Legal Definition Of The Day...

[Scott Meeson]

TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/tortious_interference

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/intentional_interference_with_contractual_relations

........?

[Jim O'Bryan]

Scott

This has been brought up many times in discussions around this topic. Mostly as a reason
why no one would answer Mayor Summer's RFP. With the Cleveland Clinic having an 11-year
contract with the LHA, what was the point?

However answer the RFP, would seem to put the burden on the LHA, and the Mayor, not on
other hospitals, and certainly not on the residents, unless a professional connection could
be proven, with a malicious intent.

As for the residents, I see it as nothing more than a very real and healthy concern for the
health of the community, which is their right. City Hall, and the LHA are their to manage and
correctly, and legally run our business. City Hall and members of the LHA have the additional
legal responsibility to be our agents working in the light of day for the betterment of the
community. It is their fiduciary duty, and residents feel they have failed, there are only
two options to correct, courts or ballots.

This city has a long and healthy history of responding firmly and quite harshly with those
that abuse their trust and their appointments.

It will be an interesting summer.

.

[Scott Meeson]

Scott

This has been brought up many times in discussions around this topic. Mostly as a reason
why no one would answer Mayor Summer's RFP. With the Cleveland Clinic having an 11-year
contract with the LHA, what was the point?

However answer the RFP, would seem to put the burden on the LHA, and the Mayor, not on
other hospitals, and certainly not on the residents, unless a professional connection could
be proven, with a malicious intent.

As for the residents, I see it as nothing more than a very real and healthy concern for the
health of the community, which is their right. City Hall, and the LHA are their to manage and
correctly, and legally run our business. City Hall and members of the LHA have the additional
legal responsibility to be our agents working in the light of day for the betterment of the
community. It is their fiduciary duty, and residents feel they have failed, there are only
two options to correct, courts or ballots.

This city has a long and healthy history of responding firmly and quite harshly with those
that abuse their trust and their appointments.

It will be an interesting summer.

.

Hello Jim.

I have not read or observed tortious interference being talked about on the deck.

Excuse me for my ignorance:

1) Tell me why the Cleveland Clinic responded to the RFP?

2) To the best of your knowledge, has the Cleveland Clinic operated the hospital with the best intentions/care of their patients as the primary concern/function?

3) Has Lakewood Hospital Association made decisions that contradicted the management expertise/advice provided by the Cleveland Clinic ?

Maybe there is a nationwide conspiracy:http://www.darkdaily.com/more-hospital-closed-due-to-empty-beds-as-providers-succeed-in-reducing-hospital-admissions-pathologists-should-respond-with-outpatientoutreach-services-526#axzz3bMemiSKi

Scott

[tom monahan]

Scott:

The saddest part of this whole episode is the fact that the Mayor, his law director, the LHA, the Clinic, its in-house legal expert, etc. really don't know what an RFP is.

The Subsidium-generated RFP clearly called for respondents to provide a proposal to operate a fully equipped acute care hospital.

What did we get? A proposal that said let us tear your hospital down and let us build something that we call a family health center.

Of the many hundreds of RFPs that I have seen during my working career, if that proposal came to me, it would have been declared non-responsive and we could be talking to Metro right now. Instead, the Mayor changed the ground rules. And we are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on so-called experts and lawyers.

This is a sad example of our so-called leadership in City Hall and the LHA.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Hello Jim.

I have not read or observed tortious interference being talked about on the deck.

Excuse me for my ignorance:

1) Tell me why the Cleveland Clinic responded to the RFP?

2) To the best of your knowledge, has the Cleveland Clinic operated the hospital with the best intentions/care of their patients as the primary concern/function?

3) Has Lakewood Hospital Association made decisions that contradicted the management expertise/advice provided by the Cleveland Clinic ?

Maybe there is a nationwide conspiracy:http://www.darkdaily.com/more-hospital-closed-due-to-empty-beds-as-providers-succeed-in-reducing-hospital-admissions-pathologists-should-respond-with-outpatientoutreach-services-526#axzz3bMemiSKi

Scott

Scott

Let me answer these out of order.

2) I belive the Clinic has been operating the hospital properly until 2010, and from that
point on, they have been moving along the lines set down and desired by Mayor FitzGerald,
and then at the time Councilman Summers. No reason to think otherwise, satisfaction was
high, and plans were solid. We rated at the top of stroke survival in the state.

3) I have sat in enough meetings at enough corporations to realize that consultants are
often hired for their specialties. I also know that many will report whatever you want if
you pay them enough. Generally when a consultant tells a group what they wanted to
hear, I think it a fraudulent study. Perhaps we can recover the money spent.

1) You know I find it interesting, if the Clinic was in a hurry to leave, why change the
contract? After all since the mayor has been on his rec center kick, they have been
allowed to strip most money makers out of the hospital. Thereby proving the mayor's
point that it is losing money and we need three soccer fields, errrr Wreck Center, errr
Wellness Center.

As for why the Clinic answered it, and remember they were asked twice before they even
took the time to answer it, might be akin, to a bet up in legal. Some thing like, "Hey Dave
let's put together a deal so bad, so hideous and so painful, no one would ever except it."
and bet each other a dollar, laughing their asses off. They send it out, knowing no sane
person would ever take this loss. How could anyone lose their largest employer, their
key to a healthy community, and give up space. But let's see if they are willing to lose like
$70 million while doing it. And the mayor jumps on it!



Now the real question is, did the mayor come back with "I'll do this, but you have to
channel about $38 million I need for the soccer fields, errrr Wreck Center, errrrr Wellness
Thingy, so channel some of that cash to my best friend setting up this faux Active Living
Task Force, so I can build the soccer fields, errrr Wreck Center, errrrr Wellness Thingy
another good friend is pushing for, Thereby justifying a design by Lawson Architects
a couple months ago?

Draft Day version of the LOI (Scenes shot in Ricky River)

Mayor Summers demands a rec center, and Clinic lawyers call with their answer...



The question is, if Mayor Summers is the businessman we have all heard he is, can
he move the LOI, a terrible deal, into something really great for Lakewood?




.

[Brian Essi]

Tom & Jim,

You are both right, the Clinic response should have been rejected and laughed by Mayor Summers and his Step 2 committee when it was issued.

The problem was the was nobody at LHA in leadership position who understood what Lakewood had and what it needed, much less what they were negotiating from and for, except maybe money for the rec center. None of those in charge knew how to negotiate or how to hire someone to negotiate for them.

Jim is also right: The nice lady from Atlanta Ms. Fry (Subsidium) told them what they wanted to hear as she laughed on her way to the bank--she will be paying it back or paying lawyers a good chunk of what she took.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Jim is also right: The nice lady from Atlanta Ms. Fry (Subsidium) told them what they wanted to hear as she laughed on her way to the bank--she will be paying it back or paying lawyers a good chunk of what she took.

Brian

It is not always that easy.

Sometimes you have to work really hard not to laugh in their faces as you take the check.

I am thinking the size of the check, means they didn't even smile until they got back.

True Professionals.

.

[marklingm]

The question is, if Mayor Summers is the businessman we have all heard he is, can he move the LOI, a terrible deal, into something really great for Lakewood?

Jim,

It is interesting to see how Mike Summers explains, in his own words, "Why doesn't government behave more like business?"

From June 4, 2012:

Why doesn't government behave more like business?

I am frequently asked about my views and experiences regarding the differences between business leadership and government leadership. It is a great question and I am in a very unique position to answer it. I spent 32 years in business. Twenty six of these years were spent owning and operating a mid-sized industrial distribution company. I left the management of this Company on December 31, 2010 and walked into the mayor’s office 24 hours later.

The differences are many, yet the five of the clearest differences I have observed:

1. Ownership: In government, the owners and customers are the same. Every citizen is an owner and customer, and has a rightful seat at the table. Business has a clear distinction between owners and customers. This is a very important distinction. In business, owners choose their customers by their strategies. Government cannot make this choice. Government must serve all of its customers. The strategic options available to government to manage costs are therefore fewer.

2. Power and authority: Business is more autocratic. Government in the United States is everything but autocratic, as it should be. This defining characteristic dramatically changes the speed and process of decision making and implementation. Thus, checks and balances and the owner/customers having a voice can make for a sometimes chaotic, very lengthy decision timeline.

3. Approach to risk: Businesses must be risk tolerant to succeed. The very essence of business decision making is risk and reward. Business understands that not all investments will succeed. Business reconciles its setbacks and moves on. Government is risk averse. We are charged with taking the hard earned tax dollars of our owner/customers and making certain that every penny is spent well. Big, bold initiatives are therefore hard to justify. Government mistakes can affect every citizen, not just a “few owners.” Good ideas that do not pan out are frequently viewed as ‘waste and fraud’. All of these issues foster a decision making culture that favors caution.

4. Approach to investment: The essence of investment is to get an expected return. Business can much more easily quantify the cost and return. In government, the returns are frequently “aspirational.” Leaders can seek a desired state of behavior or achievement that may take a very long time in coming. It is more difficult to quantify if and when success is achieved. In government, there are many more variables at play outside of the control of government that will ultimately determine success.

5. Short term vs. long term thinking: Government leadership is very transitory. I am the fourth mayor in nine years. With the exception of a few, all of the top managers of our government serve as “At Will” appointees of the mayor. Thus, with each new mayor you can anticipate a turnover of top managers. This makes it very difficult to create and sustain a long term investment view.

Likewise, some other noteworthy differences between government and business are the respective approaches to strategy development processes, customer feedback, suppliers and competitors, performance measurements, organizational development and employee motivation. These subjects will be a story for another day.

By no means should these differences be viewed as excuses for lesser government performance. Business leadership principles do apply. But not directly. At the core of both good business and good government is a commitment to goals, great customer service, efficient use of resources and effective implementation of thoughtful strategies. This is exactly what we are endeavoring to do in Lakewood city Government.

http://lakewoodmayor.blogspot.com/2012/06/why-doent-government-behanve-more-like.html

I posted Mike's blog in its entirety because, as you and I know, "City Hall & Friends" are well-versed in hitting the delete button.

By the way, it will not surprise you to know that Mike was not entirely truthful in the following statement:

I left the management of this Company on December 31, 2010 and walked into the mayor’s office 24 hours later.

http://lakewoodmayor.blogspot.com/2012/06/why-doent-government-behanve-more-like.html

In a September 1, 2013 article, Jennifer Keirn reported:

In January 2011, he agreed to take on the unexpired term of Lakewood mayor Ed FitzGerald when Mr. FitzGerald became Cuyahoga County executive. Later that year, Mr. Summers ran and won a campaign to stay in the mayor's office, all while retaining his position at Summers Rubber.

***

[A]fter two years of serving simultaneously at Summers Rubber and Lakewood City Hall, Mr. Summers accepted an offer on the business in a deal that closed Dec. 31, 2012.

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20130901/SUB1/309019980/life-after-selling-a-business-can-be-less-stressful-but-more

Matt

[Marguerite Harkness]

Matthew,
Thank you for that. It was a long read, but a good laugh!