Why Do We Have Governmental Audits of Our City? Accountability!

[Jim O'Bryan]

I also want to say that I don't understand how voting against 64 holds the mayor or anyone else accountable. All it does is prevent the city from continuing with the deal as currently configured, correct? It doesn't call for Mike Summers to stand up and tell everyone he's sorry and let SLH throw eggs at him, does it? I am generally in favor of repeal, but I am constantly forced to re-evaluate. I don't understand what the ramifications of destroying the deal are. I don't think anyone with SLH or Brian Essi really knows either. And that's the problem, same as it was last time. On one hand you have a plan from the mayor, great or terrible, in the other hand you just have the opposition just saying don't do what the mayor figured out.

Also, can someone remind me which of the mayor's friends are getting contracts/money? I never seem to hear that part. Is it construction people or something? Because, honestly, that's why you elect a businessman to political office, so that he can use his business acumen (I know you all feel he is a terrible businessman) and his contacts to get things done. I don't think Summers' keeps a lot of business friends that were used to ripping him off, so that story doesn't really ring true to me. But again, I can't even remember who you all claim is doing the laundering. Maybe it's only Lori that claims that even though she always starts the sentence with "by now, we all know... alleged laundering". No Lori, seriously we don't all know Who is laundering the money for summers? Laundered money starts with some illegal money that needs to get turned into legal money somehow. I don't see where CCF or the City of Lakewood would obtain such illegal money. Certainly not from the hospital deal right? All that $ will be scrutinized 10 times over. It's not even done yet and there are civil suits. Maybe CCF has a thug in their parking lots shaking people down? Or maybe they have been robbing Wells Fargo trucks that drive down Belle Ave?

So many endless questions. Even when they are answered, they really aren't. I can only imagine how city council and the mayor felt trying to find their way through this.

Todd

I am not up to speed like many in this but the two paragraphs I pulled I can answer.

Accountable, for over a year and a half City Hall has fought the release of documents. Why? The Mayor has had more than 2 years to explain the aspects of the deal, and refuses to. Instead of putting it out there, he hired a crisis management company to control and manage the crisis. A no vote let's us check what has turned into a troubling nightmare. You have not only the lawsuit, but the cover-ups, the potential law breaking, and the war against residents.

I do not believe a check is going any one person. What we are witnessing is a core group of ten, that decided to liquidate our hospital for, as a Lakewood Voter For Progress member put in his recent articles, to acquire "two pots of gold." This was liquidating a public asset into the hands of private institutions. Now we can argue over how much of LHF we would be entitled to, but the rest is certainly the cities/ours.

Todd, what if, what they are working so hard to hide is that, the hospital leaving had much more to do with this group getting their hands on the "two pots of gold" than healthcare or even a wider better image of what Lakewood could do or be?

.

[Lori Allen _]

Accountability? That's is almost laughable! Not only do we have out of control finances in Lakewood, but, we also have a Fire Chief that is NOT a licensed paramedic being put in charge of Lakewood's paramedics. He has also been traveling with the mayor throughout the city allegedly giving medical advice that he is NOT trained to do. Mr. Mayor, where is the accountability there?

[james fitzgibbons]

Even using Anderson and Bullock's $128 million low book value from Lakewood Hospital, the admission the city only got $22M, that leaves $106 M unaccounted for.

Brian, forgive me, I'm sure you've probably printed these numbers for us before. But lately I've been wondering how you account for the $90M of renovations the hospital required to continue to be serviceable/safe whatever. If you take $90 from the $128, you are left with $38 which is not far from the $22M that we "get". I'm not suggesting that you haven't accounted for it, just can't remember where that $90M is reflected in your numbers.

I also want to say that I don't understand how voting against 64 holds the mayor or anyone else accountable. All it does is prevent the city from continuing with the deal as currently configured, correct? It doesn't call for Mike Summers to stand up and tell everyone he's sorry and let SLH throw eggs at him, does it? I am generally in favor of repeal, but I am constantly forced to re-evaluate. I don't understand what the ramifications of destroying the deal are. I don't think anyone with SLH or Brian Essi really knows either. And that's the problem, same as it was last time. On one hand you have a plan from the mayor, great or terrible, in the other hand you just have the opposition just saying don't do what the mayor figured out.

By now everyone knows that hospital is shut down, the medical building across the street that had other peripheral services is about to be demolished (and that whole building was screwed up and neglected in the run up). I think the best we could do is sue CCF for breach of contract and get some money from them, but then we still have these three abandoned buildings to deal with (the hospital, doctors office building, and parking structure). I guess SLH would like me to believe that someone will come in and give us more than 22 million for all of that (though I don't actually believe that is the number).

I guess we'll find out what happens on November 8th, with the vote at least. If 64 goes down, then we get a few more years of hand wringing and financially uncertain and dangerous negotiation with, most likely, non CCF entities, right? If it passes, we are out many 10's of millions of dollars but we end up with a FHC, but that is not in any way guaranteed to stay open for any amount of time, right?

Also, can someone remind me which of the mayor's friends are getting contracts/money? I never seem to hear that part. Is it construction people or something? Because, honestly, that's why you elect a businessman to political office, so that he can use his business acumen (I know you all feel he is a terrible businessman) and his contacts to get things done. I don't think Summers' keeps a lot of business friends that were used to ripping him off, so that story doesn't really ring true to me. But again, I can't even remember who you all claim is doing the laundering. Maybe it's only Lori that claims that even though she always starts the sentence with "by now, we all know... alleged laundering". No Lori, seriously we don't all know Who is laundering the money for summers? Laundered money starts with some illegal money that needs to get turned into legal money somehow. I don't see where CCF or the City of Lakewood would obtain such illegal money. Certainly not from the hospital deal right? All that $ will be scrutinized 10 times over. It's not even done yet and there are civil suits. Maybe CCF has a thug in their parking lots shaking people down? Or maybe they have been robbing Wells Fargo trucks that drive down Belle Ave?

So many endless questions. Even when they are answered, they really aren't. I can only imagine how city council and the mayor felt trying to find their way through this.

People, do not believe a word of it. Todd seems to have tunnel vision. Also the last sentence made me run for a crying towel.

[todd vainisi]

People, do not believe a word of it. Todd seems to have tunnel vision. Also the last sentence made me run for a crying towel.

Do not believe a word of what, James? Don't believe that the hospital deal is a never ending can of worms that defies explanation no matter how many times you look at it? That the average citizen can't have spent even a fraction of the time I have reading about the in's and out's of the deal, and yet I am still confused, don't know what information to believe, don't know what the various outcomes would be?

It doesn't matter whether people believe that or not. I guarantee you the majority of the population of Lakewood is 3 times as confused about this deal as I am and the ramifications of striking it down.

I'm not here stumping for anything, so I don't know what you mean that people shouldn't "believe me."

And I seem to have tunnel vision??? No, no, friend. Quite the opposite. I am unable to stay focused and on point for either side. Everytime I re-examine the issue, endless questions arise that prevent me from feeling positive about either answer. There are very few people with tunnel vision on this matter, and half of them are regular posters here like you. The other half work for the mayor. The rest of us are left scratching our heads and wondering who and what information to believe. And all of the information I have seen, from both sides, seems open to interpretation and manipulated.

No sir. I do not have tunnel vision at all.

[james fitzgibbons]

People, do not believe a word of it. Todd seems to have tunnel vision. Also the last sentence made me run for a crying towel.

Do not believe a word of what, James? Don't believe that the hospital deal is a never ending can of worms that defies explanation no matter how many times you look at it? That the average citizen can't have spent even a fraction of the time I have reading about the in's and out's of the deal, and yet I am still confused, don't know what information to believe, don't know what the various outcomes would be?

It doesn't matter whether people believe that or not. I guarantee you the majority of the population of Lakewood is 3 times as confused about this deal as I am and the ramifications of striking it down.

I'm not here stumping for anything, so I don't know what you mean that people shouldn't "believe me."

And I seem to have tunnel vision??? No, no, friend. Quite the opposite. I am unable to stay focused and on point for either side. Everytime I re-examine the issue, endless questions arise that prevent me from feeling positive about either answer. There are very few people with tunnel vision on this matter, and half of them are regular posters here like you. The other half work for the mayor. The rest of us are left scratching our heads and wondering who and what information to believe. And all of the information I have seen, from both sides, seems open to interpretation and manipulated.

No sir. I do not have tunnel vision at all.

Todd, in particular what information has been manipulated? The obvious to me is that Lakewood Hospital has been closed for no good reason. It was serving all the people of Lakewood, it was profitable, it was giving Lakewood $ 900,000.00 in tax collection from its employees and was giving Lakewood $ 380,000,000 that is million in economic activity per year according to CCF accounting. That is all I need to know. A city with a population of 52,000 needs a 24/7 emergency room that is backed up by a full service hospital. We had all that, our city officials pulled it out from under us. There is no guarantee the we will even have an emergency room, look at the Master Agreement. I was in a serious car accident in Lakewood the doctor told my father that I only had a minute or two and I would not have made it because I was bleeding out. I have to go out canvassing.

VOTE AGAINST 64

[todd vainisi]

The obvious to me is that Lakewood Hospital has been closed for no good reason. It was serving all the people of Lakewood, it was profitable, it was giving Lakewood $ 900,000.00 in tax collection from its employees and was giving Lakewood $ 380,000,000 that is million in economic activity per year according to CCF accounting. That is all I need to know. A city with a population of 52,000 needs a 24/7 emergency room that is backed up by a full service hospital. We had all that, our city officials pulled it out from under us. There is no guarantee the we will even have an emergency room, look at the Master Agreement. I was in a serious car accident in Lakewood the doctor told my father that I only had a minute or two and I would not have made it because I was bleeding out.

Yep, the mayor tries this tactic of over simplifying everything too. And the appeals to emotion and outrage ("pulled out from under us!") which have served Donald Trump so well. And then sprinkle some anecdotal evidence in at the end.

You know there are counter arguments to all of that. And we both know there are counter arguments to the counter arguments. And more counter arguments to those. It goes back and forth with every fact either side offers attacked and obfuscated.

I applaud your ability to fully commit to one side, even if the side you commit to has the least information about what happened. It's sort of like missionary christians, who have made such a strong decision to believe one thing that they want to go and convert others to that belief as well and spread the good word. And also shout rude things at people who question or believe otherwise.

Go forth, James, and quoteth martyr Essi, for all that he has done has been done for you and for the greater glory of our kingdom Lakewood.

By the way, I respect the heck out of Brian Essi's ability and drive to get as many facts as he can. It's a shame we can't just have these facts laid out plain as day from the administration instead of relying on private citizens to expose the truth (the partial truth but truth nonetheless).

[Jim O'Bryan]

People, do not believe a word of it. Todd seems to have tunnel vision. Also the last sentence made me run for a crying towel.

Do not believe a word of what, James? Don't believe that the hospital deal is a never ending can of worms that defies explanation no matter how many times you look at it? That the average citizen can't have spent even a fraction of the time I have reading about the in's and out's of the deal, and yet I am still confused, don't know what information to believe, don't know what the various outcomes would be?

It doesn't matter whether people believe that or not. I guarantee you the majority of the population of Lakewood is 3 times as confused about this deal as I am and the ramifications of striking it down.

I'm not here stumping for anything, so I don't know what you mean that people shouldn't "believe me."

And I seem to have tunnel vision??? No, no, friend. Quite the opposite. I am unable to stay focused and on point for either side. Everytime I re-examine the issue, endless questions arise that prevent me from feeling positive about either answer. There are very few people with tunnel vision on this matter, and half of them are regular posters here like you. The other half work for the mayor. The rest of us are left scratching our heads and wondering who and what information to believe. And all of the information I have seen, from both sides, seems open to interpretation and manipulated.

No sir. I do not have tunnel vision at all.

Todd

Actually you sound like many in this city. Confused, and what should we do next. You have "TWO" different groups that seem to be at odds with each other? One fighting for "two pots of gold," they will control with the clinic, not the city. their words not mine, and one trying to save a chance for a hospital, ie our largest employer.

And that should give you a key on how to think. City Hall that has been hard at work for over 5 years, still hasn't explained, the private foundation, yet to be named. They have yet been honest with their plans. And more to the point they fight anyone, not just the other group, in seeing paperwork that could prove more than one case going on in this city. Why?

Even Mayor Summers closest friends, (I grew up with him) are wondering why he is not telling the truth, and why he is fighting so hard to show the documents.

"And all of the information I have seen, from both sides, seems open to interpretation and manipulated."
Todd there is your clue. One side an adhoc group of residents, trying to make sense out of the 1-10 documents they have been allowed to see. Even when the court orders more documents be released they do not. And a group you say is fat and easy with FACTS, the government we elected, to be our fiduciary agents. GET it one, is allowed mistakes, the other has every fact and document at their fingertips. They have no reason to lie, and for some because of bonding and such are forbidden to misrepresent the truth.

SO JOIN GROUP 3

So if you are like me, and not really up on running hospitals, got for the low hanging branch we can all agree on.

HONEST TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT, as it should be. Certainly we can all agree on that.




.

[todd vainisi]

HONEST TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT, as it should be. Certainly we can all agree on that.

Yes, group #3 is where I want to be, Jim. But I don't understand how voting against 64 will force transparency. It seems to me it will just start the process over, and a new, non-transparent agreement will be made. And by the way, we re-negotiated this contract once all ready, and by all accounts it got way worse.

The whole process seems so much like trying to keep sports teams in your city, just throw money and new stadium (fhc) and new taxes (to cover our losses) and special laws and agreements to keep other teams out... I guess I just haven't seen to many mayors have success sticking it to sports teams and I also don't often hear how mayors prevail over business interests that want to leave for greener pastures either. If anything, the mayor who gives the team/business interest EVERYTHING they want comes out looking the best because they bring a new team/business to town.

I mean, look at this:
http://www.cleveland.com/avon/index.ssf ... pital.html

Look at what that mayor can boast about:
"Traffic congestion, road construction and necessary infrastructure improvements are among the most obvious concerns facing us. Improvements such as these will be paid for with the revenue that is generated from the new businesses’ income and real estate taxes. The newest stores announced recently, Menards, Cabela’s, Meijer’s, Levin’s and the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospital facilities, will create 1,250 jobs and generate more than 1.5 million in payroll taxes alone."
from http://www.cityofavon.com/174/Mayors-Office

I wonder what kind of concessions and sweetheart deals these corporations were given to come to Avon.

[Jim O'Bryan]

HONEST TRANSPARENT GOVERNMENT, as it should be. Certainly we can all agree on that.

Yes, group #3 is where I want to be, Jim. But I don't understand how voting against 64 will force transparency. It seems to me it will just start the process over, and a new, non-transparent agreement will be made. And by the way, we re-negotiated this contract once all ready, and by all accounts it got way worse.

Todd

According to some, like David Anderson, it was improved.

The real problem is, the deal was flawed and ill-advised from the beginning. A one in a million shot for our future based on nepotism, and very closed meetings.

We cannot worry about outcomes when fixings systematic problems with the city. A City Hall out of control.

Is it better then continue letting them sell off our largest asset for their "two pots of gold"?

This is why I stayed out of the hospital discussion, we need to fix government first.

The courts have ruled in favor of the SLH the last 5 rulings. Two courts have ordered them to turn over paperwork that they refuse to do. The only sane choice is to vote against, and see what happens in the courts. As I have mentioned, I have heard 5 real scenarios, all better than what we have.

City Hall, let us down on this one, we cannot reward them with the booty they plotted to get.

http://www.cleveland.com/avon/index.ssf ... pital.html

Look at what that mayor can boast about:
"Traffic congestion, road construction and necessary infrastructure improvements are among the most obvious concerns facing us. Improvements such as these will be paid for with the revenue that is generated from the new businesses’ income and real estate taxes. The newest stores announced recently, Menards, Cabela’s, Meijer’s, Levin’s and the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospital facilities, will create 1,250 jobs and generate more than 1.5 million in payroll taxes alone."
from http://www.cityofavon.com/174/Mayors-Office

I wonder what kind of concessions and sweetheart deals these corporations were given to come to Avon.

Todd

I am sure amazing deals, look at what they gave the Clinic and Jacobs. But that is not our concern, we can never compete with farmland in exurbia. We are a built out community.To even try is nuts. We have to do what we do best. Which is not Cabela's, probably not Menard's. Probably not the 25 year tax abatement Cleveland offers either.

This is why it is so critical to have a government we can trust.

.

[james fitzgibbons]

Todd you seem to be the new mouth piece for the Mayor. How will you vote on 64? Certainly Jim has given you enough to be able to commit. Do not tell me you do not know. Are you jealous of Brian Essi? Why did you call him a martyr?

[todd vainisi]

Todd you seem to be the new mouth piece for the Mayor. How will you vote on 64? Certainly Jim has given you enough to be able to commit. Do not tell me you do not know. Are you jealous of Brian Essi? Why did you call him a martyr?

I know we've butted heads about your reading comprehension level before, where you made me feel lousy that you weren't given the greatest education but made do the best you could. But your continued inability to understand the meaning behind what people type has become too much for me. Whatever I say flies right over your head and then you repeat your completely off-base accusations and company rhetoric.

I am clearly no mouthpiece for the Mayor.

[Brian Essi]

Even using Anderson and Bullock's $128 million low book value from Lakewood Hospital, the admission the city only got $22M, that leaves $106 M unaccounted for.

Brian, forgive me, I'm sure you've probably printed these numbers for us before. But lately I've been wondering how you account for the $90M of renovations the hospital required to continue to be serviceable/safe whatever. If you take $90 from the $128, you are left with $38 which is not far from the $22M that we "get". I'm not suggesting that you haven't accounted for it, just can't remember where that $90M is reflected in your numbers.

I also want to say that I don't understand how voting against 64 holds the mayor or anyone else accountable. All it does is prevent the city from continuing with the deal as currently configured, correct? It doesn't call for Mike Summers to stand up and tell everyone he's sorry and let SLH throw eggs at him, does it? I am generally in favor of repeal, but I am constantly forced to re-evaluate. I don't understand what the ramifications of destroying the deal are.

Mr. Vainisi,

Sorry for not responding sooner, but I just returned from a 4 day hunting trip.

Here are my answers---as direct and condensed as I can make them:

1. Even the city leaders say the city owned hospital was worth $128M---If we don't do the alleged $90M renovations we still should get $128M, not $22M--the $90M is not deducted from the $128M. Also, the $90M renovation number is a CCF manufactured number and it is high--but whatever the right number is, it was part of CCF's liability as a matter of fact and law, i.e. under the 1996 contract CCF would have to pay that amount to renovate or match the debt needed for renovations with CCF's cash. It was not the City's obligation. So it is not deducted from the book value $128M number. Also, if we invested $90M in renovations we would have a virtually new hospital that the City owned--CCF would own nothing--that was the deal they cut in 1996--A Vote Against is a vote for accountability.

But even if you forget all that--Please note the following internal CCF document that CCF was forced to produce in Court. It establishes that CCF would liable for $278M in capital needs and other amounts starting in 2017 through 2026. So we can assume the inflated $90M would be in the $278M that CCF invests in our hospital. So voting against 64 returns us to the 1996 Agreement which CCF admitted it owes us a $$278M investment in Lakewood and we own it--it is all about accountability. A vote For 64 takes away over $108M and an investment of only $34 in Lakewood, but we don't own the $34M FHC--CCF will. It is not accountability.




2. Here is an article that I wrote that explains how the $128M Book Value is about $50M too low. i.e. because our "leaders" never valued the asset we owned, i.e. they started from the wrong number--a vote Against 64 makes them accountable.

http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2016/1 ... -million-a

3. Voting Against Issue 64 is a no brainer: We have nothing to lose in an Against/No vote and everything to gain---

a. The City already owns the big 5.7 acre parcel of land, 7 homes ($900K), a community health center ($700K).
b. CCF paid us $9.6M from CCF's money--we have that money in the city bank account.
c. CCF must return the rest of our $84M of cash/brokerage, all of our equipment (or the value of the equipment estimated at $30M)
d. We tear up the non-compete against the 5.7 acres so the 5.7 acres are more valuable and can be used for healthcare if that is what we decide.
e. Even if we let CCF build its FHC on their land (west side of Belle) and keep the Columbia Road Surgical Center (they bought at a $5M discount), we are far better off by about $80M+++

4. Finally, as to accountability, I think that here is a simple example:

a. The citizens of Lakewood are the shareholders who own the 180M hospital.
b. The City Council are the directors and Summers is the President and they sold the hospital for $22M without any valuation--dumb--real dumb.
c. CCF knows what it was worth and CCF is making $11.5M per year profit and escaping a $278M liability
d. A Vote Against makes all the parties reverse their bad deal, account to us and do it right the second time.

In short, they pay, we get paid.

[m buckley]

Even using Anderson and Bullock's $128 million low book value from Lakewood Hospital, the admission the city only got $22M, that leaves $106 M unaccounted for.

Brian, forgive me, I'm sure you've probably printed these numbers for us before. But lately I've been wondering how you account for the $90M of renovations the hospital required to continue to be serviceable/safe whatever. If you take $90 from the $128, you are left with $38 which is not far from the $22M that we "get". I'm not suggesting that you haven't accounted for it, just can't remember where that $90M is reflected in your numbers.

I also want to say that I don't understand how voting against 64 holds the mayor or anyone else accountable. All it does is prevent the city from continuing with the deal as currently configured, correct? It doesn't call for Mike Summers to stand up and tell everyone he's sorry and let SLH throw eggs at him, does it? I am generally in favor of repeal, but I am constantly forced to re-evaluate. I don't understand what the ramifications of destroying the deal are.

Mr. Vainisi,

Sorry for not responding sooner, but I just returned from a 4 day hunting trip.

Here are my answers---as direct and condensed as I can make them:

1. Even the city leaders say the city owned hospital was worth $128M---If we don't do the alleged $90M renovations we still should get $128M, not $22M--the $90M is not deducted from the $128M. Also, the $90M renovation number is a CCF manufactured number and it is high--but whatever the right number is, it was part of CCF's liability as a matter of fact and law, i.e. under the 1996 contract CCF would have to pay that amount to renovate or match the debt needed for renovations with CCF's cash. It was not the City's obligation. So it is not deducted from the book value $128M number. Also, if we invested $90M in renovations we would have a virtually new hospital that the City owned--CCF would own nothing--that was the deal they cut in 1996--A Vote Against is a vote for accountability.

But even if you forget all that--Please note the following internal CCF document that CCF was forced to produce in Court. It establishes that CCF would liable for $278M in capital needs and other amounts starting in 2017 through 2026. So we can assume the inflated $90M would be in the $278M that CCF invests in our hospital. So voting against 64 returns us to the 1996 Agreement which CCF admitted it owes us a $$278M investment in Lakewood and we own it--it is all about accountability. A vote For 64 takes away over $108M and an investment of only $34 in Lakewood, but we don't own the $34M FHC--CCF will. It is not accountability.




2. Here is an article that I wrote that explains how the $128M Book Value is about $50M too low. i.e. because our "leaders" never valued the asset we owned, i.e. they started from the wrong number--a vote Against 64 makes them accountable.

http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2016/1 ... -million-a

3. Voting Against Issue 64 is a no brainer: We have nothing to lose in an Against/No vote and everything to gain---

a. The City already owns the big 5.7 acre parcel of land, 7 homes ($900K), a community health center ($700K).
b. CCF paid us $9.6M from CCF's money--we have that money in the city bank account.
c. CCF must return the rest of our $84M of cash/brokerage, all of our equipment (or the value of the equipment estimated at $30M)
d. We tear up the non-compete against the 5.7 acres so the 5.7 acres are more valuable and can be used for healthcare if that is what we decide.
e. Even if we let CCF build its FHC on their land (west side of Belle) and keep the Columbia Road Surgical Center (they bought at a $5M discount), we are far better off by about $80M+++

4. Finally, as to accountability, I think that here is a simple example:

a. The citizens of Lakewood are the shareholders who own the 180M hospital.
b. The City Council are the directors and Summers is the President and they sold the hospital for $22M without any valuation--dumb--real dumb.
c. CCF knows what it was worth and CCF is making $11.5M per year profit and escaping a $278M liability
d. A Vote Against makes all the parties reverse their bad deal, account to us and do it right the second time.

In short, they pay, we get paid.

Bumped.

[todd vainisi]

Thanks again, Brian. Your patience with all these questions is outstanding. I appreciate the time you take to explain (and re-explain).