Mr. Essi -
You certainly don't need my permission to put a copy of an email you sent to me on a public forum but you barely gave me a day to respond. However, you knew that posting it and following it up with "24 hours and Anderson has not answered" would make me a target of ridicule and harassment by many. And sure enough, Peppard, Harkness, Fitzgibbons and Buckley ate up. Nice job and you pontificate as to what's "tearing this city apart"? Seriously.
1. “You apparently have the records that detail the breakdown of the ‘$37,951M’ book value of assets.” Please re-read my answer – September 2015 LHA financials of which you have a copy.
2. “What ‘higher valuation’ are you referring to here?” Again, please re-read my answer. The appraisal of the 850 Columbia complex came in at $6.8M or $800,000 higher than the complex' provided book value. We ordered the appraisal and LHA and the Clinic cooperated. Are you not in receipt of the Charles M. Ritley Associates LLC appraisal of this complex dated June 15, 2015? I provided it to Bill Call when he wrote in a recent article that 850 Columbia was “appraised at nearly $15 million and the City had an offer from another interested party for a lot more than $8.2 million.” I have yet to see a retraction of the bogus $15 million claim and the City never received any such offer. The net asset valuation was $126.5M and we started negotiating at $128M. THAT'S A GOOD THING. WE STARTED NEGOTIATING FROM A FINANCIAL POINT HIGHER THAN THE VALUATION OF THE NET ASSETS.
3-7. “The following requests remain completely unanswered …” Please re-read my answer which I pasted below.
”Accept it or not, the Clinic considered many of its operating documents pertaining to the wind down/transition costs as privileged information. However, the details of these were made available during the negotiating process. Not one person working on our side of the negotiating table thought that there were enough resources in LHA's assets to absorb all anticipated and unanticipated transition costs and were rightfully concerned that the City could be liable for these uncovered liabilities throughout 2016. In fact, the issue of uncovered transition costs was ultimately accepted by the Clinic which put up another $7.0M to cover this need. Acting when Council did relieved the City of any transition costs not covered by LHA assets from the moment Council's December 2015 action was signed by all parties.”
This leaves questions 8 and 9.
8. “Tenant Relocation Costs. What is the amount of tenant relocation expenses?” I am not aware of all expenses related to the relocation effort. Council negotiated the item but I do not have the final numbers regarding this effort. I have inquired as to whether all the possible bills for this effort are in hand and will report back to you when the picture on this relatively minor line item is clearer.
9. “Operating Losses. Do you have anything to substantiate that amount?” This was a negotiated forecast as it was finalized in December of 2015 in consideration of anticipated and unanticipated losses during 2016. Operating losses coming out of LHA assets ended when the ink dried on the contracts. This was a big deal for Council as we did not want fluctuating numbers in 2016 and beyond. We wanted to know that LHA assets would not be chiseled away to fund any unanticipated losses during 2016. Again, transition costs include insurance, pension obligations, malpractice insurance, tenant relocation and other miscellaneous items.
Yours in service,
David W. Anderson
Member of Council, Ward 1
David.anderson@lakewoodoh.net
216-789-6463
Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Moderator: Jim O'Bryan
-
David Anderson
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:41 pm
-
Michael Deneen
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:10 pm
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
I appreciate your participation here, but this is the job you ran for last year.David Anderson wrote:You certainly don't need my permission to put a copy of an email you sent to me on a public forum but you barely gave me a day to respond. However, you knew that posting it and following it up with "24 hours and Anderson has not answered" would make me a target of ridicule and harassment by many. And sure enough, Peppard, Harkness, Fitzgibbons and Buckley ate up. Nice job and you pontificate as to what's "tearing this city apart"? Seriously.
And yes, the corrupt Mayor and his cronies are the ones tearing this city apart. Don't try shifting blame to the concerned citizens of Lakewood.
You and your fellow politicians have already done enough of that to the people that you allegedly "serve".
-
Brian Essi
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Mr. Anderson,
You have been misled that the E&Y statements provide any true measure of value---they express the the "book value" not fair market value. You and your colleagues failed us by not valuing the going concern and assets and not testing the market by listing and advertising the publicly owned hospital for sale or lease in a professional manner. Arguing from book value as a starting point was and is a fool's errand they sent you on.
Anderson: You certainly don't need my permission to put a copy of an email you sent to me on a public forum but you barely gave me a day to respond. However, you knew that posting it and following it up with "24 hours and Anderson has not answered" would make me a target of ridicule and harassment by many. And sure enough, Peppard, Harkness, Fitzgibbons and Buckley ate up. Nice job and you pontificate as to what's "tearing this city apart"? Seriously.
Essi: Burgess and Burgess tactic--accuse other of what City Hall is doing.
1. “You apparently have the records that detail the breakdown of the ‘$37,951M’ book value of assets.”
Anderson: Please re-read my answer – September 2015 LHA financials of which you have a copy.
Essi: I read your answer. I am asking for the breakdown--it is not included in the audited financial statements--example: how did you come up with $3M of equipment? Did you have an equipment list?
2. “What ‘higher valuation’ are you referring to here?”
Anderson: Again, please re-read my answer. The appraisal of the 850 Columbia complex came in at $6.8M or $800,000 higher than the complex' provided book value. We ordered the appraisal and LHA and the Clinic cooperated. Are you not in receipt of the Charles M. Ritley Associates LLC appraisal of this complex dated June 15, 2015? I provided it to Bill Call when he wrote in a recent article that 850 Columbia was “appraised at nearly $15 million and the City had an offer from another interested party for a lot more than $8.2 million.” I have yet to see a retraction of the bogus $15 million claim and the City never received any such offer. The net asset valuation was $126.5M and we started negotiating at $128M. THAT'S A GOOD THING. WE STARTED NEGOTIATING FROM A FINANCIAL POINT HIGHER THAN THE VALUATION OF THE NET ASSETS.
Essi: You had a CCF trustee, Tom Gable, oversee and give information to an appraiser of the city's interest in a multi-million dollar property. One of the best commercial realtors in town told me that property was $13million "all day long" The appraisal by Gable was baked--look at the comps--its a joke.
3-7. “The following requests remain completely unanswered …”
Anderson: Please re-read my answer which I pasted below.
Essi: you never answered
Anderson:”Accept it or not, the Clinic considered many of its operating documents pertaining to the wind down/transition costs as privileged information. However, the details of these were made available during the negotiating process. Not one person working on our side of the negotiating table thought that there were enough resources in LHA's assets to absorb all anticipated and unanticipated transition costs and were rightfully concerned that the City could be liable for these uncovered liabilities throughout 2016. In fact, the issue of uncovered transition costs was ultimately accepted by the Clinic which put up another $7.0M to cover this need. Acting when Council did relieved the City of any transition costs not covered by LHA assets from the moment Council's December 2015 action was signed by all parties.”
Essi: The State Auditor said we sold the hospital to CCF--why are we paying them to "wind it down" and "transition" it? So you give away a $100M million in value to CCF based upon whistles and stories from CCF---David, this was our hospital and our money--CCF was our fiduciary---there is nothing "privileged." Like you as our public servant--they owed us a duty of complete transparency. You are admitting that City Council, Mayor Summers, Jenn Pae and Mr. Butler did not verify CCF's naked claims concerning 10 of millions of dollars of wind down/transition costs--that must be why Summers told the PD there were "$78M in wind down costs" and now they have dwindled to $27M plus a $10M loss-News flash:--there aren't any wind down costs and there aren't any losses--it is all a hoax. You have been played.
This leaves questions 8 and 9.
8. “Tenant Relocation Costs. What is the amount of tenant relocation expenses?”
Anderson: I am not aware of all expenses related to the relocation effort. Council negotiated the item but I do not have the final numbers regarding this effort. I have inquired as to whether all the possible bills for this effort are in hand and will report back to you when the picture on this relatively minor line item is clearer.
Essi: A million here, a million there, no big deal.
9. “Operating Losses. Do you have anything to substantiate that amount?”
Anderson: This was a negotiated forecast as it was finalized in December of 2015 in consideration of anticipated and unanticipated losses during 2016. Operating losses coming out of LHA assets ended when the ink dried on the contracts. This was a big deal for Council as we did not want fluctuating numbers in 2016 and beyond. We wanted to know that LHA assets would not be chiseled away to fund any unanticipated losses during 2016. Again, transition costs include insurance, pension obligations, malpractice insurance, tenant relocation and other miscellaneous items.
Essi: "Chiseled away? Huh? This is double dipping with the wind down costs--it was closed in a month what losses? if they are losing $10 million with cheap rent like you've been told, the ER will close right after November 8th--we both know how CCF operates if it is not making money it will close.
You have been misled that the E&Y statements provide any true measure of value---they express the the "book value" not fair market value. You and your colleagues failed us by not valuing the going concern and assets and not testing the market by listing and advertising the publicly owned hospital for sale or lease in a professional manner. Arguing from book value as a starting point was and is a fool's errand they sent you on.
Anderson: You certainly don't need my permission to put a copy of an email you sent to me on a public forum but you barely gave me a day to respond. However, you knew that posting it and following it up with "24 hours and Anderson has not answered" would make me a target of ridicule and harassment by many. And sure enough, Peppard, Harkness, Fitzgibbons and Buckley ate up. Nice job and you pontificate as to what's "tearing this city apart"? Seriously.
Essi: Burgess and Burgess tactic--accuse other of what City Hall is doing.
1. “You apparently have the records that detail the breakdown of the ‘$37,951M’ book value of assets.”
Anderson: Please re-read my answer – September 2015 LHA financials of which you have a copy.
Essi: I read your answer. I am asking for the breakdown--it is not included in the audited financial statements--example: how did you come up with $3M of equipment? Did you have an equipment list?
2. “What ‘higher valuation’ are you referring to here?”
Anderson: Again, please re-read my answer. The appraisal of the 850 Columbia complex came in at $6.8M or $800,000 higher than the complex' provided book value. We ordered the appraisal and LHA and the Clinic cooperated. Are you not in receipt of the Charles M. Ritley Associates LLC appraisal of this complex dated June 15, 2015? I provided it to Bill Call when he wrote in a recent article that 850 Columbia was “appraised at nearly $15 million and the City had an offer from another interested party for a lot more than $8.2 million.” I have yet to see a retraction of the bogus $15 million claim and the City never received any such offer. The net asset valuation was $126.5M and we started negotiating at $128M. THAT'S A GOOD THING. WE STARTED NEGOTIATING FROM A FINANCIAL POINT HIGHER THAN THE VALUATION OF THE NET ASSETS.
Essi: You had a CCF trustee, Tom Gable, oversee and give information to an appraiser of the city's interest in a multi-million dollar property. One of the best commercial realtors in town told me that property was $13million "all day long" The appraisal by Gable was baked--look at the comps--its a joke.
3-7. “The following requests remain completely unanswered …”
Anderson: Please re-read my answer which I pasted below.
Essi: you never answered
Anderson:”Accept it or not, the Clinic considered many of its operating documents pertaining to the wind down/transition costs as privileged information. However, the details of these were made available during the negotiating process. Not one person working on our side of the negotiating table thought that there were enough resources in LHA's assets to absorb all anticipated and unanticipated transition costs and were rightfully concerned that the City could be liable for these uncovered liabilities throughout 2016. In fact, the issue of uncovered transition costs was ultimately accepted by the Clinic which put up another $7.0M to cover this need. Acting when Council did relieved the City of any transition costs not covered by LHA assets from the moment Council's December 2015 action was signed by all parties.”
Essi: The State Auditor said we sold the hospital to CCF--why are we paying them to "wind it down" and "transition" it? So you give away a $100M million in value to CCF based upon whistles and stories from CCF---David, this was our hospital and our money--CCF was our fiduciary---there is nothing "privileged." Like you as our public servant--they owed us a duty of complete transparency. You are admitting that City Council, Mayor Summers, Jenn Pae and Mr. Butler did not verify CCF's naked claims concerning 10 of millions of dollars of wind down/transition costs--that must be why Summers told the PD there were "$78M in wind down costs" and now they have dwindled to $27M plus a $10M loss-News flash:--there aren't any wind down costs and there aren't any losses--it is all a hoax. You have been played.
This leaves questions 8 and 9.
8. “Tenant Relocation Costs. What is the amount of tenant relocation expenses?”
Anderson: I am not aware of all expenses related to the relocation effort. Council negotiated the item but I do not have the final numbers regarding this effort. I have inquired as to whether all the possible bills for this effort are in hand and will report back to you when the picture on this relatively minor line item is clearer.
Essi: A million here, a million there, no big deal.
9. “Operating Losses. Do you have anything to substantiate that amount?”
Anderson: This was a negotiated forecast as it was finalized in December of 2015 in consideration of anticipated and unanticipated losses during 2016. Operating losses coming out of LHA assets ended when the ink dried on the contracts. This was a big deal for Council as we did not want fluctuating numbers in 2016 and beyond. We wanted to know that LHA assets would not be chiseled away to fund any unanticipated losses during 2016. Again, transition costs include insurance, pension obligations, malpractice insurance, tenant relocation and other miscellaneous items.
Essi: "Chiseled away? Huh? This is double dipping with the wind down costs--it was closed in a month what losses? if they are losing $10 million with cheap rent like you've been told, the ER will close right after November 8th--we both know how CCF operates if it is not making money it will close.
David Anderson has no legitimate answers
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
" I appreciate your participation here"
No you don't! You hate when people like ANDERSON and Gilman decide to post here on the deck. It crushes your narrative. It threatens the entire conversation. The nine or ten posters on the deck hate it when someone from the city decides to post here. This is a bait ball of hate for the city that spins out of control on the daily.
Do you care? Probably not.
No you don't! You hate when people like ANDERSON and Gilman decide to post here on the deck. It crushes your narrative. It threatens the entire conversation. The nine or ten posters on the deck hate it when someone from the city decides to post here. This is a bait ball of hate for the city that spins out of control on the daily.
Do you care? Probably not.
-
Michael Deneen
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:10 pm
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
We like it when they post here.Patrick Wadden wrote:No you don't! You hate when people like ANDERSON and Gilman decide to post here on the deck. It crushes your narrative. It threatens the entire conversation. The nine or ten posters on the deck hate it when someone from the city decides to post here. This is a bait ball of hate for the city that spins out of control on the daily.
But they better not come here with lies.
That's why Pae and Gilman left...they prefer the "safe zone" of "Summers media".
People who ask questions are "nasty" or "bullies".
You continue to spew the "noone reads the Deck" narrative.
That's interesting, because the anti-Hospital folks sure follow this place closely.
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Mike. There are only 9 or 10 people that respond or post on the deck. THAT's a FACT! Count the name. I am not nor would I ever bash the deck. Please understand that there is only 9-10 people that post on the deck. I know that you will point out that there is maybe 15 people that post on the deck. But really there is only 9-10 that matter.
Do you believe that Mayor Summers assigns round the clock surveillance on Lori Allan? Do you believe that this happens? Answer that on one question.
Do you believe that Mayor Summers assigns round the clock surveillance on Lori Allan? Do you believe that this happens? Answer that on one question.
-
Michael Deneen
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:10 pm
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Your two preceding two sentences conflict with this one.Patrick Wadden wrote:I am not nor would I ever bash the deck.
As with most forums, a small percentage of viewers actually participate.
This forum is very widely viewed and is the leading source for Lakewood news, especially hospital related.
Patrick Wadden wrote:Do you believe that Mayor Summers assigns round the clock surveillance on Lori Allan? Do you believe that this happens? Answer that on one question.
No, of course not.
However, City Hall checks this forum multiple times a day. As we've all learned over the past year, Jen Pae spends LOTS AND LOTS of work time online.
The Build Lakewood members that are suing the LO are totally obsessed with this place. One of them has been lurking here for months.
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
So you publicly agree that Lori's claims that she thinks the city of Lakewood puts surveillance people out side her house. Thank you. Are you comfortable with the fact that Lori is the NUMBER ONE poster on the deck? That's a fact.
She represents SLH on the daily. Reasonable people are uncomfortable with this.
She represents SLH on the daily. Reasonable people are uncomfortable with this.
-
Michael Deneen
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 4:10 pm
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
As you are aware, she has repeatedly badmouthed SLH and its leadership in this forum.Patrick Wadden wrote:She represents SLH on the daily. Reasonable people are uncomfortable with this.
She particularly dislikes me for picking on her boy Donald (my favorite hobby!) and for pointing out that Summers is a Republican.
Unlike the "Build Lakewood" clan, opponents to the hospital deal come from a variety of political views....from far left (me) to far right.
We don't all march to the same drummer like the anti-hospital gang.
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Lori Allan is the lead spokes person for the Save Lakewood Hospital group on the deck. She posts more than anyone else, she offers more Intel on the Hospital issue. She comments on EVERY SINGLE thread and offers her opinion. Clearly, she is the lead spokesperson for SLH. Harkness doesn't join the deck. She doesn't post. Markling quit. (Although he does like to make records requests) he also likes to meet with Essi at Joes Deli and talk in an inappropriately loud voice and declare his hatred. (Always be careful who you sit next to and talk loudly).........
-
cmager
- Posts: 697
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:33 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
People, don't let Mr. Wadden distract you from the important work of getting out the message, and the VOTE, AGAINST 64.
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Nice! I am not trying to distract folks. Let the facts fall where they may.
Cmager, do you think that people that check in on the Deck are undecided? LOL.
Cmager, do you think that people that check in on the Deck are undecided? LOL.
-
cmager
- Posts: 697
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 8:33 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
It's cmager to you. It seems to be important to you to be here.Patrick Wadden wrote:Nice! I am not trying to distract folks. Let the facts fall where they may. Cmager, do you think that people that check in on the Deck are undecided? LOL.
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am
Re: Disposition of $128M in LHA assets that was submitted along with Anderson's article.
Hey cmager who are you? I am Patrick Wadden and I am a life long Lakewoodite. What is is your full name? I live on Riverway. How about you? Why hide who you are?
-
Patrick Wadden
- Posts: 265
- Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 11:04 am