The Observation Deck

Brian Essi wrote:

David Anderson wrote:

Yes, Council has used executive sessions in recent months to discuss issues regarding Lakewood Hospital – potential sale or purchase of property and pending litigation. (For my part, I have voted against going into executive session to discuss hospital matters only once.) These sessions are not recorded and, again, we are not permitted to vote on anything. We have, however, used these to meet with lawyers from Thompson Hine which is the firm we hired to prepare for and initiate a negotiation process with the Cleveland Clinic.

There is some debate in the community as to whether the use of executive sessions to discuss potential Lakewood Hospital real estate transactions and litigation meet the legal criteria. I, and others, have consistently asked the City’s law department as well as the law firm of Thompson Hine to give an opinion as to whether our use of executive sessions in this setting is proper. We have been repeatedly assured that these do meet the standard. I am not a lawyer and would not be able to make sense of a binder of case law on this issue if I had to. Therefore, I must act on the legal advice solicited and provided.

I pledge to check in on this thread regularly and will try answer any questions and comments that I can.

Yours in Service,
David W. Anderson
216-789-6463
David.Anderson@Lakewoodoh.net

Mr. Anderson,

I have taken the liberty of combining two of your posts above from last September.

Will you honor you pledge by answering the following questions:

1. Will you make the legal opinions you refer to above public?

2. Who besides you asked for the opinions and which individual attorneys gave you the opinions that this was all "proper" as you state above?

3. Will you produce all emails provided to you and Council from Mr. Butler and Thompson Hine lawyers referring to the preparation for, initiation of, and consummation of a negotiation process and the Master Agreement with the Cleveland Clinic?

I thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Brian Essi
Lakewood Resident

David Anderson wrote:“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes” – Mark Twain

While characterizing it as a lie as opposed to a rumor may be a stretch, I think the quote above is applicable to my note below.

I received a text message as well as a couple of emails from residents over the past few days concerned that Council recently has or may hold a secret session to vote for Lakewood Hospital’s closure. The text message was in response to a reader comment linked to a Bruce Geiselman’s Lakewood Hospital related article posted on Cleveland.com. The emails were from concerned citizens who appeared to have heard the rumor from different sources.

Before I joined Council just over four years ago I had a basic understanding of the requirements that must be met for elected officials to hold sessions/hearings and to call for votes. So, I appreciate that some residents, informed and engaged as they may be, might not be completely aware of all that is involved. I certainly know I wasn’t until 2011.

Per Lakewood’s Second Amended Charter and Ohio Revised Code:
1. Public notice must be issued in order for Council to meet. This applies for a Council session as well as a committee hearing.
2. Council cannot vote while in executive session.
3. While in executive session, Council can only discuss publically noticed topics.
4. Council cannot vote on ordinances or resolutions without a publically noticed meeting (date, time, location, ordinances and resolutions to be considered).
5. Ordinances are required to have three public readings. Passage of an ordinance before three readings requires the rules to be suspended which can only take place via a recorded and public vote of a super majority of Council members present during a properly noticed public session.

My intent was to disprove the rumor as well as to assure residents that there are checks and balances written into our Second Amended Charter and supported by Ohio law to prevent any concocted scenarios related to the rumor.

There have been no votes. There will be no secret votes.

I pledge to check in on this thread regularly and will try answer any questions and comments that I can.

Yours in Service,
David W. Anderson
216-789-6463
David.Anderson@Lakewoodoh.net

Brian Essi wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

David Anderson wrote:

Yes, Council has used executive sessions in recent months to discuss issues regarding Lakewood Hospital – potential sale or purchase of property and pending litigation. (For my part, I have voted against going into executive session to discuss hospital matters only once.) These sessions are not recorded and, again, we are not permitted to vote on anything. We have, however, used these to meet with lawyers from Thompson Hine which is the firm we hired to prepare for and initiate a negotiation process with the Cleveland Clinic.

There is some debate in the community as to whether the use of executive sessions to discuss potential Lakewood Hospital real estate transactions and litigation meet the legal criteria. I, and others, have consistently asked the City’s law department as well as the law firm of Thompson Hine to give an opinion as to whether our use of executive sessions in this setting is proper. We have been repeatedly assured that these do meet the standard. I am not a lawyer and would not be able to make sense of a binder of case law on this issue if I had to. Therefore, I must act on the legal advice solicited and provided.

I pledge to check in on this thread regularly and will try answer any questions and comments that I can.

Yours in Service,
David W. Anderson
216-789-6463
David.Anderson@Lakewoodoh.net

Mr. Anderson,

I have taken the liberty of combining two of your posts above from last September.

Will you honor you pledge by answering the following questions:

1. Will you make the legal opinions you refer to above public?

2. Who besides you asked for the opinions and which individual attorneys gave you the opinions that this was all "proper" as you state above?

3. Will you produce all emails provided to you and Council from Mr. Butler and Thompson Hine lawyers referring to the preparation for, initiation of, and consummation of a negotiation process and the Master Agreement with the Cleveland Clinic?

I thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Brian Essi
Lakewood Resident

David Anderson wrote:“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes” – Mark Twain

While characterizing it as a lie as opposed to a rumor may be a stretch, I think the quote above is applicable to my note below.

I received a text message as well as a couple of emails from residents over the past few days concerned that Council recently has or may hold a secret session to vote for Lakewood Hospital’s closure. The text message was in response to a reader comment linked to a Bruce Geiselman’s Lakewood Hospital related article posted on Cleveland.com. The emails were from concerned citizens who appeared to have heard the rumor from different sources.

Before I joined Council just over four years ago I had a basic understanding of the requirements that must be met for elected officials to hold sessions/hearings and to call for votes. So, I appreciate that some residents, informed and engaged as they may be, might not be completely aware of all that is involved. I certainly know I wasn’t until 2011.

Per Lakewood’s Second Amended Charter and Ohio Revised Code:
1. Public notice must be issued in order for Council to meet. This applies for a Council session as well as a committee hearing.
2. Council cannot vote while in executive session.
3. While in executive session, Council can only discuss publically noticed topics.
4. Council cannot vote on ordinances or resolutions without a publically noticed meeting (date, time, location, ordinances and resolutions to be considered).
5. Ordinances are required to have three public readings. Passage of an ordinance before three readings requires the rules to be suspended which can only take place via a recorded and public vote of a super majority of Council members present during a properly noticed public session.

My intent was to disprove the rumor as well as to assure residents that there are checks and balances written into our Second Amended Charter and supported by Ohio law to prevent any concocted scenarios related to the rumor.

There have been no votes. There will be no secret votes.

I pledge to check in on this thread regularly and will try answer any questions and comments that I can.

Yours in Service,
David W. Anderson
216-789-6463
David.Anderson@Lakewoodoh.net

Mr. Anderson,

On August 16, 2017, I received 8,400 pages of what Butler claims is the entire Thompson Hine file---There are many redactions but I don't see the legal opinions you referred to above.

Will you honor your pledge of September, 2015 by answering the following questions:

1. Will you make the legal opinions you refer to above public?

3. Will you produce all emails (un-redacted) provided to you and Council from Mr. Butler and Thompson Hine lawyers referring to the preparation for, initiation of, and consummation of a negotiation process and the Master Agreement with the Cleveland Clinic?

"If ain't in black and white, it ain't right"

m buckley wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

Brian Essi wrote:

David Anderson wrote:

Yes, Council has used executive sessions in recent months to discuss issues regarding Lakewood Hospital – potential sale or purchase of property and pending litigation. (For my part, I have voted against going into executive session to discuss hospital matters only once.) These sessions are not recorded and, again, we are not permitted to vote on anything. We have, however, used these to meet with lawyers from Thompson Hine which is the firm we hired to prepare for and initiate a negotiation process with the Cleveland Clinic.

There is some debate in the community as to whether the use of executive sessions to discuss potential Lakewood Hospital real estate transactions and litigation meet the legal criteria. I, and others, have consistently asked the City’s law department as well as the law firm of Thompson Hine to give an opinion as to whether our use of executive sessions in this setting is proper. We have been repeatedly assured that these do meet the standard. I am not a lawyer and would not be able to make sense of a binder of case law on this issue if I had to. Therefore, I must act on the legal advice solicited and provided.

I pledge to check in on this thread regularly and will try answer any questions and comments that I can.

Yours in Service,
David W. Anderson
216-789-6463
David.Anderson@Lakewoodoh.net

Mr. Anderson,

I have taken the liberty of combining two of your posts above from last September.

Will you honor you pledge by answering the following questions:

1. Will you make the legal opinions you refer to above public?

2. Who besides you asked for the opinions and which individual attorneys gave you the opinions that this was all "proper" as you state above?

3. Will you produce all emails provided to you and Council from Mr. Butler and Thompson Hine lawyers referring to the preparation for, initiation of, and consummation of a negotiation process and the Master Agreement with the Cleveland Clinic?

I thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Brian Essi
Lakewood Resident

David Anderson wrote:“A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes” – Mark Twain

While characterizing it as a lie as opposed to a rumor may be a stretch, I think the quote above is applicable to my note below.

I received a text message as well as a couple of emails from residents over the past few days concerned that Council recently has or may hold a secret session to vote for Lakewood Hospital’s closure. The text message was in response to a reader comment linked to a Bruce Geiselman’s Lakewood Hospital related article posted on Cleveland.com. The emails were from concerned citizens who appeared to have heard the rumor from different sources.

Before I joined Council just over four years ago I had a basic understanding of the requirements that must be met for elected officials to hold sessions/hearings and to call for votes. So, I appreciate that some residents, informed and engaged as they may be, might not be completely aware of all that is involved. I certainly know I wasn’t until 2011.

Per Lakewood’s Second Amended Charter and Ohio Revised Code:
1. Public notice must be issued in order for Council to meet. This applies for a Council session as well as a committee hearing.
2. Council cannot vote while in executive session.
3. While in executive session, Council can only discuss publically noticed topics.
4. Council cannot vote on ordinances or resolutions without a publically noticed meeting (date, time, location, ordinances and resolutions to be considered).
5. Ordinances are required to have three public readings. Passage of an ordinance before three readings requires the rules to be suspended which can only take place via a recorded and public vote of a super majority of Council members present during a properly noticed public session.

My intent was to disprove the rumor as well as to assure residents that there are checks and balances written into our Second Amended Charter and supported by Ohio law to prevent any concocted scenarios related to the rumor.

There have been no votes. There will be no secret votes.

I pledge to check in on this thread regularly and will try answer any questions and comments that I can.

Yours in Service,
David W. Anderson
216-789-6463
David.Anderson@Lakewoodoh.net

Mr. Anderson,

On August 16, 2017, I received 8,400 pages of what Butler claims is the entire Thompson Hine file---There are many redactions but I don't see the legal opinions you referred to above.

Will you honor your pledge of September, 2015 by answering the following questions:

1. Will you make the legal opinions you refer to above public?

3. Will you produce all emails (un-redacted) provided to you and Council from Mr. Butler and Thompson Hine lawyers referring to the preparation for, initiation of, and consummation of a negotiation process and the Master Agreement with the Cleveland Clinic?

"If ain't in black and white, it ain't right"

Mr. Essi,
Did councilperson Anderson respond to your questions?

Mark Kindt wrote:Again, in council-member Anderson's defense:

1. The nature and outcome of the spurious Subsidium proposal process was intentionally withheld from him by the ex officio LHA board members, to wit, the $100,000,000 offer from Metro to continue operations at Lakewood Hospital;

2. The fact that Huron Consulting was, in fact, a Cleveland Clinic Foundation vendor was withheld from him and other council members;

3. Deceptive inducements were made to Mr. Anderson and other council-members when threats of LHA bankruptcy were made, to wit, such statements were knowingly deceptive to the extent that they failed to disclose that LHA had rejected a meritorious offer from a major local health care provider to step into the LHA lease;

4. The fact that senior board members of LHA had advised the city administration that the proposed hospital closure transaction had a $120,000,000 value was, in fact, in their words, bogus was likely also withheld from him and other council members.

One "knowledge group" of elected officials intentionally misled other elected officials with respect to certain relevant and material details related to the LHA/Clinic plan to shutter the hospital.

Stan Austin wrote:At the risk of seguing into the emergency lane for a moment thread drift can be risky but brother Essis' somewhat, problematic visual metaphors are also equally dicey

Mark Kindt wrote:Again, in council-member Anderson's defense:

1. The nature and outcome of the spurious Subsidium proposal process was intentionally withheld from him by the ex officio LHA board members, to wit, the $100,000,000 offer from Metro to continue operations at Lakewood Hospital;

2. The fact that Huron Consulting was, in fact, a Cleveland Clinic Foundation vendor was withheld from him and other council members;

3. Deceptive inducements were made to Mr. Anderson and other council-members when threats of LHA bankruptcy were made, to wit, such statements were knowingly deceptive to the extent that they failed to disclose that LHA had rejected a meritorious offer from a major local health care provider to step into the LHA lease;

4. The fact that senior board members of LHA had advised the city administration that the proposed hospital closure transaction had a $120,000,000 value was, in fact, in their words, bogus was likely also withheld from him and other council members.

One "knowledge group" of elected officials intentionally misled other elected officials with respect to certain relevant and material details related to the LHA/Clinic plan to shutter the hospital.