The Observation Deck

The issue at hand regarding Lakewood Hospital is not what is going to replace it but the deal that was rammed down the collective throats of taxpaying residents behind closed doors invoked by a bogus use of executive session. The modus operandi is the same at the state and federal level: Politicians as a social class are non-productive members of society who abuse the power of the purse to capture unaccountable pools of taxpayer money to enrich themselves and their friends. As Jim mentioned, having that Hospital rot to the foundation is a better option than having it sponge more taxpayer money to wind up in the pockets of this current administrations' friends in so-called economic development, construction and demolition services, and nonprofits. This is not even bringing up the fact that the moves on the part of the LHA is what rendered the Hospital unprofitable to begin with! Not as if any of this will change your mind. You clearly have very powerful psychological barriers to objectivity. This fact will remain: As long as City politicians think that they can continue to bilk the people with their scams, there will be armies of us watching and following them. You will be held accountable. You will be forced to countenance the truth.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Corey Rossen wrote:
Save Lakewood Hospital, from my conversations, is trying to save the framework of the Hospital that was not losing money, and figure things out. a reboot.

My question still looms in your tap dance.

"A reboot." How long will it take to "reboot?" What exactly is the "reboot?" Who will be involved in the "reboot?" What will be in it's place until this "reboot" evolves into something real?

It wasn't a "catch on the caps." I get it, he is upset and that part is understood. I would be upset too if I selected an insurance coverage that was not honored anywhere. Just not sure I would hold everyone else by the throat to make sure I got coverage, especially after claiming to be in it for the poor and others.

Back to the "reboot." Who? When" How long? Etc.

Corey Rossen wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote:

Corey Rossen wrote:
Save Lakewood Hospital, from my conversations, is trying to save the framework of the Hospital that was not losing money, and figure things out. a reboot.

My question still looms in your tap dance.

Corey

That is why we need the facts, and the paperwork. You want exact numbers, give up the information.

Or should we just guess at that too?

For the record, I am more on the stop and let's figure it out crowd than a reboot, the reboot is only needed as the Mayor screwed it up.

.

Jared Denman wrote:The issue at hand regarding Lakewood Hospital is not what is going to replace it but the deal that was rammed down the collective throats of taxpaying residents behind closed doors invoked by a bogus use of executive session. The modus operandi is the same at the state and federal level: Politicians as a social class are non-productive members of society who abuse the power of the purse to capture unaccountable pools of taxpayer money to enrich themselves and their friends. As Jim mentioned, having that Hospital rot to the foundation is a better option than having it sponge more taxpayer money to wind up in the pockets of this current administrations' friends in so-called economic development, construction and demolition services, and nonprofits. This is not even bringing up the fact that the moves on the part of the LHA is what rendered the Hospital unprofitable to begin with! Not as if any of this will change your mind. You clearly have very powerful psychological barriers to objectivity. This fact will remain: As long as City politicians think that they can continue to bilk the people with their scams, there will be armies of us watching and following them. You will be held accountable. You will be forced to countenance the truth.

thank you

a growing group of residents agree.


.

Jared Denman wrote: As Jim mentioned, having that Hospital rot to the foundation is a better option than having it sponge more taxpayer money to wind up in the pockets of this current administrations' friends in so-called economic development, construction and demolition services, and nonprofits.

Okay, this helps me understand your stance better. I may be interpreting it wrong, but seems like the wrong "win at any cost" mentality. You win, nothing but a crumbling building - but at least you've won and kept the city from economic development. So, while the building is crumbling you will devise a "reboot" to save the building from rot? That doesn't sound very good.

I seriously appreciate the responses and viewpoints. Before this post, I did not realize that Jim would rather have the building rot than let the city develop, I just thought he hated the Mayor.

Jim O'Bryan wrote:
Or should we just guess at that too?

.

So far there have been no "guesses" just deflections and proof that a plan does not exist if against 64 wins.

Every medical system in the area is pushing to set up outpatient facilities.
If the deal goes away either the Clinic continues with its plan, or if not, the competition is hot among the others - and this competition for the outpatient facility was never tested via RFP.
There is no way that we don't end up with something at least equivalent to what CCF is planning.
Or we might just get the hospital we really want.

And maybe, just maybe, we'll get a more transparent, open and honest government.

Dan Alaimo wrote:Every medical system in the area is pushing to set up outpatient facilities.
If the deal goes away either the Clinic continues with its plan, or if not, the competition is hot among the others - and this competition for the outpatient facility was never tested via RFP.
There is no way that we don't end up with something at least equivalent to what CCF is planning.
Or we might just get the hospital we really want.

And maybe, just maybe, we'll get a more transparent, open and honest government.

Okay, thank you. For those of you in the know, approximately how long does an RFP of this magnitude take to evolve and mature, 3 -5 years? Longer? Still there is no assurance that an RFP would lead to anything, or am I wrong? How far do we let the building rot, as Jim puts it, until a different course of action is required? How would a rotten building appeal to those who may or may not be submitting these hopeful RFPs?

"Or we might get" does not seem very positive of persuasive for this group of insistent people. A little too "loose" in my opinion.

How are you reassured that there is "no way that we don't end up with something..." - where is that evidence in all of this?

Corey--- You've pretty well summarized the situation that the current leadership in Lakewood has put us in.
Stan Austin

Stan Austin wrote:Corey--- You've pretty well summarized the situation that the current leadership in Lakewood has put us in.
Stan Austin

The situation as I see it...

If for 64 wins = medical facility.

If against 64 wins = no plan but a lot of hypothetical question marks.

You're right, that does sum it up.

Team Summers is back to the "What's your plan" rhetoric....which is itself an admission that their plan stinks.

Corey should keep in mind that it's impossible for private citizens to offer specific plans when City Hall is hiding 85 percent of the relevant information.

Corey, Patrick, and the rest of Team Summers want Lakewood to bow down, surrender, and accept being a suburb in decline.
I believe we can do much, much better.

Corey Rossen wrote:I will ask again. Prove me wrong. What is the plan if against 64 passes? You have had many chances and instead of showing a plan you display hate, and flail your arms in frustration over not having an answer as you just proved.

Given this opportunity again to state your plan - you failed. You hate Lakewood, and want to win at all costs, even if that means not having a plan.

Plan if against 64 passes. Go.

The closet thing to a display of hate I ever saw was when the Mayor used the police force to threaten and intimidate the opposition.

Your question has been answered many times and in many ways. I will give you the short version.

If issue 64 fails the original agreement remains in affect. The original agreement required the Clinic to maintain the Hospital as an ongoing concern in substantilly the same condition.

When the Clinic accelerated the process they were warned by judge O'Donnell that they proceded at their own risk.

Issue 64 changes the Lakewood Hospital Foundation to a new regional Foundation controlled by the Clinic. When was that discussed or debated? As one supporter of issue 64 stated "that $33 million is gone".

Issue 64 transfers millions of dollars in medical supplies an equipment and licenses to the Clinic without compensation to the City.

Issue 64 forces the City to bear the full cost of demolition and site development.

Issue 64 requires the City to build and maintain parking facilities without compensation.

Issue 64 transfers 1,000 jobs to Lorain County from Lakewood.

Issue 64 sells the Columbia Road property and the related equipment and business for substantially less than the actual value.

Issue 64 gives the Clinic the full value of $140 million in revenue generated by Lakewood without ANY compensation to the City.

Issue 64 requires the City to surrender any remaining cash to a foundation controlled by the Clinic.

Issue 64 gives the Clinic the right reduce future serice in Lakewood without notice.

Issue 64 requires the Clinic to build a small 3 story medical office building that will house the residency program on one floor, the gay, lesbian and transgender clinic on another floor and everthing else on the third floor.



Issue 64 gives the Clinic a monopoly on Healthcare service in Lakewood on the current Hospital site which gives the Clinic an effective healthcare monopoly in Lakewood.

Issue 64 grants a blanket immunity for all board members for their failure to perform their fiduciary duty.

Issue 64 grants the Clinic blanket immunity for their breach of contract.

Issue 64 requires the City to pay millions of dollars in insurance premiums to an insurance company controlled by the Clinic.

Issue 64 is a bad deal.

Issue 64 us bad for your health.

Vote against issue 64

Corey Rossen wrote:

Stan Austin wrote:Corey--- You've pretty well summarized the situation that the current leadership in Lakewood has put us in.
Stan Austin

The situation as I see it...

If for 64 wins = medical facility.

If against 64 wins = no plan but a lot of hypothetical question marks.

You're right, that does sum it up.

Why do we have to surrender a hospital for a second rate medical office building?

Anyway, the Mayor is telling everone that we don't need medical facilities in Lakewood because Fairview is only 10 minutes away

Michael Deneen wrote:Team Summers is back to the "What's your plan" rhetoric....which is itself an admission that their plan stinks.

Corey should keep in mind that it's impossible for private citizens to offer specific plans when City Hall is hiding 85 percent of the relevant information.

Corey, Patrick, and the rest of Team Summers want Lakewood to bow down, surrender, and accept being a suburb in decline.
I believe we can do much, much better.

So what info are you going off to devise your plan other than a wing and a prayer? That is what scares me. You want to win but have no plan. When asked why you don't have a plan your response is to shrug your shoulders and say "what do you expect from us?" That scares me.

It is great that you think you can do better, but right now your answer seems to scream "we can't do anything."

Bill Call wrote:

Corey Rossen wrote:I will ask again. Prove me wrong. What is the plan if against 64 passes? You have had many chances and instead of showing a plan you display hate, and flail your arms in frustration over not having an answer as you just proved.

Given this opportunity again to state your plan - you failed. You hate Lakewood, and want to win at all costs, even if that means not having a plan.

Plan if against 64 passes. Go.

The closet thing to a display of hate I ever saw was when the Mayor used the police force to threaten and intimidate the opposition.

Your question has been answered many times and in many ways. I will give you the short version.

If issue 64 fails the original agreement remains in affect. The original agreement required the Clinic to maintain the Hospital as an ongoing concern in substantilly the same condition.

When the Clinic accelerated the process they were warned by judge O'Donnell that they proceded at their own risk.

Issue 64 changes the Lakewood Hospital Foundation to a new regional Foundation controlled by the Clinic. When was that discussed or debated? As one supporter of issue 64 stated "that $33 million is gone".

Issue 64 transfers millions of dollars in medical supplies an equipment and licenses to the Clinic without compensation to the City.

Issue 64 forces the City to bear the full cost of demolition and site development.

Issue 64 requires the City to build and maintain parking facilities without compensation.

Issue 64 transfers 1,000 jobs to Lorain County from Lakewood.

Issue 64 sells the Columbia Road property and the related equipment and business for substantially less than the actual value.

Issue 64 gives the Clinic the full value of $140 million in revenue generated by Lakewood without ANY compensation to the City.

Issue 64 requires the City to surrender any remaining cash to a foundation controlled by the Clinic.

Issue 64 gives the Clinic the right reduce future serice in Lakewood without notice.

Issue 64 requires the Clinic to build a small 3 story medical office building that will house the residency program on one floor, the gay, lesbian and transgender clinic on another floor and everthing else on the third floor.



Issue 64 gives the Clinic a monopoly on Healthcare service in Lakewood on the current Hospital site which gives the Clinic an effective healthcare monopoly in Lakewood.

Issue 64 grants a blanket immunity for all board members for their failure to perform their fiduciary duty.

Issue 64 grants the Clinic blanket immunity for their breach of contract.

Issue 64 requires the City to pay millions of dollars in insurance premiums to an insurance company controlled by the Clinic.

Issue 64 is a bad deal.

Issue 64 us bad for your health.

Vote against issue 64

Thank you for the response.