AGC is suing SJ(C?), the SJ Foundation, the City of Sitka, and PC USA for $4.5 million.
Earlier this summer it was discovered that the collateral held for a loan to SJ for the same amount had been filed improperly. As a result, AGC did not have a lien on the lower portion of campus, only uplands. The city saw this as a chance to place a lien on the lower part of campus for unpaid utilities.
Well, none of this sat well with AGC, who argues that SJ knew and intended that the entire campus be used as collateral. They allege that SJ has been unwilling to amend the documents to rectify the situation. Further, they state that SJ has failed to make payments as scheduled. So, they are suing for the amount owed, asking the courts to amend documents to accurately reflect the intended agreement, and asking to foreclose on the loan.
This is bad news for those groups trying to break away from SJ and run independently.
The Sentinel reported this story in Thursday's (Nov. 8th) paper.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Actually, the AGC action is good news, in a perverse kinda way. As long as SJC has a pending legal action that involves lands (not buildings?) as collateral, the BOT can't sell pieces of the campus, including those that might serve as the core for the several independent groups mentioned. And I doubt that AGC wants to be stuck with a turkey, even if it is dressed up as highly valuable acreage.
The only way it is valuable enough for their purposes is as something they can sell to a cruise line or some such for-profit entity with deep pockets and prospects of substantial profits. But that gives us all time to make contacts and raise funds.
I don't think that will happen, but that is what could happen if the right people got involved.
Then again, like anonymous says, I'm just a clown, still, with my idealistic dreaming and calling out for leaders to lead.
Sigh
I looked them up, and Alaska Growth Capital is a Certified Community Development Financial Institution. The certification may provide (or allow, depending on how you look at it) them unique opportunities to work with institutions that serve American Indian and Alaska Native organizations. I am curious as to the policies that govern their actions - at least to the extent that they maintain the CDFI certification.
Should the deal with SJC have been done? Now that SJC is in default, are there rules that the Treasury enforces with regard to the timing and extent of a law suit. If SJC goes into bankruptcy proceeding, are there other rules that confine AGC to a more limited legal course?
I assume SJC has legal representation that can and has answered these and related questions, but then again, maybe not...
Post a Comment