The Observation Deck

More truth.

NOT ONE person can dispute the veracity of this information. Conviction records are public and anyone has access to them. Except, apparently, our city government, which either did not do a background check, or chose to ignore that a potential employee had MORE THAN ONE conviction.

I find THAT issue extremely troubling. Was a background check performed since city job postings do mention that one will be conducted? If not, why not? If one WAS done, did the results match what was stated on the application, which asks a potential employee to disclose previous convictions and/or arrests?

Why and how did this seem to slip through normal procedures?

Bridget,

I believe Lord Lakewood knew exactly who he was hiring and why.

Lori

But why?

I would assume that city jobs are in demand. Wouldn't there be multiple applicants for a decent paying job with benefits? Why would an applicant with "issues" be hired over a qualified applicant?

I thought after the Cuyahoga County corruption scandal, patronage and cronyism came under scrutiny and the new county exec, Ed Fitzgerald, declared that those days were over. Did that message not reach Lakewood?

I believe it was because his "talents" were needed by Summers.

so you all believe that summers hired someone with a conviction just so he could use the employee to harass people? the employee is like a hit man? to be used by summers at his every whim? first of all, let's use his name. it's rick uldricks and you all know it but none of you are brave enough to utter it. you make your connect-the-dots posts and put someone's personal, embarrassing business out there but won't name names. also, no proof of any of what you imply...that summers hired this guy to harass people. it's dumb because we all know who you are talking about. i wonder what will happen if he wins his lawsuit.

"Personal, embarrassing information."

First, this isn't "personal" information, this is public. Personal information would be things like medical records. Perhaps you were not aware that a lot of information that is public is not necessarily things you might like to have people know - like how much you paid for your home, if you have a mortgage, if you filed for divorce, or filed for bakruptcy. To reiterate, criminal convictions are NOT personal information.

As for embarrassing, the record speaks for itself. Attacking a person's religion, sending unwanted and bizarre pornographic matter to someone's home, and relentlessly harassing MULTIPLE people via multiple means over months is not something anyone should be proud of.

Bridget Conant wrote:NOT ONE person can dispute the veracity of this information. Conviction records are public and anyone has access to them. Except, apparently, our city government, which either did not do a background check, or chose to ignore that a potential employee had MORE THAN ONE conviction.

I find THAT issue extremely troubling. Was a background check performed since city job postings do mention that one will be conducted? If not, why not? If one WAS done, did the results match what was stated on the application, which asks a potential employee to disclose previous convictions and/or arrests?

Why and how did this seem to slip through normal procedures?

Dan Alamio wrote: " What if - speculating here now, I don't want to get sued- a person was hired by the city to use the online skill set involved in past misdeeds?"

Mr. Alamio, At the risk of being sued I will repeat your post. Hopefully we'll get off with just a visit from the Lakewood Police at the insistence of some other Build Lakewooders.

Though I won't bump my own post, earlier this week I described an administration (going back as far as 2012) more than willing to mislead, more than willing to play games with residents to achieve an end. When you start to slip and slide there's no telling where you'll end up.

City Hall might not need a "hit man"....but they certainly would have needed a person that controls a Lakewood media outlet.
The news source in question offered biased pro-Summers, anti-Hospital coverage throughout the election campaign.

Hiring the moderator of a media outlet in order to get positive election coverage is completely consistent with this City Hall's M.O.
Over the past year they created the infamous "fake newspaper", designed to fool voters by not revealing it source.
They also recently created the fake "Lakewood Community" Facebook page, which does not disclose its bias. Jen Pae started the page because people on the "Lakewood, Ohio" FB page started asking too many questions.

When I was a kid, government-controlled media outlets were the hallmark of authoritarian regimes.
Here in Lakewood, they are just "business as usual".

BTW, I've still yet to hear anyone dispute the facts of the original post....lots of diversions, lots of attacks, but nothing that denies the actual evidence.

Mike, good point!

Lori Allen _ wrote:Mike, good point!

Unfortunately it's not hard to connect the dots with this City Hall.

City Hall might not need a "hit man"....but they certainly would have needed a person that controls a Lakewood media outlet.
The news source in question offered biased pro-Summers, anti-Hospital coverage throughout the election campaign.

Hiring the moderator of a media outlet in order to get positive election coverage is completely consistent with this City Hall's M.O.

My, it's all becoming clear. Otherwise, what would possibly justify the hiring of a person with a criminal history?

This completely destroys the nice guy image that the mayor has. There is something gravely wrong with any elected official who knowingly employs a person of this nature, giving them in this case, access to information on every property owner in the city that otherwise would not be available. This is no small infraction. It wreaks of dirty tricks and paranoia.

In this light, it is easy to understand how the hospital was given away at pennies on the dollar. It is easy to understand that monied interest were given priority at the expense of the best interest of our community.

We can no longer trust our city government.

This is all very alarming.

Thank you Brian for all your extraordinary work.

K

If the allegations against Jim find him guilty in the lawsuit....

Should he give up his role at the Observer Project, where he has access to private information and an all access pass?

Would you hire him?

How long after the court case would it be acceptable to hire him?

Could he ever be trusted again?

This seems to closely parallel the situation with Rick Uldrick.

Will you still drink Jim's Kool Aid?

It boggles the mind that you can equate an outcome in an as yet untried CIVIL lawsuit with a CRIMINAL conviction.

Now there will be no doubt in anyone's mind that you are a complete MORON.