 62040
Stinson Morrison Hecker, LLPBy Ms. Cicely I. Lubben168 N. Meramec Ave.Suite 400St. Louis, MO 63105
Defendants.
Plaintiff,
vs.
GRAND CENTER, INC., et aI,
For Plaintiff:
APPEARANCES:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25,.-..,.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 THE DEPOSITION OF VINCENT SCHOEMEHL was taken
2 on September 18, 2012, between the hours of eight
3 o'clock in the forenoon and six o'clock in the
4 afternoon of that day in the City of St. Louis, State
5 of Missouri, before me, Sara Alice Masuga, Certified
6 Shorthand Reporter and Certified Court Reporter within
7 the States of Illinois and Missouri, in a certain
8 cause now pending in the Circuit Court of the City of
9 St. Louis, Missouri, wherein PAUL GUZZARDO is the
10 Plaintiff and GRAND CENTER, INC., et al are the
11 Defendants, on the part of the Plaintiff, pursuant to
12 commission and notice.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 3
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
1
2
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
EXHIBIT INDEXExhibit: Page:
3 Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 25(Letter from Friedman to Christian dated
4 8/19/03)
5Plaintiff's Exhibit 2 42
6 (E-mail from Guzzardo to Krewson, et a1 dated9/5/03 attaching Letter from Friedman to
15 (Media Box First Quarterly Report dated6130/04 )
16
17 Plaintiff's Exhibit 7 88(E-mail string)
18
19 Plaintiff's Exhibit 8,.,..,..,.,.,.,..,.,.,.,. .95(Memo from Guzzardo and Friedman to Grand
20 Center Board Members dated 3/23/04)
21
22
23
24
25
Page 4
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 VINCENT SCHOEMEHL produced, sworn and
2 examined as a witness on behalf of the Plaintiff
3 testified as follows:
4
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. PAPA:
7
8
9
10
Q.
A.
Q.
State your name, please, sir.
Vincent Schoernehl, Jr.
And what location are we giving your
11 deposition today, sir?
12 A. The offices of Grand Center, Incorporated,
13 3526 Washington, Second Floor, 63103.
14 Q. All right. What relationship do you have
15 to Grand Center, sir.
16 A. I'm the president and chief executive
17 officer.
18 Q. If you would be kind enough, give me some
19 background information about the Grand Center, how it
20 was established, what relationship you had with it
21 since that time, if any.
22 A. It -- The organization began in 1981 as an
23 urban redevelopment corporation called City Center
24 Redevelopment Corporation, principal ownership being
25 St. Louis University, the Scottish Rite, the Urban
Page 5
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 League, the Third Baptist Church, and I forget a
2 couple of other not-for-profit institutions. Their
3 The Board included Leon Strauss, who was really sort
4 of responsible for the real estate development in the
5 neighborhood. After the '86 Tax Act took away
6 historic tax credits, the Board of CeRC, City Center
7 Redevelopment Corporation, determined that they needed
8 to form a not-for-profit corporation because they
9 would need some not -- not-for-profit contributions in
10 order to make up the delta that had gone away because
11 of the loss of the Federal tax credits and, so, an
12 organization called The New Performing Arts Center was
13 organized. It was called TNPAC. They found that to
14 be a rather difficult name to work with and, 501 they
15 changed the name to Grand Center, Incorporated and
16 that was about 1987 or 1988. Richard Gaddes was the
17 first president, Ann Ruwitch was the second president,
18 and I came to work here in April of 2001.
19 Q. While you served as mayor, did you have
20 dealings with either Grand Center or its predecessor
21 organizations?
22
23
A.
Q.
Yes.
How 15 it that you began working here in
24 April of 2001?
25 A. Father Biondi suggested that I -- There
Page 6
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
was an opening and they were doing a search and Father
Biondi suggested that I submit my resume -- my resume.
Q. Now, in '87-'88 when Grand Center was
first identified as that entity, what were its mission
or goals?
A. In '87-'88?
Q. Yes.
A. Pretty consistent with what had been goals
of ceRe because ceRe became -- was purchased by Grand
Center, Inc. for $10 plus their debt. So, Grand
Center, Inc. as a not-for-profit is -- is a urban
redevelopment corporation and its subsidiaries, CeRe
and Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation, both
353 corporations, and in our capacity, as the TIF
developer for about a 30D-acre TIF district that was
established in I think 2003, so our mission is to
revitalize this neighborhood with the performing arts
as the organizing theme of the redevelopment and
really to establish it as a national tourist
destination, cultural tourist destination.
Q. You mentioned that Grand Center became the
TIF developer in 2003. How did that come about?
A. We organized a TIF program that involved,
you know, doing a study of the neighborhood, a
financial analysis, the whole -- the whole procedure
Page 7
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 that you go through to establish a TIF district. We
2 have to go through the TIF Commission in the City and
3 then then to the Board of Aldermen and it took us
4 probably a year or so to get that established.
5 Q. Prior to becoming the TIF developer, how
6 was Grand Center funded? What did it use for funds to
7 forward its mers- -- its mission?
8 A. Part of its original funding involved the
9 issuance of several million dollars -- I forget the
10 exact number, but it would be in the neighborhood of,
11 you know, 3 to 6 million dollars of debentures were
12 issued by ceRe. And when Grand Center, Inc. -- And
13 those were purchased by civic progress companies.
14 When Grand Center, Inc. was formed as a
15 not-far-profit, they forgave that debt and took the
16 charitable deduction associated therewith and most of
17 that -- most of that money had been used for the
18 purchase of land for parking lots and other real
19 estate, so there -- there has been a continuous stream
20 of income from parking lots and small real estate, a
21 diminishing amount of -- of our overall budget,
22 however, because as we've built around here, we've
23 given up some of that land. And then we raise about
24 approximately 1.5 million a year from char- -- from --
25 in charitable contributions.
Page 8
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guuardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
Q.
A.
How long has that been the case?
Pretty much as long as I've been here.
3 There have been years when we've done much more than
4 that if we were doing capital campaign, but it's, you
5 know / 1 1.2 to 1.5 million a year is pretty
6 consistent.
7 Q. Are there particular fundraising
8 activities that have traditionally been held by the --
-- organization to raise the money?
9
10
11
12
13
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Oh-huh.
Yes, we --
What are some of those?
Well, we put on festivals. For example,
14 First Night St. Louis is a big New Year's Eve
15 alcohol-free New Year's Eve arts festival and we
16 raise, you know, several hundred thousand dollars to
17 put that on. We have an annual gala that is held
18 every year and we'll raise money through the gala.
19 And then we have Board members who contribute. But
20 we're -- you know, it's a -- it's a big part of the
21 job is raising money to support the organization.
22 Q. Now, back in 2003 whenever you became the
23 or whenever the organization became the TIF developer
24 for this area in the city, tell me about that. How
25 did that corne about? Who advanced the idea that Grand
Page 9
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Center would be the appropriate TIF developer for this
2 region and
3 A. Well, the -- the board and -- and -- and I
4 approached the City with the idea. We include in --
5 in this TIF District the St. Louis University campus
6 and -- and a component of land that goes in one sort
7 of very narrow neck up all the way to Page Avenue, but
8 the -- the experience that led us to that was that
9 what we found was that as we succeeded in creating a
10 development, what we did is we simply raised the land
11 values next to it and, so, the next project just
12 needed more subsidy, so you had to go out and raise
13 more money to do the next project. I used the
14 metaphor at the time that this was a popcorn machine
15 without a lid. You know, The Pulitzer Foundation for
16 the Arts would get established and all the land values
17 around there went up and there was no means of
18 capturing that value to help drive the neighborhood in
19 a -- in a more organized way and, so, that was the
20 thinking was that if we were out in the community
21 asking people to give us money to drive this
22 development, we should be figuring out how we capture
23 that up -- uptick in value that we're creating so that
24 we can re- recycle it into -- into the
25 neighborhood.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 10
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. And had you done some studies you found
2 that the market forces alone wouldn't take care of
3 that
4
5
6
A.
Q.
A.
Sure.
-- first of all?
Yeah, that's a statutory requirement to
7 establish a TIF district
8
9
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
-- that you have to -- you have to
10 demonstrate that there are certain conditions in the
11 neighborhood and that -- that there's a requirement
12 for this incentive package that comes with -- with tax
13 incentive financing.
14
15
Q.
A.
And who did that work for Grand Center?
A firm called PGAV, Peckham Guyton
16 Albers & Viets.
17 Q. And what were the particular items cited
18 by PGAV to support the establishment of the TIF
19 district?
20 A. Well, that was a long time ago, so, I
21 mean, I could produce a copy of the report, but
22 it's there's a set of statutory requirements and
23 they went through describing -- describing the
24 conditions that ~- that were necessary. You have to
25 demonstrate that the area is blighted and eligible for
Page 11
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 redevelopment incentives and there's a set of
2 standards that -- that they go through to to
3 establish that, you know. Off the top of my head, I
4 don't know what they are.
5 Q. All right. Back in '03 when the TIF
6 program was developed, who was on the Board at Grand
7 Center that was involved in pursuing that -- that type
8 of legislation?
9 A. We have a -- We have a Board right now of
10 about 43 people.
11
12
Q.
A.
Okay.
It's a little larger than it's typically
13 been, but back then I would say it was in the mid
14 thirties to high thirties. I believe the chairman at
15 the time was Joe Adorjan, A. Joseph Adorjan, but, you
16 know, we have representatives from the neighborhood.
17
18
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
So, Harvey Harris from The Fox would have
19 been on the Board and Emily Pulitzer from The Pulitzer
20 Foundation for the Arts and somebody I think
21 Jim Buford from the Urban League. Jim, yeah, Jim was
22
23
24
on that.
I can
Q.
Still is. So, you know, it's a long list.
We can produce it for you.
Okay. Now, once the -- the Grand Center
25 became the TIF developer, how did that affect the
Page 12
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 revenues that you-all had to advance development in
2 the region?
3 A. Well, we -- we have not profited from
4 being the TIF developer in the way a private developer
5 might. We -- We collect a five percent fee for all
6 TIF notes that are issued. That's more in concept
7 than in reality. The -- Inevitably in developments,
8 as you're scraping together a variety of subsidies to
9 make them work, you know, more often than not that
10 gets set aside. I don't have a recollection of us,
11 frankly, ever collecting the full five percent from
12 any development.
13 Q. All right. Were there any other
14 developers considered by the City for the Grand
15 Center Is it called the Grand Center TIF?
16 A. It's called -- It's called Grand Center
17 TIF, yeah. You know, the statutory process is, I
18 believe, and I stand to be corrected, but I think this
19 is the way it goes, that the City advertises for
20 eligible or for the availability and then solicits
21 through -- via through these advertisements potential
22 developments. As a practical matter, that is not the
23 way tax increment financing works in Missouri. As a
24 practical matter, we have -- in the state of Missouri
25 virtually every TIF that I'm aware of is done is what
Page 13
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
1
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
is on typically called a developer driven TIF. In
2 other words, a developer comes up with an idea, goes
3 to the municipality or the TIF authorizing agent
4 and -- but there there is, I believe, a pro forma
5 requirement or a requirement that there be
6 advertisement for it. In reality, I'm not sure that's
7 very competitive because, you know, it's just the
8 developers that have been proposing it are generally
9 ahead of the learning curve of everybody else.
10 Q. Now, you referenced a little bit the
11 boundaries of the TTF. Has it changed over the years
12 or--
13
14
A.
Q.
No, it's --
was the original boundary kept pretty
15 much the same?
16
17
A.
Q.
Original boundaries are -- have been kept.
You say that St. Louis University
18 properties were contained within the TIF?
19
20
A.
Q.
Yes.
Does that go over to the medical campus,
21 as well?
22
23 campus.
24
25
A.
Q.
A.
Doesn't. It stops at the -- at the north
Okay. How far west is the TIF boundary?
West is Vandeventer and east is Compton.
Page 14
Masuga Court Reporting314/680·2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. Once the Grand Center became the TIF
2 developer, was there any particular change in the way
3 in which Grand Center conducted its business at that
4 point in time?
5
6
MS. LUBBEN: Objection,
vague, but you can answer.
7 A. Okay. Not particularly. I mean, I think
8 the I think the primary change would have been the
9 way in which we subsidized projects.
10
11
Q.
A.
Right.
Because CeRC, which had been founded
12 in 181, had a 25-year right to grant tax abatement,
13 that was coming to an end, and we could have gone back
14 and tried to renew CeRe, but 353 and tax abatement had
15 sort of been fading as the preferred tool and TIF
16 utilization of TIF has become a more popular tool in
17 recent years and, so, rather than try to renew CeRC,
18 we thought it best to just -- to do a TIF district
19 that also encompassed both CCRC and Vandeventer Spring
20 Redevelopment Areas.
21 Q. Okay. Prior to the TIF legislation -- And
22 in the TIF legislation, did Grand Center then receive
23 the power of eminent domain
24
25
A.
Q.
No.
-- or had it had that before?
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 15
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent 5choemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 A. No, we had -- we had that in the CeRC,
2 which was, basically, from Theresa to Spring, Delmar
3 to Lindell, and we -- we have the power of eminent
4 domain inside our Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment
5 Corporation, but we do not have eminent domain in
6 our -- in our TIF ordinance.
7 Q. It's in the TIF It's not in the TIF
8 legislation?
9
10
11
12
13
14
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Not in.
It's something that --
Right.
-- preceded that?
Right.
But that's something that the Grand Center
15 continued to have authority of or --
16
17
A.
Q.
Yeah, I believe
or power to do after the TIF agreement
18 was reached?
19
20
A.
Q.
Yes.
Once the Grand Center became the TIF
21 developer, did it have an increase in revenues
22 available to it to foster development as a result of
23 the TIF legislation?
24 A. No, our -- our role is really to organize
25 investment in the neighborhood and make the additional
Page 16
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehi taken on 9/18/2012
1 revenues available to the -- to the developers. As I
2 say, in theory we're supposed to collect five percent
3 of any TIF amount that we grant to someone. I have no
4 clear recollection of ever having gotten the full five
5 percent. I mean, there are promises made, deferrals,
6 and things of that nature, but if it weren't for the
7 private fundraising that -- that we do every year,
8 we -- you know, we wouldn't be in business.
9 Q. Has there been any discussion about
10 passing, like, a business district tax or something
11 like that?
12 A. An active -- We've had one in the past and
13 are in the process of trying to establish another one
14 and that -- but that would be specifically and limited
15 to security and street sweeping and, you know, sort of
16 cleanliness activities.
17
18
19
20
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Is that by legislative limit or lS that --
No, that's by --
just what you prefer to do it?
what the -- what the property owners
21 who sign on for it, they -- they draft what they want
22 the money to be used for and, so, it's limited to
23 that -- to that purpose. And that would not be --
24 Under state law, a community improvement district, a
25 C10, is governed by a separate body, so there is a
Page 17
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 there will be a board of -- of -- governing board for
2 the CID.
3 Q. I know this question involves time before
4 you began with Grand Center, but prior to Grand Center
5 becoming the TIF developer for this area, do you know
6 on how many occasions they exercised the power of
7 eminent domain to acquire properties?
8
9
10
11
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I don't.
Do you know whether it was ever done?
I don't.
Once Grand Center became the TIF developer
12 in the area, on how many occasions have they attempted
13 to use eminent domain to acquire property?
14
15
16
17
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I think only once that --
Okay.
-- I can think of.
And that's what in part is the subject
18 matter of this claim that I've got filed here?
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Yes. Yeah.
Q. The Jim Day property
A. Jim Day is the
Q. is the only one?
A. only one, yeah.
Q. How was Grand Center obtaining properties
25 without the use of eminent domain on prior occasions?
Page 18
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 You mentioned something about they used a lot of or
2 that they acquired a lot of property and made it into
3 parking lots.
4 A. Uh-huh. Oh, I think -- And, again, I
5 don't know that they didn't use eminent domain in
6 the -- in the earliest days, but I assume through
7 negotiated purchase. I mean, this was a -- this was a
8 pretty abject neighborhood back in the -- in the early
9 eighties and property was pretty readily available.
10 Q. All right. I want to try to direct the
11 questions in the rest of the deposition to the
12 contractual relationship that Grand Center had with
13 Paul Guzzardo and his associates. If I ask you a
14 question that's not clear to you, please ask me to
15 restate it or rephrase it.
16
17
A.
Q.
Okay.
What would you say was the point in time
18 when Grand Center began to consider what type of work
19 Paul Guzzardo had been doing in St. Louis and
20 contacting him about exploring the possibility of
21 working together with him on one or more projects?
vague, compound.
22
23
24
25
A.
Q.
MS. LUBBEN: Objection,
Paul contacted me.
Okay.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 19
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
3
A.
Q.
A.
I didn't contact Paul.
All right.
And I would say that it was not long
4 before we entered into the Option Agreement.
5 Q. Now, he owned some property or was
6 involved in some property that was within the
7 district, the Grand Center District, prior to that
8 time, did he not?
9 A. Not to my knowledge. He may have, but I'm
10 not aware of that.
11 Q. You're not aware that he had property here
12 on Washington Avenue and had a nightclub and had a
13 residence?
around 12th and Washington.
Q. Okay.
A. You know, either east or west of there,
but sort of in that -- that area, not -- not up here.
Q. All right. And what manner did
14
15
16
17
18
19
A. It is my understanding that was down
20 Mr. Guzzardo use to contact you?
21 A. I can't recall. I think, I stand to be
22 corrected, but I think -- I think it was through a
23 developer whose name I cannot recall and Sung Ho Kim
24 and I -- and I can't remember, but I -- I do remember
25 Sung Ho Kim being -- being somehow associated with the
Page 20
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 introduction.
2
3
4
Q.
A.
Q.
Okay.
Okay.
Let's go back before that. Prior to that
5 contact, however it was made and by whomever it was
6 made, were you acquainted with Mr. Guzzardo before?
7
8
9
10
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
No.
Were you acquainted with Mr. Kim before?
No.
What about the developer, was that someone
11 that you had known before?
12
13
A.
Q.
No, it' 5
And I'll throw out the name Eric Friedman.
14 Does that ring a bell?
15 A. No, it wasn't -- That's not the per- --
16 It's a guy named Aaron Novick is the guy that I think
17 may have -- may have been the may have been the guy
18 that and I'm not clear as to whether or not it was
19 just
20
21
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
-- but Sung Ho introduced me to
22 Aaron Novick later on and, so, I heard at some point,
23 so I'm just a little -- and it was about the same
24 time. So, Eric Friedman came into the picture I think
25 a bit later. You know, again, I stand to be
Page 21
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 corrected. I mean, it may well be that -- that Eric
2 was the -- was the guy who introduced us, but I just
3 can't recall, but I will -- I do -- I do know Eric and
4 I've known him for a long time.
5 Q. All right. And what was the nature of the
6 contact? I mean, whoever approached you, what do you
7 recall about the ideas or proposals or reason for the
8 contact?
9 A. It was to discuss -- It was to discuss the
10 Media Box and -- and, again, 1 1 m trying to remember if
11 it was Sung Ho who first introduced the idea or Paul
12 or Eric or whomever, but that was the purpose.
13 Q. Do you recall whether this was a
14 face-to-face contact or a telephone contact?
15 A. You know, I don't. I know at one time we
16 went to -- Sung Ho had an office sort of down on
17 Locust Street someplace, I think, and we went down
18 there and actually looked at some models that he had
19 built of various proj- -- various projects, not just
20 the Media Box, but various projects and, you know, I
21 was quite enthusiastic about the project. I mean,
22 thought it -- What -- What Paul explained to me that I
23 had never realized was that Marshall McLuhan had done
24 all of his work at St. Louis University. I had never
25 heard of Father Walter Hong before meeting Paul. I
Page 22
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25r--,
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
went out and bought all their books. And I thought
the Media Box would be a great connector between Grand
Center and St. Louis University and that was really in
my mind a -- a very key component of this, you know,
of this idea that, you know, there are lots of
lighting technologies and sound technologies, but the
idea that he was going to organize it around the
teachings and -~ and the -- the philosophies
of Walter Hong and Marshall McLuhan, I found that very
intriguing and compelling.
Q. And you felt as the executive director, I
guess -- Is that the property title, executive
director?
A. President.
Q. -- president
A. Yeah.
Q. -- of Grand Center that that would be a
project that would be appropriate for the mission that
you-all were trying to advance --
A. Yes.
Q. -- here? At that time when you first
became aware of the connection that possibly existed
between these pioneers of -- of communications media
and St. Louis University, who at St. Louis University
was involved with the Grand Center Board?
Page 23
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
A.1
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
Father Biondi was on the Board at that
2 time, but, I mean, he was not particularly involved
3 with this project. Paul told me at one time he had
4 had a conversation with someone at the law school
5 about trying to get them to expand or include some
6 components of intellectual property law and, so, he
7 was in some conversations over there, but there
8 there was no direct conversation with St. Louis
9 University about this concept 'cause it was just too
10 early.
11 Q. All right. Now, you mentioned that you
12 believe that occurred several weeks or several months
13 before you entered into an agreement with Paul?
14 A. Well, we1ve we've -- we've described a
15 number of events here. I mean, I -- at some point
16 along the way here, I -- I met Paul and Sung Ho, saw
17 the project, heard the pitch, liked the idea, and at
18 someplace, and it could have been at the very
19 beginning l Eric Friedman came into the picture and
20 and we entered into this -- we entered into this
21 Option Agreement. So, you know, that was sort of the
22 sequence of events.
23 Q. Have you reviewed any particular documents
24 or e-mails, any communications or records that Grand
25 Center possesses to sort of refresh your recollection
Page 24
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 about the sequence of events?
2 A. I did. Not extensively, but I did look
3 over a couple of e-mails, yes, or a few e-rnails.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 Q.
(At this point, an
off-the-record
discussion was had.)
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 1 was marked
for identification.)
I'll hand you what I've marked as
11 Plaintiff's Exhibit One with today's date. First of
12 all, do you recognize that document, sir?
13 A. Let me take a minute. Okay, I've read it.
14 It appears to be a letter or e~mail and fax to
15 Ken Christian from Eric Friedman giving him background
on the Media Box and that appears to be16
17 know who wrote this. I -- The -- Well --
I don't
18
19
20
Q.
A.
Q.
I'm just using this as a --
Yeah.
-- for the time being as a way to try to
21 orient us chronologically to the sequence of events --
22
23
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
of when things happened. Who is
24 Ken Christian?
25 A. Ken is a consultant of Grand Center. Has
Page 25
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. Yes.
A. Yes, uh-huh.
Q. Do you -- And this apparently is a letter
Q. Now, this is dated August 19, 2003, and it
1'11 object to
Does he have office space here or
MS. LUBBEN:
Okay.
A. No.
Q.
Box project through Mr. Guzzardo and Mr. Kim?
involving yourself, Emily Pulitzer, and Paul Ha?
worked with us on and off varying projects for
the last -- well, since I've been here.
Q. Is he still associated with Grand Center?
the extent the document speaks for itself
sent out by Eric Friedman. Eric Friedman is someone
that you recall ultimately got involved in this Media
an office?
your recollection that discussions about the Media Box
preceded the date of August 19, 20037
A. Yes, I believe we had conversations with
that prlor to that.
Q. And in fact it makes reference to a
meeting or perhaps several meetings relative to this
project, does it not, particularly one on August 15
occurred prior to that date. Does that conform to
seems to be making reference to various things that
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,", 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 26
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent SChoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
answer.
and lack of foundation, but you can1
2
3
4
A.
Q.
I'm not sure of the question. Are we -
The question is do you recall a meeting on
5 August 15 between yourself, Emily Pulitzer, Paul Ha,
6 and representatives of the Media Box project.
I donlt recall that specific -- that7
8
A.
specific meeting or that specific date. I do recall a
9 meeting in which Emily Pulitzer and I went to
10 Sung Ho Kim's studio, which I mentioned earlier.
could have been with us.
11
12
13
Q.
A.
Right.
And that could be the meeting and Paul Ha
I don't -- I don't recall
14 him being there.
15 Q. Do you recall Paul Guzzardo being involved
16 in that meeting at Mr. Kim's office?
17 A. I don't. My recollection -- My
18 recollection was that it was -- But I don't recall
19 Paul being there, either.
20
21
22
Q.
A.
Q.
Do you -
Paul Ha.
I'm sorry. Do you recall Paul Guzzardo
23 speaking to or meeting with you prior to August the
24 19th, 2003, concerning this project?
25 A. Again, I mean, it's pretty obvious from
Page 27
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 this letter and my overall recollection of this -- of
2 this project that we must have been in conversation
3 prior to that because, I mean, Paul was -- was clearly
4 working with Sung Ho on this and, you know, so, even
5 though it references Sung Ho, there must have been
6 conversations with -- with Paul prior to this I would
7 think.
8 Q. Is it fair that your recall of those
9 events prior to August 19, 2003, is not crystal clear
10 in terms of date and participants and the like?
you say you were contacted by someone about,
11
12
13 the
A.
Q.
Yeah.
All right. Generally speaking, how did
14 you know, this project. What do you recall about how
15 that process proceeded, who you spoke to about it
16 within Grand Center, and how is it that members of the
17 Grand Center Board may have gotten involved in looking
18 into it more closely?
19 A. Well, you know, my recollection is that,
20 you know, this was -- this was a development that was
21 going to involve some high design components and, so,
22 I invited Emily Rauh Pulitzer and apparently Paul Ha
23 to take part in the discussions because it would be
24 this location -- the contemplated location is right by
25 their bUildings.
Page 28
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
And, so, I wanted them involved in
3 conversations. And either prior to or SUbsequent to
4 that, Emily Pulitzer and -- and Sung Ho Kim and his
5 wife, Heather Roofter (sic), have become -- Woofter
6 have become pretty good friends.
7
8
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
And, so, you know, and I donlt know if
9 they knew one another before this or not, but -- so
10 that's how Emily would have been invited in. And
11 that's pretty typical. I mean, I -- if someone
12 approaches me about trying to develop a piece of
13 property, it's pretty routine that you go talk to
14 the -- to the neighbors about the idea before you
15 start advancing it.
16 Q. All right. Well, St. Louis University was
17 within a block of this location, as well --
18
19
20
21
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- was it not?
Yes, and --
Was there any -- Was there any attempt to
22 get Father Biondi involved in any discussion?
23
24 time.
25
A.
Q.
Joe -- Joe Adorjan was chairman at this
Uh-huh.
Page 29
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. Uh-huh.
Q. The Real Estate Committee of what
A. Joe was also chairman at St. Louis
Q. -- development area. How did that
I mean, they -- my
location get selected? Who was involved in that?
A. I believe that was Paul and -- and
location had been identified or at least a potential
location had been identified to place the Media Box
within the Grand Center
widely discussed within -- within the Board and -- and
recollection is, is that, you know, they sort of had
A. Of -- Well, of Grand Center, Inc. And the
Paul Guzzardo and Sung Ho.
organization?
So, this is obvious -- I mean, this was, obviously,
University and I believe was on the Real Estate
Committee and this, I mean --
this -- they had this site in mind because of the
curvature of the street and the way in which it worked
Page 30
not to the exclusion of St. Louis University or
anybody else.
Q. It appears from this letter that a
Real Estate Committee of Grand Center, Inc. composes
the Board -- at that time it composed the Board of
ceRe and Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25r--,
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guuardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 and whatnot, so I think when they approached us, they
2 already had that site identified and I think may have
3 already had some drawings done on it.
4
5
6
Q.
A.
Q.
Do you still have any of those drawings -
Not to my knowledge.
-- that you've seen? Have you reviewed
7 any document that indicates that Guzzardo and Kim had
8 determined that this would be an appropriate site and
9 were approaching your organization to locate their
10 development
11 A. Oh, yeah.
12 Q. -- at the site?
13 A. Yeah, I mean, there -- there were
14 drawings. There was a model of this thing that was
15 built as I recall.
16 Q. But at what point in time? I'm talking
17 about in the early contact period.
18 A. I think the very earliest contacts, they
19 had that site in mind. That's my recollection.
20 Q. All right. And is that recollection based
21 upon any document that you reviewed at any time?
22 A. To the -- The drawings that I'm referring
23 to and the -- and the model that I saw. Yeah, I mean,
24 I think from the very beginning, that's what they --
25 that was the site they had in mind.
Page 31
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. You say there were parking lots that had
2 been developed by Grand Center before --
3
4
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- this date. Did anyone consider using
5 parking lots for this -- this installation? Was that
6 topic ever discussed at Grand Center?
unable to acquire the Day site, I contacted Paul.
Q. Well, we I 11 get to that.
A. Okay.
Q. I want to try to focus on things that were
happening early on as to n
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
A.
A.
Q.
It was discussed. You know, after we were
Yeah.
-- whether there was any discussion within
15 Grand Center about any other sites that may be
16 appropriate or worthwhile for a development of this
17 kind.
18 A. We had -- We had a proposal that was
19 site-specific. We had and continue to have an
20 ambition to improve the Day site. And, so, I mean,
21 there was no reason to try to find another location.
22 Q. What was the ambition that Grand Center
23 had to improve the Day site?
24 A. Well, in the point in instance, it was the
25 Media Box. Prior to the Media Box, it was just, you
Page 32
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~ 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
know, having an automotive repair shop in the middle
of an arts district was not deemed to be ideal and
it's, basically, a parking lot and a -- and an auto
repair shop and our hope was to find a higher and
better use for that.
Q. Tell me about those discussions. Who was
involved primarily in advancing that discussion within
the Grand Center organization?
A. That would have been myself,
Emily Pulitzer, the Real Estate Committee because we
have redevelopment rights and obligations from along
Olive from Spring all the way down to Vandeventer as
part of our Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment
Corporation. And, so, you know, when I came here --
we refer to that internally as Olive West -- and when
I came here, you know, there was considerable focus on
trying to get some development going along Olive west.
Q. Were developers contacted for proposals
during that time frame when you first came here to
explore those possibilities?
A. Yes, but --
MS. LUBBEN: Wait for his
question.
A. Oh, okay.
Q. And what evidence would there be that
Page 33
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 those developers were contacted or involved or
2 presented proposals or what have you?
3 A. There would be some documents in our files
4 about approaching either developers -- I'm not sure if
we ever did an RFQ per se, but shortly5
6 after I got
shortly
relatively shortly after I got here, we
7 began negotiations to acquire land up and down Olive
8 and, unfortunately, we were successful in many cases
9 and then the market collapsed, so ...
10
11 were?
12
13
14
15
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
You say you were not successful or you
We were successful.
You bought property for -
Right.
-- more than what you could have gotten a
16 couple years later?
17
18
19
A.
Q.
A.
Right, absolutely.
All right.
And -- And, yeah, I mean, we are still
20 holding a lot of that property down there because of
21 the financial collapse.
22 Q. Had there been any approaches before this
23 Media Box project was brought to you to negotiate with
24 Mr. Day and acquire his property?
25 A. I think we made an offer on his property
Page 34
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
,,",
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc" et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
early on and -- but I'm not -- I'm not exactly -- I'm
not exactly sure of the -- of the sequence there, but
it's in 2001-2002 time frame, you had The Pulitzer
Foundation for the Arts opened and the Contemporary
Art Museum right next door opened and Mr. Day's
property is, you know, just across the street from
there and, you know, we have acquired a lot of land
for future development without knowing exactly what we
were going to put there at the time that we purchased
the land and I think there -- there may have been an
early offer to Mr. Day to -- to buy his property with
the idea that we would remediate it and get it ready
for development.
Q. Was that a plan that was strongly advanced
by Ms. Pulitzer and Mr. Ha?
A. I don't want to characterize their. It
was pretty strongly advanced by me and I didn't need a
lot of support from them. You know, I mean, I --
the the idea of cleaning up this neighborhood is
our raison d'etre, it's the reason we're in existence,
so, you know, I don't want to point to anyone or two
Board members or individuals and say they were
preeminently responsible.
Q. It is a fact, however, that once
discussions became more focused on the Media Box
Page 35
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 project and this location was proposed, the two
2 individuals from the Board who apparently participated
3 in some -- some seminal meetings about the project
4 were Mr. Ha and Miss Pulitzer?
5
6
7
A,
Q,
A,
Paul Ha was never on the Board.
Okay,
But, yes, and I explained the reason, I
8 mean, their proximity to the --
9
10
11
Q,
A.
Q.
Sure.
-- to the property.
Now, in this August 19, 2003/ letter, it
12 references that there were issues and concerns
13 regarding starting condemnation proceedings and it
14 states we are all comfortable proceeding as you
15 suggested. What do you remember about any of those
16 discussions, Mr. Schoernehl, with reference to issues
17 and concerns about condemnation and that there had
18 been some suggestions made supposedly by Grand Center
19 about how that was going to proceed?
20 A. Well, I'm not -- I'm reading this
21 differently. First of all, this is addressed to
22 Ken Christian, not to me. And he says, It was good
23 talking with you yesterday regarding the Media Box
24 development project. I understand all of your issues
25 and concerns regarding condemnation proceedings and we
Page 36
Masu9a Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 are all comfortable proceeding as you suggested.
2 Okay. Now, I don't know what Ken suggested.
3 Q. Does it appear to be that Mr. Friedman and
4 his colleagues had expressed some issues and concerns
5 about using condemnation to acquire property
for speculation, lack of foundation. You
can answer.
No.
-- for a Media Box?
I -- I think it's quite the
MS. LUBBEN: Objection, calls
Okay.
I think it was Ken who was expressing
A.
Q.
A.
opposite.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13 concerns about the use of eminent domain.
14
15
Q.
A.
Okay.
And -- Because it is Friedman who is
16 saying I understand all of your issues and concerns
17 regarding starting condemnation proceedings and we are
18 comfortable proceeding as you suggested, which I read
19 to imply that Ken was saying let's try to do this
20 through negotiation or let's try to do this in some
21 other. I mean, I'm not Ken. I didn't have the
22 conversation with him. I'm just -- That's my
23 interpretation.
24 Q. Okay. Have you ever talked with Ken about
25 what issues or concerns he may have expressed when he
Page 37
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 was conducting these preliminary discussions with the
2 Media Box representatives?
3
4
A.
Q.
Not to my recollection.
As the president and -- and executive
5 officer of Grand Center at the time, what issues and
6 concerns would you have had about starting
7 condemnation proceedings to advance the Media Box --
8 Media Box project?
9 A. I think -- Well, first of all, under state
10 law you have an obligation to have good faith
11 negotiations. And, you know, so I think there is that
12 you have to -- you know, you have to satisfy. If
13 condemnation becomes required, then, you know, we
14 demonstrated we were quite ready to do that. But, you
15 know, it is something that has to be done with, you
16 know, with some degree of caution. Most recently and
17 just prior to this, maybe simultaneous with this,
18 St. Louis University was in the press quite a bit
19 about some condemnation -- some acquisitions under
20 condemnation that they had done, so there was some
21 growing sensitivity about the use of eminent domain in
22 the city at the time.
23 Q. All right. And at least those experiences
24 or that knowledge that you have about what issues
25 St. Louis U. was going through were things that you
Page 38
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc, et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. I -- I'm not sure --
A, Oh-huh.
Mr. Kim's office in downtown St. Louis?
Q. And if I ~~ am I correct in -- in
I mean, I remember looking at
1 1 m sorry.
I don't.
Yes.A.
A,
A. Prior to the August 15 meeting?
Q. The August 19 letter.
Q. That's all right. The letter also talks
A. -- I mean, you know.
Q. All right.
Page 39
Mr. Guzzardo, Mr. Kim, Mr. Friedman, or any of their
Q. Prior to this August 19, 2003, date, do
you have any idea on how many occasions you personally
would have either spoken to or communicated with
Q. That's a yes?
representatives relative to the Media Box?
yourself and to Miss Pulitzer and Mr. Ha. Do you
recall receiving any type of a binder relative to the
Media Box?
about providing binders at some point in time to
suggesting that the time that you were looking at the
drawings initially was the visit that you made to
drawings and, I mean, I don't recall a binder per 5e.
wanted to avoid if you could avoid them?1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25,'-'"
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehi taken on 9/18/2012
time; correct?
had pretty extensive conversations by then.
Q. that had taken place prior to that
all, were you using e-mail back in 2003 to communicate
I don't know, but I suspect that weOh,A,
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Do you recall any particular
e-mail that you sent to Mr. Guzzardo back in JUly of
2003?
A. No.
Q. All right. Had you reached a conclusion
before you involved other members of the Grand Center
Page 40
to be enthusiastic about this project.
Q. Have you reviewed Mr. Guzzardo's
deposition in this case, sir?
A. I have not.
Q. All right. He had indicated that he
received an e-mail from you in July of 2003. First of
with individuals concerning Grand Center business?
Q. And this letter gives the impression that
there was quite a bit of discussion --
A. Yeah.
A. Yeah, and I would not have casually
suggested that Emily Pulitzer and Paul Ha accompany me
to a meeting unless I felt that there was some reason
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,~, 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Masuga Court Reporting314/680·2424
,..--."
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc, et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
Board that the Media Box proposal seemed to be a good
fit for the Grand Center area?
A. I was pretty enthusiastic about -- You
know, I work for a Board, so I don't make these
decisions myself
Q. Sure.
A, -- but I was pretty enthusiastic about it,
sure.
Q. One of your functions, though, is to sort
of screen things before
A. Sure.
Q. -- they get to the Board?
A. Uh-huh, sure.
Q. And if you think of a good idea or someone
presents a good idea, you then take it onto the
Board
A. Right.
Q. -- for further
A. Uh-huh.
Q. -- investigation?
A. Correct.
Q. Now, the August 19 letter makes reference
to a Real Estate Committee, and I think we've made
reference to that, there is a Real Estate Committee,
at least there was at that time --
Page 41
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. I believe she was.
Real Estate Committee?
recall who would have been on the Real Estate
for identification.)
I can produce
r'll hand you what I've marked asOkay.
I can't recall precisely.
A. No.
Q.
A.
A. Okay.
the first part of September, 2003 from Eric Friedman
Q. Do you recall receiving a copy of a letter
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 2 was marked
A. It was about generally seven, six or
A. Right.
Q. -- for the Grand Center Board. Do you
Q. All right. Do you remember approximately
Box project?
Q. After August 19, 2003, do you remember
what next involvement you may have had with the Media
Exhibit Two, ask you to take a look at that.
seven/ maybe eight members.
that for you, but I can't recall precisely.
Q. Was Miss Pulitzer on the committee, the
Committee back at that time in August of 2003?
how many members would have been on the committee?
/",
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 42
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guuardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 that he had sent to Miss Pulitzer and Mr. Ha?
of the letter.
the record, this is just an e-mail draft
2
3
4
5 CC.
6
7
8
9
10
11
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I don't remember seeing this --
Okay.
-- but I do see that I am indicated as a
All right.
MS. LUBBEN: For the -- For
Okay.
On the back page of that document appears
12 the name of Terry Q 1 Bryant. Do you know who
13 Terry O'Bryant --
14
15
16
17
18
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
I don't.
-- is? Do you know who Angela Miller is?
I don't.
Do you know John Tobin or Ken Langsdorf?
I don't know John Tobin. Ken Langsdorf
19 was at the time, I believe, practicing real estate
20 with Eric Friedman.
21 Q. Now, what do you recall was going on with
22 the Media Box project here at Grand Center in
23 September/October of 2003?
24 A. You know, it was one of many projects that
25 we were trying to move along, but I don't have any
Page 43
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent SChoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 specific vivid recollections of any -- of any activity
2 regarding it.
3 Q. Was there an individual here at Grand
4 Center, you know, a staff member that was sort of
5 shepherding this project through the various twists
6 and turns as to getting it approved or having --
7
8
9
A.
Q.
A.
Well, it probably --
decisions made?
probably would have been
10 Ken Christian --
11
12
13
Q.
A.
Q.
Okay.
-- in his capacity, yeah.
And would there have been a file generated
14 in the normal course of business on the Media Box
15 project within the Grand Center records?
16
17
A.
Q.
I would believe so, yes.
All right. Now, at some point in time,
18 we'll get around to talking about an article that was
19 written and published in the Post-Dispatch in January
20 of 2005 by Jack -- or Jake Wagman. Do you recall
21 that article?
22
23
24
25
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I do.
Have you looked at that recently?
I have not.
All right. I'll represent to you that
Page 44
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. I think that would have been me and
Ken Christian, I suspect.
$125,000 was made to Mr, Day in October of 2003 to
within that article, it suggests that an offer of
I can't enter into any contract until I --estate
for approval?
A. No, I typically, if I make offers on real
point in time?
probably Alan Pratzel would have been involved in
write -- drafting the letter, but probably me and
Q. Was the proposal brought before the Board
what we thought in our mind we could afford to pay for
have on -- on our general progress, I'm just saying,
okay, let's -- let's offer $125,000, which we did, and
I don't think we ever got a response.
Q. Who do you remember was directly involved
in reaching the decision to make the offer at that
it and raise money to pay for it. The impact it would
A. We hadn't done an appraisal and we looked
at -- at the property and, you know, sort of assessed
Q. -- Mr. Day? How did that come about?
What was done to decide to make that offer?
purchase his property. Do you recall an offer of that
amount being made to --
A. Yes.
",1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 45
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 you know, until I get Board approval, but I wouldn't
2 typically get Board approval on an offer.
3 Q. Had the Board set any parameters as to,
4 you know, a value of the property as to what kind of
5 offers could be made prior to that time?
6
7
A.
Q.
Not to my recollection.
What do you remember the appraisal that
8 was commissioned showed for the value of the property?
9 A. When we made the offer for 125,000, we
10 didn't have an appraisal.
11
12
Q.
A.
All right.
After not getting a response, we then had
13 an appraisal done.
14 Q. What served as the basis for coming up
15 with the number if you didn't have an appraisal?
16
17
18
A.
Q.
A.
Which?
The 125.
As I described, it was -- it was a -- an
19 estimate of what we felt we could justify to our
20 Board, the neighborhood, our funding sources, and
21 whatnot as to the value that it would add to the -- to
22 the neighborhood in general and I'm sure we did a
23 square footage calculation. I don't recall what it
24 how big the property is, but I'm sure we would have
25 done a calculation and come to some conclusion based
Page 46
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent SChoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 upon -- upon some type of calculation.
2 Q. Was there any attempt to involve
3 Mr. Guzzardo, Mr. Kim l Mr. Friedman in arriving at a
4 number to make an offer?
the question.
5
6
7
8
A.
A.
Not -- Not that I'm aware of.
MS. LUBBEN: Just wait for
Sure. I'm trying to -- When was the
9 offer? When was the offer made? I'm trying to recall
10 the date.
11 Q. I don't know for sure. The newspaper
12 article reported October of 2003 is when $125,000 was
13 offered and then reported that in December of 2003 a
14 second offer was made of $67,500. Do you recall a
15 second offer
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Yes.
-- in that amount?
Uh-huh.
Is that after an appraisal --
Right.
-- was received on the property?
Uh-huh.
Again, at the time of the second offer,
24 was anyone from Guzzardo's group consulted at all as
25 to what amount was going to be offered and how it was
Page 47
Masuga Court Reporting314(680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
MS. LUBBEN: Go ahead.
second offer was?
would there?
recollection whether I talked with them about the --
I don't
I mean, this
I mean, 1 ' m not -- I have no
I -- I couldn't pinpoint.
Yeah, yeah.
I -- I have no recollection of.
A.
A.
A.
MS. LUBBEN: Objection, asked
A. You know --
Q. And there would be no reason to do that,
A. I'm sorry?
A. Yeah, I -- What was the date of the -- The
Q. Reported December of 2003.
and answered. Go ahead.
having discussions with Guzz~rdo or Qnyonc QooociQtcd
know.
with Guzzardo about entering into a formal contractual
the price amount or not.
Q. Okay. At what point in time did you begin
reached?
discussions, and at some point in time, you -- you
enter into an agreement.
start with conversations, you have conceptual
sort of evolved as transactions like this evolve. You
relationship with them?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
r', 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 48
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. All right. Was there a particular
2 occurrence or occasion that took place, a particular
3 conversation that occurred that caused you to say it's
4 time to proceed to something more formal than just the
5 informal discussions back and forth?
6 A. I don't think I ever suggested the
7 formality of an option. I think that carne from either
8 Eric or Mr. Guzzardo or Eric Friedman or
9 Mr. Guzzardo or -- or someone on their side. And
10 I'm -- You know, I don't recall ever really seeing a
11 real set of what I would call finance numbers and I
12 believe in the option one of the things that is in
13 there that they were supposed to deliver -- Excuse me.
14 I'm sorry.
15
16 fine.
Q. Sure. If you need to take that, that's
17 A. Too late now. One of the things that I
18 believe is in the Option Agreement lS that they will
19 provide us with a set of numbers. And, so, without
20 more financial information, I really felt that all of
21 this formality was premature. I remember thinking at
22 the time why are we doing this before we have our mind
23 around whether or not this is a truly financeable
24 project. So, I would be surprised if I suggested a
25 for- -- a formal agreement. I think that came from
Page 49
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
their side.
Eric Friedman.
Contract?
A. I don't, but I believe it came from
I don't recall any
Page 50
A. My recollection is that in the agreement
the property per se, but there is a -- as I say,
price would be if you acquired the property?
administrative costs not to exceed a certain amount,
Q. What did you understand the formal
agreement was supposed to accomplish?
A. They wanted to know that if we acquired
the property, they would have a right to purchase it.
Q. At the time of the Option Agreement, had
there been any discussion as to what the purchase
Q. Ultimately, it appears that your signature
was put on a contract on the 15th day of March, 2004?
there's sort of a list of things that would -- would
have been added up to determine the price.
Q. Do you know who drafted the Option
specific conversations about how much we would pay for
remediation costs not to exceed a certain amount, some
determine the price and that included things like
itself, there's a description of what the additive
what the additive elements would be that would
cost of acquisition, et cetera.
r',
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.r--,
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
3
4
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
Does that sound about right to you?
Yes.
And had Mr. Guzzardo signed for the buyer
5 prior to that time as far as you can recall?
6
7
A.
Q.
I can't recall.
Now, were you authorized to execute this
8 Option Contract by your Board?
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
MS. LUBBEN: I'm going to
object as to vague to the extent you say
"your" what -- which entity you're talking
about.
MR. PAPA: That's fine. I'll
clear it up.
(Questions by Mr. Papa)
16 Q. Were you, as president of the Grand Center
17 District, authorized to execute this contract by your
18 Board?
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. LUBBEN: I'm going to
object again to the extent that you're
suggesting he signed on behalf of Grand
Center.
MR. PAPA: And I appreciate
the technical correction -- correctness of
that objection.
Page 51
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2 Q.
(Questions by Mr. Papa)
Actually, the contract was between
3 Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corp. and Guzzardo
4
5
A.
Q.
Right.
-- correct? You were president of
6 Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corp.?
7
8
A.
Q.
Yes.
Were you authorized to sign this Option
9 Contract by the Vandeventer Spring Development
10 Corporation Board?
11 A. I don't recall if there was a specific
12 approval or not.
13 Q. Were members of the Vandeventer Spring
14 Redevelopment Corporation Board aware of the fact that
15 you were going to sign this Option Contract?
16 A. They were certainly aware of these ongoing
17 discussions and I would point out that that's more
18 than a technical distinction because Grand Center,
19 Inc. does not have the right of eminent domain.
20 Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation has the
21 right of eminent domain. And, so, it was an important
22 distinction in terms of who executed this and -- and
23 to whom it was addressed because, clearly, at this
24 point this time, we were contemplating that we may
25 have to go to eminent domain.
Page 52
Masu9a Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. All right. Well, that was contemplated
2 back in August of 2003, was it not, that you might
3 have to go to eminent domain to acquire this property?
4 A. It was certainly always a possibility, but
5 by the time we were around to this, I meant the
6 specificity of this being a contract or an agreement
7 between Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation
B as opposed to Grand Center, Inc. is -- is a meaningful
9 distinction.
10 Q. All right. And just so the record is
11 clear, we're referring to a document that I've marked
12 as Exhibit Three.
13 (At this point, Plaintiff's
14 Exhibit No. 3 was marked
15 for identification.)
Can we take a quick break?
MR. PAPA: You need another
MR. PAPA: I mean, I've got
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
copy?
here.
it here.
A.
MS. LUBBEN: I've got one
23
24
25
MR. PAPA: Absolutely.
(At this point, there was
a short break taken.)
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 53
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2 Q.
(Questions by Mr. Papa)
Okay. You have the Option Contract in
3 front of you. Did anyone pay anything as a result of
4 the Option Contract? I mean/ did Grand Center pay
5 Guzzardo anything? Did Guzzardo pay Grand Center
6 anything or -- I'm sorry. Not Grand Center.
7
8
9
10
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Vandeventer Spring?
The Vandeventer Spring?
No.
What did you understand when you executed
11 this contract, what did you understand Vandeventer
12 Spring was getting out of this contract?
13 A. Well, to the extent that we could acquire
14 the property and to the extent that the project could
15 be developed, we'd be getting a very important
16 addition to the neighborhood.
17 Q. Now, I understand that this was likely the
18 first time that you were involved in a condemnation
19 proceeding on behalf of Vandeventer Springi correct?
20
21
A.
Q.
Yes.
Presuming that the Vandeventer Spring
22 followed all the -- the legal requirements to acquire
23 the property, other than establishing what the value
24 is by the Court, there's no way to prohibit the
25 condemnation from taking place, is there?
Page 54
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
extent it calls for a legal conclusion.
1
2
3 A.
MS. LUBBEN: Objection to the
I'm not -- I'm not sure I understand the
4 question.
5 Q. Well, the question is this. The
6 corporation has the authority to condemn property. As
7 long as it follows all the legal requirements, there's
8 no impediment to it getting the property at least at
9 that point in time to your knowledge as the president
10 of Vandeventer Spring?
11
12
13
MS. LUBBEN: Objection, calls
for a legal conclusion, lack of
foundation, and speculation.
14 A. It is my understanding that if we follow
15 all the rules, that we -- we can -- we can come up
16 with a number determined by a legal procedure.
17
18
Q.
A.
Sure.
You have no assurance of what that legal
19 procedure -- what that number is going to be --
20
21
Q.
A.
Exactly.
but there lS, absent that, putative
22 certainty that you can get it done.
23 Q. All right. Do you understand that once a
24 number is assessed by the legal proceeding as to how
25 much the property has to be compensated or the
Page 55
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 property owner has to be compensated for the property,
2 that Vandeventer Spring had the -- the option of not
3 paying that and abandoning the project?
I have been over time -- People have argued
4
5
6
7 that.
A.
Q.
A.
Is that -- Is that my understanding?
Your understanding.
It is -- It's my belief that we could do
8 that back and forth that in inverse condemnation cases
9 that a price can then be enforced, but I've never -- I
10 didn't I didn't have that as a concern here. I
11 felt that if we got to a number, if we could afford
12 the number, we could pay it.
13 Q. All right. When was the condemnation
14 proceeding begun in reference to the time when this
15 Option Contract was executed? And using ~-
16
17
A.
Q.
Yeah.
-- the date that you executed it on
18 apparently March 5, 2004.
19
20
A.
Q.
I'm not sure.
Again I'll make reference to this Wagman
21 Post-Dispatch article. He suggests that the suit was
22 filed sometime after December of 2003 and before
23 February of 2004.
24
25
A.
Q.
Say -- Say those again? I'm sorry.
December of 2003 and February of 2004 is
Page 56
Masuga Court Reporting314/6BO-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 when the condemnation action was actually --
2
3
A.
Q.
Okay.
-- instituted. Does that sound about
4 right to you or do you know for sure?
5
6 know
7
8
9
10
A.
A.
Q.
A.
You know, absent anything else, you
MS. LUBBEN: Don't guess.
Yeah, I'm not going to guess.
Okay.
You know, there -- there would -- there's
11 a document someplace that's got that.
12 Q. Let me ask you this: Was the condemnation
13 proceeding instituted prior to the execution of this
14 Option Contract?
have signed sometime in February.
15
16
A. I don't know. I mean, Guzzardo appears to
I appear to have
17 signed sometime on the 15th day of March. So, I don't
18 know exactly when it was -- when it was instituted.
19 Q. Okay. Tell me what you remember about the
20 condemnation proceeding. How did it progress through
21 the court system?
22 A. It didn't. I mean, we filed and at the
23 time there was a national case that was getting a lot
24 of -- a lot of attention.
25 Q. Uh-huh.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680·2424
Page 57
A.1
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
Day never responded. To my knowledge, we
2 never got any response from him, legal or otherwise.
3 I had made mention earlier that there had been some
4 press in the previous year or two about St. Louis
5 University and other condemnations taking place in the
6 city and there was a lot of very bad press about this
7 at a national level, at a local level and we were
B in -- we were nowhere in terms of achieving any kind
9 of a response from -- from day. I mean, it was
10 just -- it was just dark on their side. To my
11 knowledge, he never even engaged an attorney.
12 Q. When you say that there was a lot of press
13 about this, you're not talking about a lot of press
14 regarding the Day matter?
15
16
17
A.
Q.
A.
Yes.
In 2004?
I'm talking about the Day matter and
18 eminent domain in general.
19 Q. Well, let's focus on the Day matter. What
20 do you recall being the issues raised in the press
21 regarding your attempt to condemn his property during
22 2004?
23 A. Well, you've got the Post-Dispatch
portrayed Grand Center in a
24
25
article. I mean, it was it portrayed -- I think it
in an aggressive
Page 58
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 negative light and there was considerable concern at
2 the Grand Center Board level and, candidly, among our
3 donors. You know, this was not -- this was not a
4 positive thing for us.
5 Q. Okay. Now, I'll represent to you that the
6 Wagman article appeared on January 31, 2005, and I'm
7 getting the impression that you believe there was
8 negative press ongoing about the Day matter throughout
9 2004 or at various times in 2004.
10 A. No, not so much about Day. And, again, I
11 will ~- I will defer to the record on this, but there
12 was a case -- I don't know the name of it -- that made
13 its way all the way to the Supreme Court about the use
14 of eminent domain for economic development.
15
16
Q.
A.
Commonly called the Kelo case?
Ke10 case, okay_ And that was ramping up
17 at the same time that this was ramping up. Now, when
18 we started these conversations, you know, I didnrt
19 know there was going to be a Supreme Court case that
20 was going to sort of crescendo into this. There was a
21 national organization that came to town over the
22 over the Day case that wanted to have demonstrations
23 in Grand Center. I mean, there was -- there was a lot
24 of -~ there was a lot of concern about this from a
25 public relations standpoint. I mean, to the extent
Page 59
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 that Mr. Day's intention was to discourage us from
2 pursuing eminent domain, he was successful. To the
3 extent that his intent was to get us to pay an
4 exorbitant price, he was disappointed.
5 Q. All right. But you're speculating as to
6 what actions he was taking because, as you said
7 earlier, throughout 2004, you guys hadn't heard
8 anything from him --
9
10
A.
Q.
That's exactly right.
-- right? What attempts were you making
11 to reach him during 2004 about any issues that may
12 have existed regarding, you know, his opinion
13 concerning your actions to try to take his property by
14 eminent domain?
15 A. We had a couple of conversations. I spoke
16 with him directly. As I say, to my knowledge, he
17
18
never
Q.
never engaged an attorney. And--
Can you be more specific as to
19 approximately when you would have had these
20 conversations with him and the circumstances where
21 they took place?
22 A. I stopped by his place of business on at
23 least once and I think two occasions and -- and he
24 just didn't want to talk. I mean, he just said, Look,
25 I, you know -- There just was not a -- There were some
Page 60
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 efforts I think on behalf of the alderman at the time,
2 Mike McMillan, to try to reach him to see if something
3 could be worked out and there just wasn't any -- there
4 just wasn't any communications.
5 Q. Did you speak with Mike McMillan during
6 2004 about any issues relative to that condemnation
7 proceeding?
8
9 it.
10
A.
Q.
I don't have any specific recollections of
Okay. When is the last time you think you
11 read the -- the Wagman article?
12
13
14
15
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Oh. When did it run, 2005?
Well, I believe January 31, 2005.
Yeah, yeah.
I don't have a copy of the paper, but I've
16 got what --
17
18
A.
Q.
Yeah.
-- purports to be a copy of -- of the
19 article.
20
21
22
23
A. Okay.
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 4 was marked
for identification.)
24 MS. LUBBEN: If you have
25 questions about it, I'll ask that he takes
Masuga Court Reporting314{680-2424
Page 61
1
2
3
4
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
his time to review it.
MR. PAPA: Yeah, and I would
ask that he do the same. Might as well
get to it when we're talking about it.
(Questions by Mr. Papa)
Okay.5
6
7
A.
Q. All right. In that article towards the
8 end of it, it does make some reference to comments by
9 Alderman McMillan, does it not?
10
11
A.
Q.
Yes.
And reading that -- Now, you had just
12 mentioned that sometime before I think this article
13 carne out, you believed you had talked to
14 Alderman McMillan about the Day project and and,
15 you know, some of the issues that had arisen
16 concerning the use of eminent domain. Do you think
17 Mr. McMillan is inaccurate or whether it's being
18 reported inaccurately that he said he was surprised to
19 learn about Day's situation at the time this article
20 was being published and that he's quoted as saying,
21 "Had I been aware of it, I would not have supported
22 the way it was done"?
of foundation. Calls speculation.
23
24
25 A.
MS. LUBBEN: Objection, lack
Yeah, I -- my earlier comments were not
Page 62
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 predicated upon a specific point in time. Knowing
2 Mike McMillan, I would be surprised if he did not try
3 to contact Day if not before this article, after this
4 article because it talks about the case being set back
5 and if we didn't settle by -- you know, by the new
6 trial date or whatever, so I wasn't -- you know, I
7 wasn't trying to intimate that we went to
8 Mike McMillan with every action before we undertook
9 it. And Mike might have been, might not have been
10 surprised by this, but I'm pretty sure he tried after
11 this became a public issue to -- to resolve it. I
12 could be wrong, but I -- you know, Mike was a
13 pretty pretty proactive guy --
14 Q. Uh-huh.
15 A. -- and with something like this, I would
16 suspect that he would be trying to resolve it.
17 Q. On the occasion that -- occasion or
18 occasions that you personally visited with Mr. Day
19 after the suit had been instituted, what do you recall
20 about the nature of the conversations you had with
21 him?
22 A. Just that he -- that he didn't want to
23 make an offer, a counteroffer. He -- To this -- You
24 know, I met with Mr. Day in this room I don't
25 know -- three months ago and he would like to sell,
Page 63
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
did that decision --
A. I don't know the exact --
Q. Who was involved in that decision and when
but he will not name a number and he just, you know
I don't know the exact date, butdate,
I did take that to the full Grand Center
Q. Wagman article?
A,
Q. And was that after the publication of
A. Yes.
it went
this
Q. take place?
A. It was after the publication of the Wagman
article. We weren't making any progress. And just we
Board.
yourself, and -- and especially in this environment.
decided, you know, this is just -- we're just -- you
Well, I mean, you can't just keep bidding against
we -- if we had pursued this, we could have come out
with a judgment and a number that would have made the
Media Box impossible and, so, we made the decision to
I mean, there was all of this national press, all of
this national conversation about this. You know,
drop it.
and that's how he was back then. He just said, you
know, I'm -- Make another offer. Make another offer.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
r', 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 64
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 know, we're taking too much of a public beating and we
2 need to -- you know, we need to just dismiss this case
3 with prejudice.
4 Q. Okay. So, the public beating had been
5 occurring for some time before the Wagman article had
6 been written?
7
8
9 to?
10
A.
Q.
A.
The?
The public beating that you make reference
No, I think this really was the -- there
11 was a lot of conversation in there and there was
12 some -- and there was some negative press, but this
13 was really kind of the high point of it, but there was
14 also all of this press about eminent domain in
15 general, the case going to the Supreme Court. You're
16 looking ahead. Even if you Wln a case and you get
17 some exorbitant number, you know, can you afford to
18 pay it? You know, why are -- It was just the circ-
19 the set of facts were just bad at that particular time
20 to be trying to use eminent domain and, so -- so, you
21 know, we dropped the suit.
22 Q. Was a primary concern on behalf of the
23 Vandeventer Redevelopment Board and the Grand Center
24 Board adverse reputation, bad will being caused by the
25 action?
Page 65
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 A. There was certainly that. There was also
2 the concern that we could have come out of this with
3 a -- with a jUdgment that would have been -- would
4 have made the project itself, even if ~- you know, we
5 could have come out with a condemnation award that
6 would have made the project impractical in terms of
7 in terms of it ever getting built, so if you're in
8 this -- if you're in this process to achieve an
9 outcome and if the process gets tainted by outside
10 circumstances such that it's going to make the outcome
11 impossible anyway, why continue?
12 Q. Okay. Was Guzzardo or any member of his
13 development group consulted on whether you would
14 continue with the litigation against Day or not?
15
16
A.
Q.
I can't recall.
Is there any document that you've ever
17 seen where you talked with Guzzardo or talked with
18 Mr. Friedman about, you know, the plans to abandon
the condemnation action?19
20
21
the
A.
Q.
Not that I'm aware of.
They certainly had no right to control
22 that decision, did they?
23
24
A.
Q.
I don't believe so.
The Option Contract didn 1 t give them the
25 right to advance or cause to have the condemnation
Page 66
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 action advanced, did it?
2
3
A.
Q.
I don't believe so.
The Wagman article makes reference to
4 Mr. Guzzardo and to Eric Friedman, does it not?
5
6
A.
Q.
Yes.
While this condemnation action was
7 pending, do you recall having conversations with
8 Guzzardo and/or Friedman about what, if anything, they
9 were allowed to talk about or who they could talk to
10 about the project and -- and condemnation proceeding?
11
12
A.
Q.
No.
All right. Do you know whether Guzzardo
13 and Friedman were ever told they could not talk to the
14 press about the condemnation proceeding?
15
16
A.
Q.
Not that I'm aware of.
Prior to the publication of the article by
17 Mr. Wagman, had you been contacted by Wagman about,
18 you know, his plan to prepare and write an article?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. And how did that occur? What do you
21 remember about that?
22 A. I think he sent me an e~mail saying that
23 he had some questions and I think I answered what I
24 could and I think I referred him to -~ to Eric and
25 Paul about descriptions of the Media Box per se. I
Page 67
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 think he had some questions about the Media Box
2 itself.
3 Q. Well, prior to that time -- And that was
4 just a day or two before the article came out; is that
5 when the e-mail came to you?
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I'm not sure.
All right. I'll show you that.
Okay.
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 5 was marked
for identification.)
Does that appear to be a copy of the
13 e-mail that we're talking about?
14 A. Yeah, it would appear what! did was
15 pasted Wagman's e-mail to me and sent it to Eric.
16 Okay.
17 Q. Now, this e-mail from Wagman says -- I
18 don't know. Well, the e-mail was sent on Saturday,
19 January 29, 2005, and he indicates that on the prior
20 Tuesday, he spoke to Mr. Day and he says that Grand
21 Center is seeking to take his property by eminent
22 domain and use it for something called a Media Box.
23 Now, did you ever speak directly with Mr. Wagman about
24 this?
25 A. You know, I can't recall.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
I spoke to
Page 68
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Wagman. I was on the school board at this time.
2 Q. Okay.
3 A. So -- And Wagman was covering the school
4 board, so I had a lot of conversations back and forth
5 with Wagman on various things, so I can't recall if --
6 if this -- you know, if I had conversations with him
7 about this or not. But, I mean, clearly, you know, I
8 would not have --
9
10 question.
MS. LUBBEN: Wait for the
11
12
A.
Q.
Yeah.
I mean, it appears that Wagman had only
13 spoken to Jim Day a couple of days before this -- this
14 e-mail to you, the Tuesday before, and it was at that
15 point in time that Mr. Day informed him about the
16 condemnation action. Do you believe that Wagman was
17 writing articles before that time reference to this
18 matter?
19 MS. LUBBEN: Objection, calls
for speculation, lack of foundation.20
21 A. Yeah, I -- I mean, I don't know of any
22 articles that were published prior to this one
23
24
Q.
A.
Okay.
by Wagman. I'm not aware. You know,
25 and -- So, you know ...
Page 69
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. No.
that this can be controversial.
the time, I think Father Biondi was on the Board. I
A. It was -- Yes, I mean, my Board is a
Is that your recollection that you did
A. Yeah. Yes, I did.
Q. Do you recall that or are you just
Q. -- were they? It appears from Exhibit
that?
Mr. Friedman.
Five that you suggested that Mr. Wagman contact
remembering from --
responded to relocation. I sent him your way to
A. Well, I'm reading this e-mail and it would
appear that I -- that I tell Eric that I sent I
University's condemnations
some press, as I said, about St. Louis University. At
pretty informed board and, you know, there had been
Q. Were members of your Board aware in 2004
of all of this negative information circulating about
condemnations and using condemnations for, you know,
inappropriate reasons?
Q. But your organizations, neither Grand
Center nor the Spring Avenue Redevelopment group, was
involved in any of those issues with St. Louis
mean, people were pretty generally aware of the fact
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
/" 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 70
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 explain what the Media Box is.
would indicate that a matter
2
3
Q. You were also asking or expecting that he
that as a matter of
4 law, businesses are entitled to relocation benefits so
5 he wasn't hearing it just from us.
6
7
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
So, you were asking him to do more than
8 just talk about the Media Box, were you not?
9 A. I thought that would have been helpful,
10 but the specific question that Jake kept asking me is
11 what is a Media Box and I didn't want to misrepresent
12 what it was and
13 Q. Well, by this time, Grand Center and
14 Spring Redevelopment had had several lengthy
15 descriptions of what the Media Box --
16
17
18
19
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- was proposed to be, right?
Right.
Did you make an attempt to send that
20 information to Mr. Wagman?
21 A. No, I felt it would you know, I felt it
22 would not be inappropriate for the developers to
23 describe their project to -- to the press.
24 Q. What was your understanding as to the
25 controversy that Mr. Wagman was curious about what
Page 71
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 prompted him to write the article?
this sort of vague thing called Media Box that,
2
3 the
A. I think the eminent domain piece and
4 you know, I mean, if you look at it in the article, he
5 has it -- he has it in -- I think he actually has it
6 in quotes. Yeah, he does. So, my point is that
7 that he was -- he wanted -- he was trying to do, I
8 think, three things. Number one, tie a story into the
9 national sort of uplift of interest in the whole issue
10 of eminent domain for economic development. The
11 second is I think he was trying to portray a -- a
12 small property owner being disabused and -- in his
13 view. And he was trying to leverage that disabuse, if
14 you will, by saying that there's some sort of a
15 planned use here that isn't contemplated by the plan.
16 He gets into that in the article. But, again, he was
17 repre- -- he was referencing the CID Redevelopment
18 Plan, not the Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Plan.
19 And, so, you know, I say in the article and I still
20 think that this was entirely consistent with what we
21 wanted to accomplish.
22
23 it?
24
25
Q.
A.
Q.
And you were still very enthusiastic about
Absolutely. Still am.
And to the extent that you were willing to
Page 72
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 pursue this course of action by eminent domain --
2
3
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- right? But it appears that the
4 controversy has to do with the eminent domain? I
5 mean, prior to him contacting you, there was no
6 controversy in any quarter about what a Media Box is,
7 was there, to your knowledge?
MS. LUBBEN: Objection, calls
for speculation, lack of foundation.
8
9
10 A. I mean, no one -- no one was objecting to
11 the Media Box that I was aware.
12
13
14
Q.
A.
Q.
No one on the Boards
No one on the Board, no.
that you were working with were raising
15 any issues
16
17
A.
Q.
No.
~- about how inappropriate this would be
18 or how vague it was or any of that --
19
20
A.
Q.
No.
-- concern that you, you know, expressed
21 or at least are talking about now? You all were still
22 hopeful n
23
24
25 fruit?
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- that the project was going to bear
Page 73
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
A.
Q.
Yes.
You felt that the project would be an
3 improvement to having an auto repair station located
4 across the street from the Contemporary Art Museum
5 and ~- and The Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts;
6 correct?
7
8
A.
Q.
Yes.
By referring Mr. Wagman to Mr. Friedman
9 And at the same time, did you tell Mr. Wagman about
10 Mr. Guzzardo's interest in the project; do you recall
11 that?
12
13
A.
Q.
I don't.
Do you know how Mr. Wagman would have
14 found out about Mr. Guzzardo?
15
16
A.
Q.
I don't.
By referring Mr. Wagman to Mr. Friedman,
17 were you hoping to deflect some of the criticism away
18 from your organizations and -- and have the developer
19 explain the value of the project and the -- the
20 mechanisms by which Mr. Day would be compensated as a
21 result of the condemnation?
22 A. I think deflect is is the wrong verb.
23 I think what I was hoping to do was inform the public
24 about what this was and the value that it -- that it
25 represented and -- and I felt that could be best done
Page 74
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 by people that could articulate what the Media Box
represented in general -- or2
3 than in general.
in specific rather
I mean, to this day, I can assure
4 you that Paul Guzzardo or Sung -- Sung Ho Kim or
5 probably even Eric could give you a better description
6 of exactly what the Media Box was going to be than I
7 could. I was trying to give them an opportunity to
8 explain to the pUblic what -- you know, what this was
9 going to be and how it would be beneficial. The--
10 The second point that I make is that, you know, that,
11 obviously, I had talked to him about relocation
12 benefits and Eric is a -- an accomplished professional
13 realtor and I was you know, I was hoping he could
14 explain the process to Jake in -- in more precise
15 terms than maybe I could.
16 Q. All right. You had formed the opinion
17 that Mr. Wagman's story was going to be negative?
18
19
A.
Q.
Yep.
Did you expect it to be negative as to
20 your organizations?
21
22
A.
Q.
I did.
Did you suspect his tory would be negative
23 as to the developer?
24 A. I did not. I -- He didn't -- He was -- He
25 seemed a bit skeptical, but --
Page 75
Masu9a Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
Q.
A.
Did you have a history with Mr. Wagman?
Oh, yeah, yeah, from the -- from the
3 school board.
4 Q. And did you determine that facts don't
5 matter with him anyway?
6
7
8
A.
Q.
A.
Pretty much so.
Okay. Who is Michelle Cohen?
She was our communications person. I
9 think she was employed part-time at the time for about
10 a year.
11 Q. And her responsibilities would be to have
12 interaction with the press when the press had
13
14
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- questions about projects of the Grand
15 Center or Spring Redevelopment?
16
17
A.
Q.
Yes.
Mr. Wagman had told him that -- had told
18 you that he had been frustrating -- or -- frustrated
19 by Michelle Cohen because, quote, "no one would tell
20 him what the Media Box is," close quote?
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Where am 1?
That's the second page of Exhibit Five.
Okay.
Did you ever speak with Michelle Cohen
25 about any communications that she had with Mr. Wagman
Page 76
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 prior to the time you sent out this e-mail?
I don't recall.
No.
Do you know where she is now?
Is she still working for Grand Center?
I believe she's still inI don't.A.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
2
3
4
5
6
7 St. Louis, but I don't
8 Q. Do you-all have a last known address here
9 in all likelihood?
10
11
A.
Q.
Yeah, we can find something.
Okay. Now, when you told Mr. Wagman that
12 the Media Box was, quote, "mixed use development with
13 design studio space on the first floor and housing
14 above," close quote, where did you get that
15 information?
16 A. From the drawings and from I think it's
17 actually part of the description in -- in the Option
18 Agreement.
19 Q. All right. And you made a point in
20 telling Mr. Wagman that it was entirely consistent
21 with the Redevelopment Plan --
22
23
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
correct? Did you tell Mr. Wagman that
24 the developers had no input into the filing or
25 prosecution of the eminent domain case?
Page 77
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
A.
Q.
I don't recall.
That would have been a true statement had
3 you told him that, would it not?
4
5
A.
Q.
Yes.
Did you believe when you referred
6 Mr. Wagman to Mr. Friedman that in all likelihood
7 Mr. Friedman and his associates in the development
8 team would be made a part of the Wagman article?
9
10
A.
Q.
I'm sorry. Repeat could you?
When you referred Mr. Wagman to
11 Mr. Friedman about the items that are mentioned in
12 your e-mail, did you believe that they would then
13 become a part of the -- the Wagman article if in fact
14 he prepared one?
15 A. I would have had no way of knowing that.
16 Q. Well, from your prior experiences in
17 dealing with Mr. Wagman, would you have expected that
18 Mr. Wagman would have followed up and contacted
19 Mr. Friedman as you --
20
21
22
A.
Q.
A.
Oh, yeah.
-- suggested?
I think he would have contacted him.
23 Whether or not he would have included them in the
24 article, you know, is a different question entirely.
25 Q. Prior to talking to you, do you know
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 78
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehi taken on 9/18/2012
1 whether Mr. Wagman was aware of who the developers
2 were of the Media Box project?
3
4
A.
Q.
I have no idea.
Do you know whether Michelle Cohen gave
5 him the names of the Media Box developers?
6
7
A.
Q.
I don't know.
Going back to the Option Contract, do you
8 recall why that Option Contract was entered into with
9 only Mr. Guzzardo?
10
11
A.
Q.
I don't.
At some point in time, did you become
12 aware of a shift or a change in the various roles
13 being played in this project between Mr. Guzzardo and
14 Mr. Kim?
15
16
A.
Q.
No.
What did you understand were the
17 respective roles that each of those individuals were
18 engaged in in presenting the Media Box project?
19 A. I thought Kim was the architect and Paul
20 was sort of the, if you will, media element designer
21 and developer.
22
23
24
Q.
A.
Q.
Okay.
Financial partner.
After the Wagman article carne out, which
25 of your Board members contacted you about it within
Page 79
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 the, say, day or two of its publication?
2
3 did.
4
A.
Q.
I can't recall. I'm not sure any of them
All right. When did you next have a board
5 meeting where that article may have been discussed?
6
7
8
A.
Q.
A.
I'm not sure.
What was your reaction to the article?
I thought it was very sympathetic to
9 Jim Day, I thought it was written precisely to
10 coincide with the sort of national debate about
11 eminent domain, and I thought it was -- I thought it
12 cast Grand Center in a very negative light and
13 misappropriately. I mean, a lot of the stuff he
14 talked about in there in terms of previous litigation
15 was simply inaccurate.
16
17
18
Q.
A.
Q.
I was going to ask you about that.
Yeah.
Had there been litigation involving Grand
19 Center that you weren't a part of that --
to -- Let's see
20
21
A. No, no, the litigation that he refers
a group of property owners led by
22 the Masonic Temple sued Grand Center in October in
23 Federal Court. They charged that Grand Center had
24 wrongfully threatened property owners with eminent
25 domain. I don't know what he's talking about there,
Page 80
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 you know. And--
2 Q. There was no Federal Court case filed?
3 A. The -- I mean, the Masonic Temple case
4 that I recall was the challenge to the TIF statute and
5 we do not have eminent domain rights in our TIF
6 statute and, you know, that case went all the way to
7 the Supreme Court and was -- was upheld and our
8 position was upheld, but, I mean, he sort of mixes
9 metaphors there. And then he talks about someplace
10 The Fox Associates, we sued The Fox Associates.
11 Q. It says the Fox sued Grand Center over
12 parking spots.
the parking spots and then
13
14
A. Yeah, but then it also goes on to say all
Then the second sentence
15 of that paragraph, it says that suit was dismissed,
16 but in a separate suit, Grand Center sued the company
17 that owns Fox in a land dispute that was dismissed in
18 Circuit Court. Well--
19
20
Q.
A.
Do you know what he's talking about there?
Yeah, there's a company -- there's an
21 organization called Foxland Associates that owns the
22 land under The Fox Theater. We sued Foxland
23 Associates to condemn the land underneath The Fox on
24 behalf of and at the instruction of Fox Associates.
25 Q. Okay.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 81
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 A. And Mr. Wagman got his facts a little
2 wrong there. He -- You know, my point is this guy is
3 just not terribly precise and that's what I was trying
4 to convey to -- to Eric.
5 Q. From the past experiences that you had
6 with him?
7 A. Yeah, past experience I had with him and
8 as represented in that article. I'm going to have to
9 leave in about five minutes.
10 Q. And I am sorry that we're running into
11 that schedule.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I'll let
I'll be back at one.
She's reminding you.
Yeah.
(At this point, an
off-the-record
discussion was had.)
Why don't we just adjourn right now and
I'm gOlng to look at my notes here and
20 I'll see what else I want to talk to you about.
21
22
23
24
25
A. Okay.
(At this point, an
off-the-record
discussion was had.)
(At this point, there was
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 82
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehi taken on 9/18/2012
1
2 Q.
a lunch break taken.)
Mr. Schoemehl, who at Grand Center -- Let
3 me clarify. The Spring Redevelopment Corporation, for
4 all practical purposes, that was the same corporation
5 as Grand Center?
6 A. It's a subsidiary. It's a wholly owned
7 subsidiary.
8 Q. Okay. After this Option Contract was
9 executed, who at Grand Center was responsible for
10 monitoring compliance with the terms of that contract,
11 if anybody?
12 A. Well, it would have been probably
13 Ken Christian. JoAnne LaSala came along someplace in
14 there. She worked with us for a while in real estate
15 and I think she knew Paul Guzzardo and, so, she would
16 have had some contact with him. But I think in terms
17 of monitoring, it probably would have been Ken.
18 Q. Okay. JoAnne LaSala, is she still
19 associated with Grand Center?
20 A. She's not. She's -- I'm not sure where
21 she is now. She's lived here and in Boston since
22 leaving Grand Center.
23 Q. When did she first start working for Grand
24 Center, approximately?
25 A. I want to say 2003.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 83
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. Okay. So, it would have been before this
2 Option Contract was executed?
3
4
5
A.
Q.
A.
Yeah, I
All right.
-- I could be wrong, but my instinct is
6 it's right about that time.
7 Q. Now, I'm looking at the period of time --
8 The contract was signed, I think we established that
9 you signed it on
10
11
A.
Q.
March 15.
-- March 15 of 2004. The contract says in
12 Paragraph 18 that it's subject to and contingent upon
13 prior approval by the Board of Directors of the seller
14 and the Board of Directors of Grand Center, Inc. and
15 that was supposed to take place within 30 days of its
16 execution. Do you know if there is a formal action
17 taken by both the Board of Directors at Grand Center
18 and Spring Redevelopment Corp.?
19
20
21
22
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
I don't know
Okay.
-- offhand.
Was a certified letter sent to
23 Mr. Guzzardo as required by Paragraph 18 advising him
24 that the contract had been approved?
25 A. I don't know.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 84
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 Q. All right. After the execution of the
2 contract and throughout 2004, do you know of any
3 exception that either Grand Center, Spring
4 Redevelopment Corp., or any of its agents took to the
5 manner in which Guzzardo was complying with the Option
6 Contract?
7
8
A.
Q.
I'm sorry. Could you state it again?
Sure. Throughout 2004, do you know of any
9 exception that was being taken by Grand Center or
10 Spring Redevelopment or any of its agents as to
11 Guzzardo's performance of the contract or under the
12 contract?
vague.
extent it calls for a legal conclusion and
13
14
15
16
17
A.
A.
I think n
MS. LUBBEN: Object to the
I think our -- my only concern, if you go
18 to Page 2
19 Q. Sure.
20 A. -- prepare with Fried- -- item 3 -- or--
21 Section 3, item 2, prepare with Friedman Development
22 Group a feasible -- a financial feasibility study of
23 the Media Box. I think I had mentioned earlier --
24
25
Q.
A.
Right.
-- I never really got a hard set of
Masu9a Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 85
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 numbers that -- and, you know, to the extent that I
2 was concerned, it was that -- about the feasibility of
3 this is that we never really got good -- a good set of
4 numbers that you could kick the tires on.
5 Q. All right. At any time, was a written
6 request made to clarify that issue sent out by
7 yourself or anyone associated with Grand Center or
8 Spring Redevelopment?
9
10
A.
Q.
Not that I am aware of.
I mean, the contract requires, does it
11 not, that each party shall provide -- and this is Page
12 3, Paragraph 5, the bottom sentence -- each party
13 shall provide the other party with periodic updates
14 occurring at least every quarter regarding the status
15 of the project? Now, do you recall that an initial
16 quarterly status report was received from Guzzardo on
17 or about June 30, 2004?
18 A. I don't have any specific recollection.
19 I'm not sure that I would read that as to contemplate
20 a written update, but we had regular -- pretty regular
21 ongoing conversations about this.
22
23
24
25
Q. Okay.
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 6 was marked
for identification.)
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 86
Q.1
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
Just so we're clear on that, your counsel
2 was good enough during Mr. Guzzardo's deposition to
3 identify a number of these documents, so it's not
4 taking me too long to find them. Handing you
5 Plaintiff's Exhibit Six, does this document purport to
6 be Guzzardo's first quarterly report pursuant to the
7 requirements of the contract?
8
9
10 time?
A.
Q.
Yes, it does.
Do you remember seeing that back at that
11 A. I remember seeing drawings. I don't
12 remember these specific drawings, but I do -- yeah, I
13 mean, I suspect that I did review this.
14 Q. Okay. After seeing that, do you recall
15 any occasion subsequent to that June 30, 2004, date
16 during which you or anyone else associated with Grand
17 Center or Spring Redevelopment notified Guzzardo that
18 he had not been complying with the contract by
19 providing this financial feasibility study or filing
20 additional quarterly reports?
21 A. No, I continued to meet with Guzzardo
22 and -- and I think it was by this time mostly he and
23 Eric Friedman and we were talking about having more
24 residential, that I was concerned that there wasn't
25 going to be enough rent to cover what they wanted to
Page 87
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 get done, there wasn't going to be enough income
2 Q. Uh-huh.
3 A. but, you know, this was all -- this was
4 all conceptual conversation at that point.
5 Q. DO you recall receiving a -- an e-mail
6 from a Mr. Kozeny in September of 2004 that set out a
7 rather expanded -- expanded document regarding the
8 project itself and the cost associated with the
9 project?
10
11
12
13
14
15
A.
Q.
Q.
I don't.
All right.
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No.7 was marked
for identification.)
Let me show you what's been marked Exhibit
16 Seven and ask if that looks familiar to you at all.
17
18
A.
Q.
This does not look familiar.
Okay. What kind of numbers were you
19 receiving from Guzzardo or anyone associated with
20 with his side of this enterprise as to, you know, what
21 it was going to cost to build the Media Box and the
22 associated residences and the like that was being
23 proposed?
24 A. Again, they were what I would call gross
25 square footage calculations, and -- and just based
Page 88
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc" et alDeposition of Vincent SChoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 upon the gross square footage and what we sort of knew
2 could be commanded by rents in -- in this project, I
3 just felt there was going to have to be more density.
4 It was originally proposed, I think, as three
5 residences.
6
7
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
And that's when we started talking about
8 trying to maybe vacate the street to give it more
9 square footage without any real incremental cost and
10 perhaps add some additional units so that there -- you
11 know, so there could be some additional revenue. Of
12 course there would be additional cost. But it never
13 progressed beyond industry standards and I never saw a
14 real revenue side projection. I saw cost projections.
15 In fact I think there's a cost projection back here.
16 But, you know, to have a pro forma and to figure out
17 what sort of gap you're going to have in your
18 financing between your revenue and your expenses,
19 you've got to have a real pro forma that you can kick
20 the tires with and we never got to the second side of
21 that -- of that pro forma. We had the cost, but we
22 never got a reliable income projection.
23 Q. All right. Can you cite to me any
24 document that would have brought this to the attention
25 of Guzzardo, Friedman, any other -- any other
Page 89
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent SChoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 individuals
2
3
4
5
6
7
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
No, but we --
-- in his group?
NO, but it was discussed.
Discussed on a number of occasions?
Uh-huh.
In fact was it apparent to you that
8 Guzzardo and Friedman were expending, you know, time
9 and effort in developing this -- this project during
10 the course of 2004?
11 A. Absolutely they were and so were we. I
12 mean, we were -- there was a lot of staff time put
13 into this and, as I've stated earlier, you know, we
14 thought this was a good project and -- and wanted to
15 see it get built.
16 Q. Okay. Were there any Board members with
17 Grand Center or Spring Redevelopment that took a
18 particular interest in this project that seemed to be
19 wanting to be aware of and knowledgeable about what
20 was happening?
21 A. I think the -- I think the entire Board
22 was interested in.
23
24
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
You know, there was some skepticism about
25 the -- about the cost, about how big a financing gap
Page 90
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 there would be, but, you know, that's -- that comes
2 with having lawyers and bankers and, you know, CPA's
3 and whatnot on your board, butl you know, we never got
4 to the point where it was we need -- you know, we need
5 to fill this much of the gap.
6 Q. WeIll just so I'm clear on this, presuming
7 the project went forward and was completed, would
8 Grand Center or Spring Redevelopment have any
9 ownership interest in the project itself?
10
11 intent.
12
A.
Q.
No, that was never -- that was never our
And I didn't think so. So, any risk
13 associated with not generating enough revenue to pay
14 for mortgages or whatever on the property would have
15 been risk borne by the developer?
16 A. Yes/ except we are spending time and --
17 and expenses promoting a project, and if you if you
18 promote too many projects that just go nowhere, you
19 lose your capacity to -- to raise money, to sustain
20 momentum, to -- so you have an obligation in my
21 position to your Board and to the City, because we're
22 designated by the City to do this stuff, you have an
23 obligation to pursue projects that are realistic and,
24 you know, Guzzardo and Friedman and some of the other
25 people, they're not the first people that we've had to
Page 91
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 coach on, you know, upSlzlng or downsizing the project
2 or figuring out a different way to approach it. You
3 know, we do that all the time. And, so, no, we
4 wouldn't have been at risk if the project had been
5 completely financed. Where we were at risk was at the
6 front end of the project just, you know, spending time
7 and money trying to move along a project that -- that
8 we didn't see -- we didn't see a firm P & Lon.
9 Q. All right. What was the reason why the
10 Option Contract focused on the singular property of
11 Mr. Day as opposed to, you know, having it, say, in
12 some location within our district would be made
13 available?
14 A. I don't know. I think that's the -- I
15 think Paul and Eric drafted that. I mean, as I stated
16 earlier, that was the property they came to us about.
17 It wasn't do you have a place where we can put this.
18 It was we want to the put this project here.
19
20
Q.
A.
All right.
And they were intrigued with that
21 curvature of the street and how the Media Box could --
22 could fill that space. I mean, there was a particular
23 aesthetic that attracted them to that.
24
25 street
Q. When you talked about vacation of a
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 92
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent SChoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
A.
Q.
Uh-huh.
-- to increase the footprint of the
3 property, whose idea was that?
4
5
A.
Q.
I think that was mine.
Okay. What street were you talking about
6 vacating?
7 A. To the west of the Day property as you
8 were going south on Spring, Spring branches off and it
9 goes to the left and curves around, goes down to
10 Lindell, and then it goes straight through and dead
11 ends at -- at Olive.
12
13
Q.
A.
All right.
So, there is a stretch of about 150 feet
14 by about 40 feet of width, maybe -- maybe more like
15 60, and there's a vacant parking lot that is owned by
16 AT&T on the other side of that. Now, we would have
17 had to get AT&T to agree to this, but they access that
18 parking lot off of Olive. They'd have to give up
19 access off of that vacated Spring portion, but it was
20 something that saying, okay, here's another, you know,
21 six to eight, ten thousand square feet that could be
22 added to the project site that we might be able to do
23 and it wouldn't cost any money.
24 Q. Okay. Looking at the Option Contract on
25 Page 2, in Paragraph 3, the middle of the second
Page 93
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
.'"1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
third paragraph, it states, All such documents shall
remain the property of Guzzardo and Kim and treated as
proprietary and confidential. What did you
understand, number one, the documents were making
reference to in that context?
A. Well, it says the buyer shall deliver the
referenced architectural concepts, financial
feasibility study and prospective program and content
summary to seller for its review and approval prior to
closing on the subject property and seller's
obligation to close on the subject property with
with buyer shall be subject to and contingent upon the
delivery and seller's approval of the referenced
documents, so it was those documents.
Q. Okay. What did you understand the
statement that those documents were to remain the
property of Guzzardo and Kim and treated as
proprietary and confidential?
A. I assume that they didn't want, you know,
their drawings and their financials shared with other
developers.
Q. Okay. Once it was determined that this
project was going to be abandoned, at least the
project contemplated by this Option Contract, was
Grand Center, was Spring Redevelopment in possession
Page 94
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Sehoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 of certain documents that could be considered
2 architectural concepts, studies, programming, and
3 content summaries?
4 A. Other than the last document that you
5 handed me, which was Number Seven, document Number
6 Seven that has -- isn't that the one with the drawing?
7 No. I'm sorry. Document Number Six. It's got
8 some -- It's got some drawings attached to it. And
9 then document Number Seven has -- has some cost
10 estimates associated with it. Other than that, 1 ' m
11 not aware of any -- any drawings or documents that
12 would have been -- would have been considered
13 confidential. Notwithstanding, I don't recall getting
14 on April on August the 15th a folder. I don't know
15 what was in that folder.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
The binder --
The binder, yeah.
-- that was referenced?
Right.
(At this point, Plaintiff's
Exhibit No. 8 was marked
for identification.)
Let me show you Plaintiff's Exhibit Number
24 Eight and ask if you recognize this document at all.
25 A. I don't remember the document in specific,
Page 95
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 but it's all familiar. I mean, I -- And it's
2 addressed to the Grand Center Board. I think I may
3 have asked Paul and Eric to prepare this to present to
4 the Board.
5 Q. All right. Once the -- the attempt to
6 purchase the property or obtain the property
7 referenced in the Option Contract was abandoned, what
8 did Grand Center or Spring Redevelopment do with any
9 of the documents prepared and submitted by Guzzardo,
10 Kim, or Friedman?
11 A. Nothing to my knowledge. I mean, I think
12 that, you know, I contacted Paul and we looked at
13 alternative sites in Grand Center. I showed him that
14 burnt church site, I showed him some other properties
15 around, but to my knowledge, we didn't share the
16 documents with anyone.
17 Q. In How did that -- Strike that. What
18 did you or anyone associated with Grand Center do to
19 notify Guzzardo, Friedman, Kim, any of the people
20 associated with them that you had decided to abandon
21 the attempt to obtain the property by eminent domain?
22 A. We talked about this before. You asked
23 did I talk to them before we did that and I said I
24 couldn't recall.
25 Q. Right.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 96
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
sites?
Q. What was the date that the Board voted to
Q. From?
A. It was shortly thereafter, I called him.
I mean,
I do have a specificI don't.
You know, I don't know offhand.A.
A.
Q. -- further action?
A. You know, I --
Q. When did you then approach Paul and in
A. Right.
Q. The Post-Dispatch?
A. From the Post-Dispatch.
A. And, unfortunately, as soon as the Board
voted to drop the lawsuit, someone alerted the press
and/or Eric that day, but it was probably nine o'clock
and, so, this was -- this was in the news media that
what way did you approach Paul about looking at other
in the morning and the Post-Dispatch was already on
suspend --
the story.
Q. All right. Do you have a specific
recollection of talking to either one of them?
recollection of getting a phone call almost 15 minutes
after our Board meeting ended, so ...
day and I suspect I had talked to Paul and -- and --
,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 97
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25~.
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
we can get the date, but I --
Q. Sure.
A. -- but I donlt recall offhand, but it was
shortly thereafter. And we looked at other -- you
know, we looked at other sites. And I can't -- You
know, I mean, I couldn't tell you if that was within
two days or two weeks, but it was within sort of that
time frame.
Q. Did you meet with him about that?
A. Oh, yeah, yeah.
Q. Okay. Where did you meet with him?
A. I think we -- we actually met at the burnt
church. Maybe met at my office and went over there, I
can't recall, but I remember specifically showing him
that burnt church because he was interested -- he
seemed pretty interested in that site. And we're
we're still looking for something to do with it.
Q. Other than the burnt church, where else
did you --
A. Well, there's --
Q. talk to him about?
A. there's a considerable amount of land
along Spring that is -- that's vacant. Just north
immediately across Grandel from the burnt church and I
think we -- You know, I don't recall precisely other
Page 98
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
Q. Yeah.
recollection of that, of discussing the Woolworth
neighborhood. You know, you just drive through this
could have been mentioned as a possibility, but I'm
I think the Woolworth
I mean, we probably drove the
Not that I recall.
I certainly don't have any clear
A.
Q. Over what span of time do you think you
that was known as the Woolworth Building and using
Page 99
had discussions with Paul about other sites that might
than that.
Building.
Q. Okay. Do you know whether JoAnne LaSalla
not sure.
may have had further discussions with Guzzardo about
other properties that might be available?
A. May well have had, yeah. As I say, I
think she and Paul knew one another.
that in any way?
neighborhood, there are a lot of places where you can
build buildings as I think you pointed out earlier.
Q. Was there a discussion about a building
A. Yeah. By then, I'm pretty sure Big
Brothers Big Sisters had -- had expressed an interest
in getting that develop -- in being the developer for
that. You know, I could -- You know, it could -- it
Building -- This is 2005, right, that we're
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
r--..
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
A. Not that I remember.
St. Louis ,University that I thought was important, so
guessing.
mean, I think -- I think finding another location
I mean, I took him on --Not that long.A.
just couldn't reach a consensus?
A. No, I wouldn't say we had. You know, I
there ever a conflict in that regard where you guys
you felt would work that Paul didn't or, you know, was
of ground wouldn't be suitable for a development like
what you may have expressed before why a vacant piece
Q. And do you know of any reason other than
know, where do you put something like this that
I don't think anybody had flagging enthusiasm.
Q. I mean, were there any parking lots that
that you want it to have and the connectivity to
it's -- that it has the fit and the feel that you
became -- you know, became the central issue. You
him. So, you know, I mean, you know, I would just be
on that tour and I think perhaps JoAnne and
Ken Christian had some follow-up conversations with
Q. Had you or your Boards tempered their
enthusiasm for the Media Box project after the Wagman
article was pUblished?
work?/"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 100
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 a Media Box?
2
3
A.
Q.
No.
In fact you'd have to tear down what was
4 there in most instances to put the Media Box if you
5 would have one, right?
6 A. Well, in the singular instance, yeah, we
7 would have had to tear down that old Shell gas
8 station--
9
10
Q.
A.
Right.
-- but your -- to your point, there are
11 places in -- in Grand Center where the Media Box
12 concept could have been executed. I think, you know,
13 from the drawings l the concepts, and whatnot I they put
14 a lot of focus on the design specifically around that
15 particular spot. And given the shape of that piece of
16 land, it wasn't something you could just pick up and
17 move someplace else. There would have been a lot of
18 energy associated with redesigning it.
19 Q. I appreciate that, but to me, and I'm
20 certainly not trained in architecture or design,
21 anything like that, it sort of looks like a box and it
22 seems like it would fit just about anywhere. Am I
23 missing a point here or is there something about your
24 conversations with them that cause you to believe that
25 there was something unique about, you know, this
Page 101
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 building and how it wouldn't be able to fit just on a
2 vacant piece of property no matter where it is?
3
4 worked.
A. No, I think the -- the concept could have
I think they were intrigued with the -- with
5 the curvature of the street and the way in which that
6 offered some opportunities for visual engagement with
7 the property, the location or the juxtaposition
8 between the Contemporary, The Pulitzer, and St. Louis
9 University right down the street, I think those all
10 had sort of, if you will, special attributes to this,
11 but, I mean, when I asked Paul to join me on a tour to
12 look at other locations, he carne and my recollection
13 is Eric was with him and, you know, we -- we wanted to
14 find another spot and I thought he wanted to find
15 another spot.
16 Q. All right. The last time that you met
17 with him or spoke to him about -- Guzzardo I mean or
18 Friedman for that matter spoke to either one of
19 them about this project and what could be done, if
20 anything, in Grand Center, when was that?
21 A. I would -- I'm not -- I'm not sure. I
22 just -- I'd be guessing.
23 Q. Did you have some contacts with Paul then
24 in 2006, near the end of 2006 about getting involved
25 in some consulting work or projects?
Page 102
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
stuff and he seemed to know a lot about it or know
have done that in 2006, 2000 -- yeah, 2006. And I did
I don't -- I'm not a technician and I didn't know that
here because this is just occurring to me as you're
I mean, I
I could be wrong
I don't know. I mean, you know, I didn't
that you may have had when you just picked up the
A. New Year's Eve festival and we might
types of because there were lots and lots of people
times, I believe, just to ask him to interpret certain
that want to do lighting displays in Grand Center and
call him from time to time just to talk through ideas.
people who did and, so, you know, I innocently would
Q. At any time during those conversations
Q. Right.
A. Yeah, actually, I think we may have
know he was upset enough to file a lawsuit.
millions of pages. And, so, I called him several
call Paul.
considered him a friend and I just picked the phone up
and called him from time to time to ask about lighting
technologies. And, you know, you go to Google and you
type in, you know, artistic lighting and you'll get
engaged him to do a light project.
asking this, but I think -- I think we engaged him to
do a light project or projection project at First
Night, which is this
'" 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Page 103
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 phone, did the conversation ever corne back around to,
2 you know, the Jim Day property acquisition
3 attempt and
4
5
6 time?
7
A.
Q.
A.
No.
-- what's happened to everybody since that
No. I mean, I -- the last time I remember
8 talking with him, he was someplace in South America --
9
10
Q.
A.
Uh-huh.
-- and I called him on the cell phone and
11 he answered and I could tell just by the nature of the
12 sound that he was someplace strange and he said, Yeah,
13 I'm someplace in South America and, so, it was a brief
14 conversation, but specifically I was asking him about
15 some sort of lighting technology. I forget what the
16 specific question was.
17 Q. Did Grand Center notice any adverse effect
18 financially from the Jim Day newspaper articles and --
19 and press that was associated with it, like a fall in
20 donations or any lost income because of it to your
21 knowledge?
22
23
A.
Q.
I couldn't say that with certainty.
All right. Did you ever speak with any
24 donor making a solicitation and being rebuffed because
25 of what they perceived to have been the manner in
Page 104
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
was asked to leave a board as a result of the article.
reasonable to believe that the individuals who were
article?
A. I don't know. I mean, I -- I believe I
that Paul thinks that he
A. -- all of whom were donors, and they were
Q. Do you think Mr. Guzzardo and Mr. Friedman
associated with it because of that article, isn't it
that your organization had some negative press
Q. All right. Since your Board perceived
heard about any negative impact on them was when I
anything from -- from Eric about it. First time I
He never said anything to me about it. I never heard
read the Complaint.
Page 105
identified in the article as being involved in that
enthusiasm, you can interpret that to the larger
know, so, to the extent that they were losing
read in the Complaint that
had any negative publicity associated with the Wagman
A. Well, I wouldn't put it that way. I would
say that I talked to my Board --
Q. Right.
concerned about the negative publicity and -- and, you
community, I think.
which the Jim Day property acquisition had been
handled?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
,,", 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
"Masuga Court Reporting
314/680-2424
,~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
program or that project would also have had some
negative connotation associated with them?
MS, LUBBEN: Objection, calls
for speculation.
A. You know, you read that article, and on
its face, that article was about Grand Center and
about Vince Schoemehl and about litigation. The Media
Box is mentioned in passing. My candid opinion is you
have to be pretty thin skinned if you're Paul Guzzardo
or Eric Friedman to be offended by that article.
Q, Okay.
A. I mean, that article was about Grand
Center and me and -- and a misrepresentation of a
litigious history that I had had, you know, from 2001
to 2005 and about eminent domain as a national issue.
I mean, you know, the Media Box was a footnote in
that -- in that article and, you know, I mean, I was
stunned when I read this Complaint.
Q. All right. I don't know whether you
consider yourself qualified to -- to answer these
questions, but do you believe that Grand Center has
since the time of, you know, this project with the
Media Box applied or used any techniques or procedures
that were provided to Grand Center and Spring
Redevelopment in the materials submitted by Guzzardo
Page 106
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 and Sung Ho Kim in their presentation of the Media Box
2 project?
3 A. I'm going to say no, I'm not qualified to
4 answer that Icause I -- yeah.
5 Q. Do you know about the projects that were
6 performed by Rainer Kehres and Sebastian Hungerer
7 regarding the burnt church?
8
9
10 that?
11
A.
Q.
A.
Yes.
And what involvement did you have with
That was a light show project that was
12 sponsored by The Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts.
13 Grand Center's involvement was we provided, I think,
14 $15,000 in financial support to the project. It
15 involved the burnt church, I think the Contemporary
16 Art Museum, an installation on a piece of vacant land
17 across from The Pulitzer, The Pulitzer Foundation
18 itself, some interior lighting and exterior lighting.
19 Our involvement was -- And a installation by Powell
20 Symphony Hall. And our involvement was to allow them
21 to use the property by Powell Symphony Hall, the burnt
22 church, and provide $15,000 in programming money.
23
24 that
25
Q.
A.
Do you know what the total amount of
I --
Page 107
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1
2
3
Q.
A.
Q.
-- project cost was?
I don't.
Okay. Was there anyone other than Grand
4 Center and The Pulitzer that commissioned that work to
5 be done?
6 A. I don't know. The Contemporary might
7 have, but I don't know.
8 Q. Are you familiar with the project that
9 Ann Lislegaard did with, I guess it was called Crystal
10 World at the Contemporary?
11 A. I think that was part of that same -- that
12 same overall --
13
14
15
Q.
A.
Q.
Oh-huh.
-- light program if I'm not mistaken.
Okay. Did Grand Center pay anything to
16 Ann Lislegaard?
17 A. Well, no, I think it all carne out of the
18 same pool
19
20
Q.
A.
Okay.
-- okay? And, you know, the people you're
21 mentioning here, these individuals, these are
22 international--
23
24
Q.
A.
Oh-huh.
artists who use these lighting
25 techniques allover the world, so, I mean, it's not --
Page 108
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 so, I mean, nothing -- nothing they did was
2 proprietary, let me put it that way.
3 Q. Did things that they did, were they things
4 that you believe Mr. Guzzardo could have arranged and
5 produced, as well?
6
7
MS. LUBBEN: Objection, calls
for speculation, lack of foundation.
8 A. I have no idea. I mean, this was a
9 international light show involving international
10 artists. I don't know that Paul has any international
11 art curatorial experience. I mean, these were ~~ But
12 I have no idea if he could have curated that show or
13 not.
14 Q. What were the lighting projection projects
15 that you talked to him about here in Grand Center --
16
17
18
19
20
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Well, he --
-- at the end of 2006?
I think he actually did one.
Uh-huh.
I stand to be corrected by the record, but
21 I think -- I think we engaged him and paid him to do a
22 projection on The Pulitzer Foundation building if I'm
23 not mistaken.
24 Q. Sir, you've been patient with me. That's
25 all I have today.
Page 109
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc" et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
MS. LUBBEN: We'll review the
transcript.
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 110
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
1 STATE OF MISSOURISS
2 COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS
3
4 I, Sara Alice Masuga, Certified Shorthand
5 Reporter and Certified Court Reporter within the
6 States of Illinois and Missouri, DO HEREBY CERTIFY
7 that pursuant to agreement between counsel that on
8 September 18, 2012, at the offices of Grand Center,
9 Incorporated, 3526 Washington Avenue, 2nd Floor,
10 St. Louis, Missouri, there appeared before me the
11 aforementioned witness, and having been duly sworn to
12 tell the whole truth, was examined, and the
13 examination was taken down in shorthand by me and
14 afterwards transcribed upon the computer, and said
15 transcription is herewith returned.
16 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto
17 subscribed my name this 12th day of October, 2012.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IL CSR No. 084-002993MO CCR No. 1012(G)
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Page 113
Paul Guzzardo v, Grand Center, Inc, et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THECITY OF ST, LOUISSTATE OF MISSOURI
PAUL GUZZARDO,Plaintiff,
vs,GRAND CENTER, INC" etal,
Defendants.
APPEARANCES:
No, 0922-CC01036
For Plaintiff:For Defendants:
Callis, Papa, Hale & Szewczyk, PCStinson Morrison Hecker, LLP
CERTIFICATE OF OFFICER/STATEMENT OF DEPOSITION CHARGES
Deposition of VINCENT SCHOEMEHL taken on behalf of thePlaintiff on September 18, 2012
NO, of Pages: 115 Signature Reserved
Firm in possession of original transcript:
Callis, Papa, Hale & Szewczyk, PC, 1326 NiedringhausAvenue, P.O. Box 1326, Granite City, IL 62040
Taxing Info:
PLAINTIFF:DEFENDANTS:
$561, 25$228,00
r"-,
Upon delivery of transcript, the above charges had notyet been paid. It is required that all charges willbe paid in the normal course of business,
Page 114
Masuga Court Reporting314/680-2424
Paul Guzzardo v. Grand Center, Inc., et alDeposition of Vincent Schoemehl taken on 9/18/2012
MASUGA COURT REPORTING2033 Hiawatha Avenue
St. Louis, MO 63143-1215(314)680-2424
October 12, 2012
Stinson Morrison Hecker, LLPAttn: Ms. Cicely I. Lubben168 N. Meramec Ave., Suite 400St. Louis, MO 63105
In Re: PAUL GUZZARDO vs. GRAND CENTER, INC., et alNo. 0922-CC01036
Dear Ms. Lubben:
Enclosed herewith, please find your copy of thedeposition transcript of VINCENT SCHOEMEHL taken inthe above-styled matter along with the originalsignature page of same.
Please have the deponent read your copy of thetranscript, note any corrections to be made, sign theoriginal signature page, have the deponent's signaturenotarized where indicated, and return the signedsignature page and correction sheets to Mr. Papa forproper filing of the original transcript with theCourt.