Local News

City drops lawsuit against man buying Roanoke Rapids Theatre

Posted March 7, 2012

— Roanoke Rapids is dropping its lawsuit against a Chicago businessman who has twice agreed to buy the troubled Roanoke Rapids Theatre. 

Several years ago, Lafayette Gatling entered into a $12.5 lease-purchase agreement for the theater, but the city terminated it in 2010 when Gatling failed to pay more than $500,000 in back rent.

The city filed suit against Gatling and he countered with a lawsuit of his own. 

Roanoke Rapids Mayor Emery Doughtie said the city has authorized its attorney to drop the lawsuit against Gatling. The move should help the city move forward with getting a contract signed to sell the theatre. 

Roanoke Rapids agreed again in November to sell the music theater to Gatling for $7.1 million in cash.

Attorney H. Lawrence Armstrong said last month that Gatling is negotiating with developers to buy some land near the theater for projects that could include a water park, movie theater or restaurants.

Roanoke Rapids borrowed $21.5 million in 2005 to build the theater along Interstate 95 to attract tourists and help boost the economy. Local taxpayers are now paying nearly $2 million a year in borrowing and operating costs.

The city will still have to pay about $12 million on the property after the sale, but Doughtie has said the city would be able to refinance the remaining debt to make it more manageable.

5 Comments

This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • superman Mar 8, 9:51 a.m.

    And Raleigh had to build a convention center!

  • Karmageddon Mar 8, 9:08 a.m.

    It's way too easy for towns and cities to use taxpayer money for projects like that. I'd bet the residents never voted to build that boondoggle.

  • Skyyecatfromafar Mar 8, 8:56 a.m.

    Agreed, andy2. Aren't we seeing enough of that in the "big(ger) picture when it comes to the Fed. govt?!! That's half the trouble with this country now . . Big Bro has its nose in too much business (other countries)instead of taking care of its own business . . us.

  • andy2 Mar 8, 8:31 a.m.

    That building should be razed and the property sold. They need to take there licks and move along. The "schooldoctor" is correct towns do not need to be in business ventures.

  • schooldoctor Mar 8, 8:05 a.m.

    This is why city and county governments should not get into any business venture that is supposeed to generate money other than the services they provide like water, sewer, etc. Most have more than they can do to provide and maintain.