Day 379: All Foundation Task Appointees Named

[Lori Allen _]

The following may as well be the qualifications for being on the Foundation Planning Task Force:

1. Must live north of Clifton Blvd. or west of W. Clifton Blvd.
2. Must have an annual income of $200,000+
3. Must be in favor of continuing hospital destruction
4. Must strongly dislike lower and middle-class individuals as well as seniors
5. Any other qualifications as Michael P. Summers sees fit
6. Mayor or City Council campaign donors preferred
7. Current member of Summers & Extended Co. preferred
8. Nobody shall pass "go" or collect $200 before receiving mayoral approval. There must be nothing but "yes sir" members!

[mjkuhns]

How would you all have gone about the appointment process, without dragging this out another year or two?

With respect, I would like to question your premise here. Why is "without dragging this out" an important criteria?

This has been one of the great unanswered questions for the past year or two: what public-interest priority has driven the push, push, push for this "health care transformation?"

• What necessitated closing the doors of Lakewood Hospital 10 years before the end of a lease which included very plain obligations to maintain its operations throughout the lease?
• What necessitated skipping over actions like a comprehensive appraisal and open bidding process?
• What necessitated slamming the door on an interested bidder who did emerge in spite of the focus on bilateral negotiations?
• What necessitated council limiting this matter to a fraction of the time spent in study of backyard hen-raising?
• What necessitated force-marching the disposal of a major public asset through a lame-duck city council in 15 days?
• Etc.

The closest thing to a substantive answer I can recall is the claim that the hospital/association was going to run out of money, and closing it preemptively would preserve assets the city would otherwise have lost. This, however, seems inadequate rationale in one or two fundamental ways.

The eagerness to dispose of the hospital, quickly, predates its actual first loss, which occurred over the course of 2015. Lease obligations, and massive fees for to-this-day-never-specified expenses, call into question the narrative that losses were irreversible.

If we set all of that aside, arbitrarily, the argument that a summary proceeding was required to preserve the hospital's ample financial reserves is still a tenuous one. The public benefit of prematurely closing a hospital, to conserve its financial resources, depends entirely on those resources being diverted to a greater good than additional years of a working hospital.

This test seems distinctly unmet. It's very difficult to demonstrate that a city of 50,000 was in real danger of losing any of the limited health services continued (but not guaranteed) under the agreement to dispose of the hospital lease. Which, then, returns us to the new foundation as the only alternate justification for haste in the public interest.

Very well, then: what significant public interest is the new foundation furthering?

As others have noted, it seems not to be furthering public interest by genuinely preserving once-public assets for formally public management. So, then, what public-interest functions will this non-public enterprise perform using once-public assets? What, frankly, is the independent case for this foundation at all?

I'm afraid that I'm yet to discern one. When the marketing is pealed away it appears, at least to me, a classic example of a solution in search of a problem. If one or more problems may be found—and I propose that any sufficiently cash-flush solution in search of a problem will always find at least a few—which ones are so pressing that avoiding delay should be a constraint on suggestions?

[bentleymike]

How would you all have gone about the appointment process, without dragging this out another year or two?

With respect, I would like to question your premise here. Why is "without dragging this out" an important criteria?

I only stated "without dragging this out another year or two", because it took a year to establish the taskforce from when the master agreement went into place. The fact that this is going to proceed, to delay the process any longer would be against public interest. IF the foundation is going to assist those less fortunate, then get the show on the road. Why delay that process? That's all I was saying.

When I post asking any of those questions, I'm literally curious as to what others would do. Is it not healthy to have conversation about what the foundation should or shouldn't be about? It would probably be in the best interest of our community, at this point, for even those who oppose the whole agreement and process, to give input. Or even if called upon the taskforce, to give their thoughts on how to make it better the community.

[Bridget Conant]

Or even if called upon the taskforce, to give their thoughts on how to make it better the community.

What community? The information we were given about the intent of the foundation was that it was to benefit the region, not Lakewood, and not even restricted to Cuyahoga County.

Should they solicit input from the county residents, from Lorain, Medina, and Lake county residents, since they may also be beneficiaries?

[Mark Kindt]

Mr. Bentley:

I will respond with a question:

How much community input did the city administration solicit when it chose to reject the Metro Health System proposal? None. Based on that premise, I am going to suggest that any community input with respect to the so-called new foundation will just be window-dressing. Discussing community input to the new foundation, seems to beg the question of why these public funds are being transferred to a private entity at all.

There is a fundamental issue of governance here that still needs to be understood and addressed. Who is setting tax policy for the City of Lakewood, our elected officials or un-elected private citizens acting without governmental authority. I can make a strong case that it has been the later and not the former.

With respect to the loss of the Hospital, its jobs, its charity-care, its revenues streams to the City, we witnessed not only how community input was ignored, but actually ridiculed. SLH was slandered as the "tin-foil hat crowd" by our President of Council.

And, of course, the whole deal was sold with the $120 Million Investment fantasy created by the PR flacks.

[mjkuhns]

The fact that this is going to proceed, to delay the process any longer would be against public interest. IF the foundation is going to assist those less fortunate

How? This is my question. I have not argued that delay would serve the public interest; I'm simply trying to find out why you seem to take for granted that it would harm the public interest.

You emphasize the word "if." Yet your firm declaration that delaying the foundation's activities would be against public interest seems to take for granted that really there is no if, and that whether it's sooner or it's later, the foundation is eventually going to assist those less fortunate, without question.

So, in what way?

I could offer suggestions, but as noted, absent an explanation otherwise I believe that "foundation first, mission afterward" is a solution in search of a problem, and my own suggestion is that we recognize "well, we're going to have a foundation anyway, so we should concede that and brainstorm ideas for it" as terrible policy. In case I need to make this explicit: I do not believe that money thrown at a very vague cause is guaranteed to accomplish any public good, even if that cause is wholly positive on its face i.e. "health and wellness." Without substantial details, "it's a foundation, for health and wellness" is not nearly enough to prove that public interest is at stake.

If you're agreed, then presumably there is currently no clear reason to assume that delay would be against the public interest. If, on the other hand, you are convinced that there already exists some dependable, clearly defined public-interest function that this foundation will serve… please elaborate. I would like to know.

[Brian Essi]

How would you all have gone about the appointment process, without dragging this out another year or two?

If you were on the taskforce, what would your suggestions be on how to establish and operate the foundation?

I understand, some (or many), of you disagree with how this went about. I'm just saying, if you were one of these people, what would you prioritize within the foundation?

Mr. Bentley,

These are good questions and I appreciate your posts.


However, in my opinion it is simply too late to salvage the New Foundation so that Lakewood citizens will have any measurable influence or meaningful benefit. Here are just a couple of reasons why:

1. Sam O'Leary publicly agreed with Huron Consulting in the Summer of 2015 that there was simply not enough money to "move the needle" on helping people--That was when the LOI guaranteed about $7million more than what the Master Agreement now provides on a "net present value" basis. Since O'Leary voted for a deal that gives the New Foundation $7M less, I assume he knows that the New Foundation has no hope of "moving the needle."

2. Since I spent some time with several LHA trustees in 2015, I can say with confidence that they all were concerned about the power and influence of the Clinic--they feared the Clinic and were therefore captive to it. That's why they voted unanimously to violate their fiduciary duties by selling the hospital at less than fair value and getting a $2.5M CCF Cayman Island liability policy to protect themselves.

3. The Clinic will control the New Foundation--Sam O'Leary rolled over in November 2015 and he is lined up at the CCF trough for his political future--they are in lock-step.

So to directly answer all three of your questions, I would make two priorities if I had any influence:

1. Negotiate to get the Clinic completely removed from the New Foundation.
2. Insist upon active government involvement and oversight of the money.

Otherwise, the money should just be put in the General Fund to be used, e.g. to partially fund the planned $30 million sewer/water treatment project.

There are some good people who have been appointed to the task force. Unfortunately, there are also some insiders too.

The good people don't know yet that they are on a fool's errand.

The reason they are dragging this out is because the first installment of funding will not happen until mid 2018 at the earliest--- the parties to the agreement apparently never intended to raise any money to help the underserved--otherwise they would be moving faster.

[Lori Allen _]

These are just a few of the members that stick out to me:

Daniel Cohn - works at Mt. Siani Healthcare Foundation. Guess who is on the Board of Directors for Mt. Siani Foundation? Susan Ratner, Larry Pollock, and Larry Goldberg, all Cleveland Clinic people.

Charles Garven - CCF doctor. Mayor and Sam O'Leary campaign donor.

Brittany O'Connor - Todd Heckeler's wife. She was also a mayor campaign donor.

Vicki Smigelski - husband was a mayor campaign donor.

Phyllis Dykes - mayor campaign donor.

Bryan DeBoer - sits on the Board of Directors for LakewoodAlive.

Katherine Collin, J.D. - works at The Cleveland Foundation.

A full list of the members and their background can be found here:
http://www.onelakewood.com/wp-content/u ... Bios-1.pdf

If you look through most of the members, you will see that a good portion of them either work or have worked for CCF. Two work for the county. Several of them are mayor and council campaign donors.

Make no mistake, these people were not chosen by accident. I said from the very beginning that these alleged scams go from the city, the county, to the Cleveland Foundation. This was all planned out, in my opinion.

According to the press release:

“This new foundation will be yet another tool to be used to reach our goal of becoming the healthiest community in Northeast Ohio — if not the country,” said Mayor Michael Summers.

Really, Mike? Almost every one of your Listening to Lakewood sessions is held at a bar or alcohol establishment. The Planning and Development Department appears to be nothing more than a "where to put a bar next" department. While I am not trying to pick on people, it is worth noting that numerous city employees can be seen smoking cigarettes in city-owned vehicles on city time.We purchase vehicles for Mr. Beno, Mr. Malley, and Mr. Summers, which I believe they drive home. Two of them could walk or bike to work. Additionally, most city employees just use their personal vehicles and record their mileage. Also, what about the encouraging of drug dealers by putting "burner" cell phone stores on almost every corner? Lakewood has yet again been named as one of the worst suburbs for Heroin, worse than Parma and Parma has more residents. How is that healthy? What about vape and smoke stores on almost every other corner? How about the bitcoin store on Madison? Bitcoin is a controversial form of currency that is hard to track and is often used by drug dealers, terrorists, and money launderers. How is any of this healthy?

I don't think we have to worry about this crowd dragging their feet. I suspect they will be moving quickly, as they may be feeling the heat closing in. Also, there should be no executive sessions. When and if a new foundation is formed and when their first Form 990 comes out, someone should write the IRS and request a full, comprehensive audit.

[Marguerite Harkness]

Mike Bentley asks, "Well, how SHOULD such a task force proceed??"

They could proceed by filling the task force, and later the foundation's board, with ONLY folks associated (formally or loosely) with Save Lakewood Hospital. This is a group of the brightest folks in Lakewood, from all areas of professional and working life, who understand the issues, the problems, the medical situation, the potential solutions, the needs of the community (medical and otherwise) and would PROTECT the assets so they are used to the benefit of LAKEWOOD folks - as the purposes for which Lakewood Hospital and Lakewood Hospital Foundation were originally established.

There are MORE THAN enough folks in this group to repopulate City Hall and all the associated activities with GOOD people who truly have the interests of the community at heart.

Any such foundation that chooses NOT to appoint Dr. Kilroy or Dr. Nautiyal to its board - but rather chooses North Coast Health (who only refers, but provides NO health care to anyone) - is a sham.

But WE already knew that . . . didn't you??

[m buckley]

When I post asking any of those questions, I'm literally curious as to what others would do. Is it not healthy to have conversation about what the foundation should or shouldn't be about? It would probably be in the best interest of our community, at this point, for even those who oppose the whole agreement and process, to give input. Or even if called upon the taskforce, to give their thoughts on how to make it better the community.

Mr. Bentley,
Mr. Kuhns, Mr. Kindt and Mr. Essi, all took the time to respond to your post. Given your fervent interest in a healthy conversation about what the foundation should or shouldn't be about, I think it's time for you to weigh in.
I'm curious, what would you do?

[Jim O'Bryan]

The question I would ask is...

Do you really think a small group of people worked in the shadows for 7 years to get these once public funds...

Do you really think they never thought how to spend it?

If you believe that then City Hall is not just morally bankrupt but stupid.

Another charade committee!

FWIW

[Lori Allen _]

Jim, well said! You are spot on!

[bentleymike]

Mr. Bentley,
Mr. Kuhns, Mr. Kindt and Mr. Essi, all took the time to respond to your post. Given your fervent interest in a healthy conversation about what the foundation should or shouldn't be about, I think it's time for you to weigh in.
I'm curious, what would you do?[/quote]

I apologize for not responding any sooner. I've been busy with work and kids.

In the previous thread on Deck Ideas, I mentioned a few things.

http://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewt ... =7&t=23646

I do think SOME of what the city receives or a portion of the overall property tax could be set aside for the foundation.

I think the foundation could also kick in the amount necessary to get the FFL match on rec center on the back of the high school. That's a community wellness thing.

I also think each year, they tak grant applications for wellness community events & also sets aside amounts to get a Lakewood student into a medical program.

I believe making the foundation private, and separate from the city is a good move. The ExecutiveDirector can make recommendations that the board either agrees, or disagrees on doing.

I think the Clinic shouldn't have control over the money. If they have a seat at the table, also should UH & Metro. I understand the fact that they're funding the thing, but that is the way to get out of the lease, or part of it. I really think it should be people who live, work, or own a business in Lakewood. If it includes a Clinic employee or two, fine. It just shouldn't be the majority, or more than 20-25% of the trustees.

I also think that IF, and it's a huge IF, any lawsuit is successful, a piece of that award should go to the foundation.

There also needs to be an investment policy statement put into place. There will be a chunk of money, and it needs to be invested wisely, for the long-term. I'd make sure that it's developed properly, and responsibly.

Finally, there needs to be a distinct radius on who this foundation benefits. I'd say a 5 mile radius of Lakewood's borders. I only say that, because if someone in Clifton Shoreway neighborhood is less fortunate and needs assistance from a doctor or Clinic in Lakewood, we shouldn't stop that from happening.

[Lori Allen _]

I don't believe giving our dishonest politicians part of our tax money is a good idea. We already do not have enough money to sustain basic city services. This week, there were several days when several of our garbage trucks were not working. Our roads aren't exactly being salted in a timely manner, we are paying more for our water and sewer and last, let's see this mayor and council get serious about health, safety, and services before we allow them to do anything else.

This supposed "Foundation" is just another part of the Summers and Extended Company scams that they have been pulling on the citizens of Lakewood since approximately 2010. Let's clear up the alleged HUD scams, alleged housing scams and alleged money laundering of the the hospital and more, before we allow these folks and their friends more control of OUR money.

[bentleymike]

I don't believe giving our dishonest politicians part of our tax money is a good idea.

Lori,

Tax money always goes to politicians to pay the city's bills.

If you meant toward the foundation, there should be no politician on the board. Or at least not a voting member, much like it is on the board of LakewoodAlive