The Observation Deck

As I have shown here, the City submitted a sworn affidavit that it had an excellent digital search tool enabling it to provide fast and robust searching of its email archive.

We also know that that search tool was not used to respond to the Essi record requests when those requests were actually made.

The City had the capability to fulfill his records requests, but instead denied and delayed his requests on most of his public document requests.

Mr. Essi had to obtain court orders to force the City to comply with the law.

It was only after the City was under court order, that they finally used the search tool that Mr. Colletta describes in his sworn affidavit.

The data-mapping information about its network finally provided by the City (subsequent to court order(s)) is the type of information that is normally provided at the very beginning of a case, not at the very end.

Should the City proceed this way in other cases, it will soon find itself on the wrong-end of a sanctions finding.

Before we leave the affidavit, I will note that dozens of vendors provide electronic discovery solutions software and offer certification programs related to the use of such software.

The City needs this capability in order to comply with its basic obligations under the state and federal rules of civil procedure. It needs to enter the 21st Century.

For the City to argue that its lack of such capability is a defense to the Ohio public records access laws is disingenuous and more evidence that Mr. Essi has been treated in bad faith by the City.

Intentional Decisions to Violate Ohio Laws

I will be blunt.

The city administration made intentional and strategic decisions to violate the Ohio public record access laws to defend the Lakewood Hospital Association, the Cleveland Clinic Foundation and itself as a key part of its defense tactics for both the Taxpayer and Skindell lawsuits.

In my opinion, the city administration feared that the disclosure of documents associated with the hospital transaction would aid the plaintiffs in these actions as well as provide grounds for citizen activists to defeat the effort to the close the hospital.

Improper Discriminatory Application

The Ohio public records access laws are basically a “dead-letter” in the City of Lakewood. The city administration has made a complete mockery of these laws.

For example:

If you have been harassed by a City employee, you will be fought tooth and nail by the City on producing public records that might show other harassing acts by that individual or other improper conduct.

Unbelievably enough, that City employee (whose misconduct was documented by the City and the Feds resulting in separation) was given full, immediate and expedited treatment by the city administration who promptly provided him copies of records on those individuals and others that he had previously harassed!

Keep in mind that this (now) former City employee had prior convictions for harassment in other local communities!

At the time these records were provided to him, the city administration had full knowledge of his prior criminal conviction(s) and the harassing conduct against citizens that resulted in his separation from employment.

They had no problem searching their files for citizen records to provide them to an individual of questioned character. Outrageous! You bet!

It's hard to understand why this chapter in the hospital saga has not triggered more outrage. Someone who is active in the Mayor's reelection campaign and Build Lakewood is hired in City Hall for a job he was not qualified for, and despite a legal record that would preclude his hire. Then this individual uses his position -- before and after termination -- to harass and stalk opponents of the hospital closing plan. His activities in City Hall, both online and in an official capacity, are not documented. The police department builds a case, but the City declines to prosecute. He continues to publicly thumb his nose at all who oppose him, including a LPD detective and many who write on the Deck.

I get it that people might feel lost in all the legal details of the hospital issue, and that the larger decisions and emails revealed so far, while unpalatable and highly questionable, walk the line between what can and can't be prosecuted, but this is another matter. This is fairly simple to understand.

Where is the outrage?

"Citizens Should Have No Right To Know"

The general argument in the City’s brief in the Essi case is that citizens (such as Mr. Essi) should not be able to use the public records access laws to gain an understanding of government decision-making and government process.

This argument is detrimental to any concept of open, transparent and accountable government. It is particularly offensive in this case where the city intentionally violated the statute and is now under court order(s) to produce public documents.

Why should citizens of this City have to litigate with the City to obtain copies of the City’s public documents that they are entitled to by law?

The way Mr. Essi has been treated by the City affects all of us. In a sense, we have all been stiffed by this conduct.

Mr. Essi has been treated with bad faith. So, have we all.

Now, I want to turn to Mr. Alaimo's observations posted above.

This is the "elephant in the room" that no one will discuss.

The city administration stonewalled Mr. Essi on his document requests for more than a year. It frequently stonewalls on other public document requests.

BUT, the city administration produced records on its citizens from its files to a former employee that the city administration knew had been convicted for harassment.

EVEN WORSE, this is a former city employee who separated from employment with the City because of the fact that he had actively harassed numerous citizens during his recent employment.

FINALLY, these citizen records were produced on an expedited basis to this former City employee.

Some citizens continue to report harassment. I have personally witnessed one incident of verbal harassment. Attorneys litigating with the City have told of recent harassment.

We each should be deeply outraged by this official conduct. We are beyond politics-as-usual here. I would not be writing this series, if I thought this was just about politics.

One might also ask why the Mayor, the Law Director Kevin Butler, the Finance Director Jenn Pae, and all of City Council actively helped to hide and cover up every aspect of this troubling period in Lakewood City Hall, and a great many continue to cover it up and normalize it to this very day.

.

Before I make my next comments, I want to again make it clear that I have no interest in suing the City or representing anyone in such a lawsuit.

It seems clear to me that the City is again recklessly risking lawsuits by its improper conduct.

Any individual harassed by this former City employee either during his employment or subsequent to his employment has a lawsuit to bring against the City.

Why?

1. The City made a political patronage hiring decision that involved ignoring and waiving the applicant's criminal record related to harassment;

2. The employee then harassed citizens for expressing political opinions contrary to those of his employer;

3. The City was on written notice from at least one attorney that this employee had previously engaged in harassment;

4. The City investigated and proved the multiple incidents of harassment, but did not prosecute;

5. Knowing his prior criminal record and the City's own investigation of his harassment of citizens; the City expedited production of City records on its citizens to him; some of the same citizens that this employee had previously harassed;

6. This resulted in continued harassment of some citizens.

There is a pretty good lawsuit here. More than one, too.

Next Topic: The Fake Ohio Attorney General Press Release

This document is a fake or falsified press release used to harass a local citizen who is a critic of the city administration.

It may also have been used to harass or embarrass the publisher of the Lakewood Observer and the Observation Deck. It was posted on the Deck prior to the November election. I have noted this version with "Fake", etc.

The person or persons involved in this violation of law are unknown to me. I do not know the current state of the investigation related to the creation of this document.

Is this politics-as-usual or simply criminal conduct? You be the judge..

Mark Kindt wrote:Before I make my next comments, I want to again make it clear that I have no interest in suing the City or representing anyone in such a lawsuit.
of some citizens.

Mark

One of the reasons I have always valued your comments is
1) Your extensive background in this sort of stuff.
2) You are not trolling for clients. So no personal gain outside of your city not being sued again and again and again.

Mark Kindt wrote: It seems clear to me that the City is again recklessly risking lawsuits by its improper conduct.

Any individual harassed by this former City employee either during his employment or subsequent to his employment has a lawsuit to bring against the City.

There is a pretty good lawsuit here. More than one, too.

I did find it more than interesting that the City not supplying records in an honest and expedited manner to those being harassed, and actually covering it up has extended the statue of limitations to those wishing to sue the city for their conduct.

Outside of that I have been advised not to comment at this time. But it looks to many legal minds I have spoken too recently as "government sponsored harassment of private citizens." Especially with the recent revelations from the statements of Mike Colletta, which is either perjury on one side, or in the affidavit released after his deposition. No matter records have surfaced elsewhere.

.

One further problem that the city administration will need to evaluate is whether or not its insurance coverage will provide coverage should such lawsuits be brought by victims of harassment.

Mark Kindt wrote:One further problem that the city administration will need to evaluate is whether or not its insurance coverage will provide coverage should such lawsuits be brought by victims of harassment.

Mark

I believe you reposting this letter provided a breakthrough moment for those looking into it.

.

Mark Kindt wrote:Next Topic: The Fake Ohio Attorney General Press Release

This document is a fake or falsified press release used to harass a local citizen who is a critic of the city administration.

It may also have been used to harass or embarrass the publisher of the Lakewood Observer and the Observation Deck. It was posted on the Deck prior to the November election. I have noted this version with "Fake", etc.

The person or persons involved in this violation of law are unknown to me. I do not know the current state of the investigation related to the creation of this document.

Is this politics-as-usual or simply criminal conduct? You be the judge.

OAG Press Release--Noted As False or Fake--Watermarked with FAKE_Page_1.jpg

OAG Press Release--Noted As False or Fake--Watermarked with FAKE_Page_2.jpg

.

Thanks for posting this, Mark. I was wondering what was going on.

Some observations:
* When I read it and stepped away for awhile, I thought "this is just like the Onion"; life imitating the Onion.
* There is a clear disrespect for law enforcement implicit in this fake press release from the Attorney General's office.
* It's well written except for the lack of indentation in the last paragraph.
* It was probably prepared with the help of experts, like a lawyer and/or a public relations professional.
* It is clearly intended to embarrass those who were tempted to share it; directly Save Lakewood Hospital and Mike Skindell, and less directly the Lakewood Observer project, Jim O'Bryan, and the Deck member who was duped into posting this (no name, because to give credit where credit is due, it is a very good hoax, although illegal.).
* An individual known to sympathize with City Hall was online shortly after this appeared making noise about all the "corrections" and the "fake news" on the LO. When I pointed out the case of a fox mistaken for a coyote, the poster said that wasn't what he was thinking of and couldn't/wouldn't produce anything on his own.

All the intended victims of the hoax are people Mayor Mike Summers regards as enemies, and as Mark has reported, it is the latest instance in a long, sad chapter in Lakewood's recent history. Although we don't have concrete proof the Mayor was involved in any of this, he should disavow the perps and apologize to the victims.

Otherwise, it's time to start the long, messy process of a recall.

It is interesting that both Mr. Alaimo and I reached separate but similar conclusions.

No matter what the purpose of the fake OAG press release, it was sophisticated, devious, and illegal and likely the work of more than one person.

It directly targeted a fellow citizen-journalist who writes here regularly with criticism of the city administration and its policies.

Each individual who posts on the Deck has a fundamental constitutional right to criticize public officials and public policies and to do so without harassment.

I do not know anything about the status of the investigation.

But I did attempt to see if I could find metadata in the PDF. Here are the screen captures that show the lack of metadata in the document. We can infer that the metadata was "cleaned" before the document was posted.