The Observation Deck

Mark Kindt wrote:Here is the Court document granting the TRO

Mark

Thank you. Unlike so many other boards in and around Lakewood. We stand alone using documents to back up what we say. And giving people a chance over the day, weeks, months even years to vet the information, and judge for themselves. What is right and wrong, and how it fits into their lives.

This is what continues to make the Lakewood Observer and the Observation Deck, "The Gold Standard for community discussion and civic discourse."

A seat for everyone at the table, that can be trusted, and can prove who they are. Since 2004.

.

mjkuhns wrote:"City council president Sam O'Leary said the plaintiffs 'pulled a fast one' on the court."

That seems less than respectful toward the judges of the appellate court.

As does the mayor's comment, just made before city council, that "What I am disappointed in is that the court was misled." When laughter followed the council president chided attendees ""Excuse me, can we all be respectful."

Good post, Matt.

That is a sad irony.

.

As part of a legal brief filed with the Ohio Appeals Court opposing a request for a temporary restraining order, since granted, Bryce Sylvester submitted and affidavit with this claim:

It is estimated that the City will receive property and income taxes annually ranging from $1,434,790 to $2,275,081 from Carnegie’s mixed-use development. These estimates are based on information provided to the city in Carnegie’s RFP response, as well as the city’s understanding of the marketplace

.


It was pointed out by pjbennett in another thread about the council discussion of One Lakewood Place, that amount is expected to be collected, but only a small portion will actually come to Lakewood - the county, the port authority, and other entities are entitled to a large chunk of it.

So is this the “misleading” the court that Summers talked about?

Bridget Conant wrote:As part of a legal brief filed with the Ohio Appeals Court opposing a request for a temporary restraining order, since granted, Bryce Sylvester submitted and affidavit with this claim:

It is estimated that the City will receive property and income taxes annually ranging from $1,434,790 to $2,275,081 from Carnegie’s mixed-use development. These estimates are based on information provided to the city in Carnegie’s RFP response, as well as the city’s understanding of the marketplace[/quote].


It was pointed out by pjbennett in another thread about the council discussion of One Lakewood Place, that amount is expected to be collected, but only a small portion will actually come to Lakewood - the county, the port authority, and other entities are entitled to a large chunk of it.

So is this the “misleading” the court that Summers talked about?

Clearly, in City documents (spreadsheets) that I have posted in other threads, such a statement is entirely unsupported by the City's own tax estimate projections across multiple spreadsheets. They come nowhere near those amounts.