McKinley Place Development

[David Anderson]

I am not saying you are, Bill, but I am continuously confused by the appraised values used by the County and don't pretend to know everything about these. I do know that I've owned my primary residence since 1998 and nobody from the County has ever come out to "appraise" my house.

An appraisal is to determine current market value. The amount attributed to a property by the County is for tax valuation - a basis for collecting taxes to meet a government budget.

I understand that these valuations are done for different purposes. Conversations I had with County representatives on this very point when the sale of 850 Columbia was being considered confirmed the distinction between the two. I understand that it would be considered coincidental should the market value and taxable value be relatively close or the same.

850 Columbia was studied inside out and appraised by a Ritley and Associates’ independent state certified real estate appraiser.

David Anderson

[Dan Alaimo]

Thank you, Mark. Clearly and strongly stated.
Yes, time is coming for next steps.

[Mark Kindt]

I have moved my additional hospital-related comments to another thread:

http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewt ... =7&t=24545

In order to keep this thread relevant to McKinley Place.

[Bridget Conant]

In regard to the city paying for asbestos abatement on the McKinley property.

I recall being asked during a levy campaign for funds to abate the asbestos in the McKinley building. In fact, it was done because I recall updates on the progress and the school being reopened. This was late 80’ early 90’s or so.

Is there a reason we paid yet again for asbestos abatement in the same building?

[Dan Alaimo]

I have moved my additional hospital-related comments to another thread:

http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewt ... =7&t=24545

In order to keep this thread relevant to McKinley Place.

Hopefully this won't drift far, but it gratifies me (as I'm sure it does Jim) to see the Deck self-moderate like this. Again I say thanks, Mark.

[Mark Kindt]

I am not saying you are, Bill, but I am continuously confused by the appraised values used by the County and don't pretend to know everything about these. I do know that I've owned my primary residence since 1998 and nobody from the County has ever come out to "appraise" my house.

An appraisal is to determine current market value. The amount attributed to a property by the County is for tax valuation - a basis for collecting taxes to meet a government budget.

I understand that these valuations are done for different purposes. Conversations I had with County representatives on this very point when the sale of 850 Columbia was being considered confirmed the distinction between the two. I understand that it would be considered coincidental should the market value and taxable value be relatively close or the same.

850 Columbia was studied inside out and appraised by a Ritley and Associates’ independent state certified real estate appraiser.

David Anderson

I would note the following points:

1. The sale of 850 Columbia Road was not an "arms-length" transaction between an independent buyer and an independent seller in the way in which that word is used among professionals.

(The sole member of Lakewood Hospital Association, the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, sold the property. The Cleveland Clinic Foundation (or an affiliate) bought the property. This is much closer to an inter-subsidiary exchange in character).

2. I understand that the appraisal was on a "Made As Instructed" basis. This is not a fair market value appraisal. A fair market value appraisal would have been closer in value to the tax appraisal.

It has been a while since I have looked at all this, but Mr. Call has a good point on the question of whether the sale of 850 Columbia Road diluted the value of the contractual residual interest that the City of Lakewood held through its contract with LHA.

So, here is the "$64,000 Question": Are we really giving the former Lakewood Hospital site away to the City's recommended developer for free?

[Mark Kindt]

And, Council-member Anderson, do not forget that the City of Lakewood has fought vigorously and fought for years to prevent the meaningful disclosure of this kind of transaction information.

Citizens have had to use their best professional judgment to attempt to understand what has occurred.

(This has been despite vast fogs of public relations blather and obfuscation blanketing Lakewood from the fog machines at City Hall.)

"Excuse us, if we don't have the full insider scoop." (using my Steve Martin voice.)

[Tim Liston]

David Anderson says: “I know, I know. You’re likely reading this saying, ‘You’re killing me with the context, Dave.’”

Not really. I’m reading this saying “The BOE appears to have conspired to circumvent the intent of Ohio law by first “selling” McKinley property to the city (to avoid the auction requirement), then by watching the city immediately clear and “sell” McKinley to a handpicked developer.

One would presume that the intent of the Board-owned real property disposal law (click here) is to (1) first ensure that civic assets remain so, and barring that, (2) at least provide for a sale process free from malfeasance. Instead what happened was the very thing that wasn’t supposed to. Is the same thing about to happen with the BOE building on Warren or are they just gonna skip the two-step formality….

Or please, if I am misreading the requirement as it is expressed in my link, or if that information is old or incorrect, someone please let me know and I will stand corrected. No problem. I’ve been wrong many times. But it looked to me from Christine’s responses above that an auction was at least contemplated at some point, then seems to have been sidestepped.

[Christine Gordillo]

Mr. Liston, regarding the McKinley property. the Board followed state law as stated on page 3 of the document you posted:

When can the board sell district property at a
private sale?
A board of education may bypass the public auction
requirement and sell its property at a private sale
when one or more of the following exceptions are met:
• the value of the property does not exceed $10,000;
• the property has been offered for sale at public
auction at least once and has not been sold;
• the buyer of the property is a municipal
corporation, county, township, school district or other
public entity enumerated in RC 3313.41;
• the property is being disposed of as part of a trade
or exchange.

As far as the Warren properties are concerned, an auction was held on April 25, 2017: http://www.lakewoodcityschools.org/News ... lOkQI.dpbs

[Ryan Salo]

straw buy·er
noun
a person who buys something on behalf of someone else in order to circumvent legal restrictions or enable fraud.

[Pam Wetula]

straw buy·er
noun
a person who buys something on behalf of someone else in order to circumvent legal restrictions or enable fraud.

SPOT ON Ryan!!!!

And - Isn't it funny that people associated with Mike Summers' administration end up working for entities that purchase these properties???

Think Drue Siley - Liberty

...and Ed Fitzgerald - Carnegie....

No matter where you look..it's the same old gang, for years now....

[cmager]

I agree that 850 Columbia was a valuable LHA asset that contributed to LHA’s monthly bottom line. Keep in mind, though, that 850 Columbia was purchased years after the residents of Lakewood voted in 1985/6(?) to get out of the municipal hospital business.

This is my favorite gem of Mr. Anderson's response. Apparently Mr. Anderson came to view himself and others as Neo-White-Knights for liberating the hospital and its assets that were profitably held captive after the residents of Lakewood voted circa 1985. So you've bought that rationale , and then you be like "Hell partner, might as well sell those ill-gotten gains for pennies!" That's some juicy rich twisted rationale right there. And twisted that someone would be so gullible to buy it. And twisted that someone would turn around and promote it. How truthy.

[Mark Kindt]

What are we really talking about when we discuss the McKinley Place Development and the sale of 850 Columbia Road?

We are asking these sorts of questions:

Are public-sector incentives to developers proportional to the perceived or actual economic development goals or public benefit desired by the officials granting the incentives?

Are public-sector incentives to developers made in a way that is both legal and ethical?

When should public assets be sold on a discounted basis?

What controls exist to prevent insider transactions or "pay-to-play" deals?

How do direct or indirect subsides to developers affect the tax burden on the citizenry?

Why should economic development projects be funded that would not otherwise have independent economic viability?

This is a healthy debate.