Docments Show Mayor's 2013 Plan to "Take Down" Hospital

[Peter Grossetti]

where is Council on the process?

Damn near time for summer recess, isn't it.

I hear the sound of feet dragging.

[Brian Essi]

Keep in mind, concerned citizens asked for documents such as these 324 "documents" err slides at the Beck Center on January 18, 2015. and this subset has appeared more than 5 months later.

I have a made a public records request to find out how and when City hall got these latest 324 documents and if they still have more---For example--Ms. Fry's dumbed down power point to the full LHA Board filtering the still mysterious and elusive 9/2014 Metro power point presentation and proposal are NOT among the latest "shuffle the deck" data dump.

Based upon inside information, I believe that the 9/2014 Metro proposal that they are hiding will further expose their scam as a complete fraud

Will it take them until December to show us when they got these slides and if they have more?

More to come on the 19 people who were "interviewed" to form the foundation of this plan....

[Rhonda loje]

Can you give us more information on the 19 people "interviewed"?

[Brian Essi]

Rhonda,

Here are the 19 names: 8 get W-2s from CCF; 2 others--Gorton and Gable are CCF Trustees;



I don't have time to explain in detail now, but the interviews of these 19 formed the basis for Subsidium's "strategic vision" for Lakewood.

[stephen davis]

I perused some of the other slides in the Subsidium document.

The slide showing "SWOT: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats" lists as one of two strengths, "Current Cleveland Clinic relationship is considered to be strong."

The Cleveland Clinic is Lakewood's current and proposed future partner.

As shown in the Subsidium slide below, that partner is the cause/controller of a majority of the weaknesses and threats to Lakewood Hospital.



Another slide shows "Risks and challenges to the future of the hospital." Again, Lakewood's partner is shown as a competitor and a challenge.



Has the Cleveland Clinic been a good partner?

Have they been good enough for Lakewood to give them a sanctioned monopoly on healthcare opportunities in our city?

.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Stephen

Thank you, it all makes sense now!

You pay $500,000 for a study that says you are your own worst enemy.

So you need to pay another $250,000 for crisis management and spin
to cover up the original study!

Wow, only $750,000 so far for nothing.

City Hall is morally bankrupt.

.

[Brian Essi]

You forgot Huron consulting is going to get $75K. When interested citizens are doing it for free.

[Brian Essi]

I perused some of the other slides in the Subsidium document.

The slide showing "SWOT: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats" lists as one of two strengths, "Current Cleveland Clinic relationship is considered to be strong."

The Cleveland Clinic is Lakewood's current and proposed future partner.

As shown in the Subsidium slide below, that partner is the cause/controller of a majority of the weaknesses and threats to Lakewood Hospital.



Another slide shows "Risks and challenges to the future of the hospital." Again, Lakewood's partner is shown as a competitor and a challenge.



Has the Cleveland Clinic been a good partner?

Have they been good enough for Lakewood to give them a sanctioned monopoly on healthcare opportunities in our city?

.

Steve,

Genius! I love the red pen, circles, lines and arrows!

Note as well the irony that the "emotional" investment Lakewood Hospital was considered as "strength" and now the "emotional" perceived "vocal minority" are cast as intellectually "weak" while the percieved "ruling class majority" are cast as forward thinking intellectual giants--but your analysis and Subsidium's own work product conclusively proves that the Clinic is a proven weak and ineffective "partner". Yet the $400 per hour "geniuses" chose to emotionally (and desperately) cling to the Clinic as Moses leading us to the promised land of the "Healthiest City In America."