David Montgomery pieces together the most complete profile yet of Joop Bollen, the man who would be the most important witness in any state investigation of the EB-5 visa investment program... assuming any state officials were interested in really investigating the EB-5 visa investment program.
Montgomery provides a number of tidbits about the dashing Dutch EB-5 chief, Aberdeen landlord, and antiquities collector. He gets a little background on Bollen's longtime partnership with Georgia businessman Pyush Patel, who became Bollen's VP at EB-5-running SDRC Inc. after former USCIS official Maurice Berez left the scene.
Perhaps most usefully, Montgomery helps us understand the motivation for taking the EB-5 program out from under the Board of Regents and into a private corporation: Bollen saw a chance to put more money in his pocket.
In 2009, Bollen resigned his job at the International Business Institute to work for his own company, SDRC Inc., which was given control of South Dakota's EB-5 program the same day Bollen quit.
Jim Smith, Northern State's president, said EB-5 had became Bollen's passion — "the work he was doing and that he liked to do."
Working on his own also had financial benefits for Bollen. As a state employee, Bollen earned a fixed salary for promoting EB-5. SDRC Inc. received more money the more investors it recruited for South Dakota projects. Its fees for projects included annual payments to SDRC of $10,000 per investor, per year — millions of dollars all told, given the almost 1,000 approved investors the company signed up [David Montgomery, "EB-5 Secrets Lie with Silent Joop Bollen," that Sioux Falls paper, 2014.08.10].
And remember, Bollen made sure he wouldn't have to compete with other bidders for that payoff by keeping his official, non-commission salary under the $50,000 threshold that would have required the state to seek bids for EB-5 services.
People lost jobs. Foreign immigrants lost investments. South Dakota taxpayers lost $4.3 million. But EB-5 promoted all sorts of economic development in the Joop Bollen household. And it helped Emory University get a really nice mummy mask.
Hmm. Makes one wonder how Bollen has been able to afford such an expensive hobby. As for his perfidy, isn't he a Dutch citizen? Does he have loyalty anywhere? Or is he simply devoted to the location of the largest $$$?
State republican rulers don't care...move along, nothing to see here.
Bollen could sink the whole wretched ship: his silence is pricele$$.
Can't help but wonder if there is a price being paid for his silence? Let me think, kill the investigation, or else?
Imagine Bobby Kennedy's killer would still be on the loose if authorities ignored Sirhan Sirhan they way they have ignored Bollen.
Maybe the entire wingnut party needs lessons in how to investigate crimes and preserve evidence.
You people are really scaring me with the stories about this Yoop boogie-boogie-man fellow.
If I told you I was a squarehead would you understand my concerns?
Wow, it is incredible how Joop Bollen has turned invincible in South Dakota. Is it lawful to receive private payment as a state employee ... aka "kickback" in SD? Prior to privatizing SDRC, as an employee of the state, if he was paid about $30k per application, it's just not acceptable to question his personal finances? Also the Northern State IBI was the charted entity to conduct the program, not SDRC. Why is it acceptable for a private party to obscond a federal program without due process of fair market? What would the IRS say?
Jane, it boggles me that this sort of rank profiteering takes place on the public dollar and no one, not the Governor, not the AG, not the Legislature, no one takes action. No one seconds Susan Wimser's call for a subpoena.
Joop Bollen exploited a public program for his personal interest. Mike Rounds let him do it and sent money his way via Future Fund grants to help. If voters look at those actions and shrug, what hope is there for good government?
Myers, Hubbel press conference tomorrow and please, no fema camp questions.
Hey, don't tell us not to ask about FEMA camps. That's someone else's hobbyhorse. Keep it real, keep it focused.
Kevin Woster agrees: Joop Bollen should talk.
So do the editorial boards of the Rapid City Journal, the Watertown Public Opinion, the Aberdeen American News, the Yankton Press & Dakotan and the Pierre Capital Journal. Oddly quiet about this severe breach of trust and public transparency is the Sioux Falls Argus Leader. Is there an advertising deal afoot involving the Rounds campaign and the GOP state chairman?
Waiting out the clock.
It has always surprised me that the Aberdeen area doesn't serve more as ground zero for outrage over the EB-5 fiasco. It may be that so much money was shuffled around in the area, and some of the power players are so well-connected, much of the general public in that great part of our state prefers to suffer in silent embarrassment rather than call for some answers and accountability.
I also find that the opinion that our legislature has "limits" in its subpoena power is primarily a way to seek political cover in hopes that all memories of the sordid mess eventually fade like old photographs.
The AG doesn't say the legislature has no subpoena power, just that he thinks it may be limited in light of EB-5 being a federal program. I agree with Kevin Woster and others who prefer to see those limits at least explored, if not ultimately established by a court.
Yes EB-5 is a federal program. However it is administered by the State, involving state agencies and, after SDRC was created, state contracts, state banking regulations, state monies, and state tax breaks. In light of that, there likely would be a great deal of information the legislature could seek if it had the courage. Subpoena Bollen and his records and let him try to quash it, then let a court establish what limits may exist. I think the legislature is afraid of what it might find and it is possible someone with serious political clout could be implicated.
The fact that the legislature won't even attempt to probe the matter beyond a cursory dusting reinforces the notion that there is too much at risk politically, and those political implications are more important than the public trust. That is what is ultimately offensive about the whole debacle - That our government serves the needs of certain individuals rather than the people of South Dakota.
Jim,
Your observation (in my view) is exactly the reason for the dearth of media and public inquiry into the EB-5 fiasco. Too many moneyed politicians -- both elected and appointed -- have too much to lose if the truth comes out. And they have the power to quash it. Your words should be repeated, underscored, shouted from rooftops:
"I think the legislature is afraid of what it might find and it is possible someone with serious political clout could be implicated. The fact that the legislature won't even attempt to probe the matter beyond a cursory dusting reinforces the notion that there is too much at risk politically, and those political implications are more important than the public trust. That is what is ultimately offensive about the whole debacle - That our government serves the needs of certain individuals rather than the people of South Dakota."
Ever wonder how these folks became financially able to begin with? As mentioned in David Mongomery's article, how was Joop Bollen able to afford $250,000 for a piece of art to begin with? Some people need to be audited big time! Joop Bollen, Anita Bollen, Pyush Patel, James Park and Austin Kim of Hanul Law Firm must have information that can help demystify the SD EB5.
Sorry this may be a better place to post
This was just posted Dems want to subpoena Rounds, DD SDRC and Bollen
http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm/sd-dems-ask-panel-to-subpoena-daugaard-rounds/?id=168383
http://www.argusleader.com/story/news/politics/2014/08/19/democrats-call-daugaard-rounds-subpoenas/14302883/
1-26-19.1. Administration of oaths--Subpoena powers--Witness fees--Disobedience of subpoena. Each agency and the officers thereof charged with the duty to administer the laws of this state and rules of the agency shall have power to administer oaths as provided by chapter 18-3 and to subpoena witnesses to appear and give testimony and to produce records, books, papers and documents relating to any matters in contested cases and likewise issue subpoenas for such purposes for persons interested therein as provided by § 15-6-45. Unless otherwise provided by law fees for witnesses shall be as set forth in chapter 19-5 and be paid by the agency or party for whom the witness is subpoenaed.
Failure of a person to obey the subpoena issued pursuant to this chapter may be punished as a contempt of court in the manner provided by chapter 21-34.
Source: SL 1972, ch 8, § 21.
This is pretty clear that they have subpoena power and I don't see any limitations on it. The only reason Jackley would not agree is the corruption of the wingnut party meeting the light of day.