Brian Essi wrote:Brian Essi wrote:Maggie Fraley wrote:I believe a fundamental starting point for all sides is where do we go NOW?
Maggie,
This is a fair and logical question, but Kevin Butler's analysis is not grounded in fact and is not supported by law.
1. Butler cites no law at all for his conclusions.
2. Butler cites no facts, except that two legal agreements exist.
3. Butler has misinterpreted the agreements in many key respects (more on that later).
4. Butler engages speculation wrapped around conjecture, e.g. Butler crystal balls a bankruptcy scenario for LHA that currently has $50 million in liquid assets, is supported by LHF with over $30 million and if all that fails, LHA has multibillion CCF guaranteeing 1:1 cash to debt.
5. Butler was on President of Council in 2010 when he let CCF/LHA out of key terms of the agreements he is now opining on--back then he believed that changes he endorsed would make the hospital sustainable for "years and decades to come." Plans to close the hospital predated Butler's proclamation. So he has a poor track record of predicting the future of healthcare. In his 4 page rendition of fictional scenarios where the City has says no rights and is left with nothing, he concludes without any mention of a plan or details that his "analysis" will inform us on "a robust healthcare delivery model in Lakewood for years and decades to come."
Building seemingly logical thinking on a series of false premises is a recipe for disaster--it won't result a fair solution to the core problem we face.
If Butler's analysis in the cornerstone of the "negotiations" with CCF, it will only result in further litigation and political and social turmoil for out City.
More to follow.....
Jenn,
You did not address my post above.
Please note that Summers’ “WAR on the POOR” is supported by his high priced crisis management gurus and you doing this on a payroll that I fund through paying taxes.
I am just a lowly independent citizen volunteer defending the underserved as best I can with no funding or support.
Pae: Per the 1996 Definitive Agreement Lakewood Hospital became part of the Cleveland Clinic health system.
Essi: Check Mate! Please tell Butler that this means the Clinic is now the tenant because Lakewood Hospital is part of the Clinic—that’s an admission of one thing Butler and Summers have been denying in the lawsuit.
Pae: Council will determine the best course of action only if and when the judge makes a decision.
Essi: I agree with you that the lawsuit has good chance of saving the hospital and the underfunded Plaintiffs are crushing the rich guys. Just image where we would be if Summers switched sides? The rascals would be run out of town after being ordered to pay us millions to rebuild what they stole and destroyed while Summers cheered them on.
Pae: Who is going to compete against the Clinic and UH?
Essi: Call the FTC, you have verified a violation of federal antitrust laws in restraint of trade if you believe nobody can compete and these parties are in collusion.
Pae: Any other potential interested parties are aware of the risks Lakewood Hospital faces as a stand-alone facility. This area's healthcare market is extremely competitive and is only going to get more competitive,
Essi: Risk and competition are not dirty words—they are things to embrace-- not things to be feared. The Clinic’s competitors don’t want it as a stand-alone facility—they want it and Columbia Road as their satellites right in the center of the Clinic’s market— you believe that Huron/Subsidium said it is going to get more competitive right? You can’t have more competition if there are no competitors. Pssst CCF fears competition. That’s why they got Summers to reject the $15 million UH offered for Columbia Road—CCF should pay a premium for Columbia to keep it from their main competitor—not get it for a song especially if their agreement is as flimsy as Butler says right?
Pae: And don't say the Cleveland Clinic has kept all other interested parties out.
Essi: The Cleveland Clinic has kept all other interested parties out—see the FTC thingy above—they are a Predator within the meaning of the Antitrust laws.
Pae: The negotiations will potentially address the terms of the existing lease so comments like "assets cannot be transferred without paying all liabilities" are not an issue.
Essi: WOW! That sounds like you already know what’s cooking and LHA will not be dissolved? Please share the details with us. Otherwise, LHA can’t be dissolved unless provisions are made to satisfy all claims—didn’t you admit that above that we have to wait for Judge O’Donnell? BTW, no real “negotiations” are going to occur—anybody who thinks otherwise doesn’t understand the Clinic—Butler’s strategy was doomed the minute he published what this thread started on. And he only put that farcical nonsense out there for political purposes to try cover Summers’ horrid plan (the failed LOI).
Pae: The lease is not written in stone and can be negotiated to be amended or even terminated.
Essi: Now we are getting some place—I suggested amending the lease back in April and then again on May 13th—I’m glad if City Hall is coming around to that thinking. Amending the lease to grant the City the right and option to terminate the lease---this would give City Council absolute power over the assets that all belong to us. It would also give Council power over the Clinic’s market share in Lakewood. Summers and Butler want to cede that power away.
Pae: If the Clinic leaves and LHA ceases to exist, which is a very real possibility, who is going to run it?
Essi: In my opinion this would be the best case scenario possible because CCF and LHA led by Summers have screwed everything up--- but that scenario is the least likely to occur. I have been told of at least three parties currently interested and working on proposals in anticipation of new Council leadership and a new mayor who will contain the Clinic and give the suitors a real opportunity.
Jenn, can you and Dru tell me the names of the developers, retailers, office tenants, hotel operators for Summers’ plan? If not, then don’t expect the suitors to come forward and waste their time with a corrupt Mayor and brainwashed Council President.
Pae: Does Mr. Essi believe that the City can force them to continue to operate the hospital?
Essi: This is a classic red herring—the Mayor distancing himself from LHA is pathetic—he leads LHA! Why should we have to “force” anyone to do what the agreements and the law requires them to do—run a hospital for Lakewood? A real Mayor with true leadership skills would turn to OUR 10 Lakewood appointees on LHA and get 2 others on board (isn’t Haber he Mayor’s friend so we only need 1 more) and say: “You will do what I and City Council tell you to because your duties are to operate a hospital for my people and my underserved citizens--so here is how we are going to do this together…1, 2, 3” Done! However, the LHA board is currently fictional and dysfunctional—it consists of junkies with only one supplier of their information who have been hooked on CCF’s junk for so long they can’t break the habit—you saw a prime example of that in Bullock on Monday night when he “mainlined” on Jones and Ritchie’s best stuff, he defended there lies and made up some of his own when there is documentary proof and testimony of state regulators to the contrary. This is what junkies do—they lie to cover their habit. Send the junkies to rehab. Summers is the “Chief Pusher” of CCF’s crack.
Pae: the area is over-bedded.
Essi: Why have Main campus and Fairview been overflowing resulting increased “door to provider” times, deaths and debility? Why does the Decanting Plan call for stealing Lakewood’s bed licenses for Fairview? Just because an experts writes something doesn’t make it true—they were looking at abstract statistics—people are not statistics.
Pae: there is a physician shortage.
Essi: Physicians will flock to Lakewood if CCF leaves and the hospital stays—physicians don’t like working for the Clinic. This is another example of how the Huron and Subsidium reports are flawed---they were not engaged to look back at WHY independent physicians left Lakewood? In 18 years CCF has decimated and run the independents out of Lakewood—more have left since the announces closing—even Ricthie admits this. The Summers Plan will continue that trend, not solve it.
Pae: and throw in a charter amendment that forces a voter referendum regarding the operations of the hospital, will make it nearly impossible to sustain it as an inpatient hospital.
Essi: The existing charter already has a provision for a referendum and so do many other communities with thriving community hospitals. So making it automatic actually speeds up the process.
Jenn,
With all the dust up over harshness and some crude humor, what gets lost is that this is the rough and tumble world of political debate regarding the most important issue facing Lakewood in our lives.
You asked me a series of questions which I took time to respond to, but then you failed to return the favor. You can use my tone, style of writing and the fact that you just don't like me as an excuse for not responding. But may I suggest that the real reason for your failure to respond is that you don't like the facts and arguments and you really have nothing that can directly deal with what I am advancing.
Surely you don't want the Deck readers to assume that your silence amounts to an agreement with my points above and that the Mayor is losing the debate?