The Observation Deck

There was no “QUID PRO QUO!!”

Mark, you are badly mischaracterizing my position, which is supportive of ethics reform ordinance and campaign finance regulations. I take my job as a councilperson seriously, and it’s my responsibility to think deeply through every angle of proposals before me. I don’t know where on earth you came up with “wait and see” from what I wrote. I am hopeful that the issues I raised can be assuaged or addressed in the legislative process, as often happens. To label these concerns as “objections” is also a mischaracterization.

I recognize Council-person O'Malley's commitment to public service and his professionalism as an elected official.

As I reviewed candidate comments on the proposed Rader legislation there seemed to be clear support for the passage of the legislation as drafted -- (Rodriguez-Carbone, Presutto, and Wise).

Other candidates while clearly expressing support for ethics or improved ethics each raised a similar concern ("objection") to the legislation as drafted related to redundancy and duplication -- (Litten, O'Malley, and Shachner).

Since no candidate will ever say that they are against ethics-in-government, I chose the phrase "wait and see" to describe where I see these three candidates falling on the likely future development of the pending legislation.

This also reflects my own personal opinion that this legislation is long overdue and cannot wait.

My statements also reflects my personal opinion that the electorate is poorly served by uncontested electoral races as is the case this year in Ward 4.

Some voters in that ward who might support a timely and vigorous ethics-in-government program are effectively disenfranchised by the fact that there is no alternative candidate in that race.

Complacency vs. Urgency

Thousands upon thousands of words have been written about the failures of the city administration; hundreds of pages of documents have been posted that illustrate these failures. In the city administration, there is this sense of complacency that everything is all right with Lakewood and this sense of complacency is sold to the public via a constant "good news" public relations campaign run by the city's paid consultants.

If everything was so fine in Lakewood, the empty lot at the corner of Detroit and Belle wouldn't have been handed over to the client of the former mayor for $1.00; the citizens would still have their award-winning hospital; and tens of millions in hospital funds and value wouldn't now be in the hands of private entities.

All candidates running for election in 2019 need to make a clear commitment to the enactment of the proposed ethics-in-government and campaign finance reform legislation.

In fact, candidates, this is the low hanging fruit.

If you can't get this done in a timely and comprehensive way, how do you expect to address more serious issues?

Mark Kindt wrote:Complacency vs. Urgency

Thousands upon thousands of words have been written about the failures of the city administration; hundreds of pages of documents have been posted that illustrate these failures. In the city administration, there is this sense of complacency that everything is all right with Lakewood and this sense of complacency is sold to the public via a constant "good news" public relations campaign run by the city's paid consultants.

If everything was so fine in Lakewood, the empty lot at the corner of Detroit and Belle wouldn't have been handed over to the client of the former mayor for $1.00; the citizens would still have their award-winning hospital; and tens of millions in hospital funds and value wouldn't now be in the hands of private entities.

All candidates running for election in 2019 need to make a clear commitment to the enactment of the proposed ethics-in-government and campaign finance reform legislation.

In fact, candidates, this is the low hanging fruit.

If you can't get this done in a timely and comprehensive way, how do you expect to address more serious issues?

Let me be blunt.

Democrats on city council right now have a unanimous majority and they do NOT have the political courage to pass the pending reform legislation.

It is as simple as that!

Let me make this even easier! -- A Multiple Choice Quiz!

You're an elected official in the third largest municipality in one of the most corrupt counties in the United States, do you:

A. Rely upon the City Law Director to attend your ethics training for you?

B. Rely upon the City Law Director to advise you on ethical issues that might have a future risk of incarceration or fine after you leave government? Or,

C. Rely upon the Ohio Constitution's home rule powers granted to your municipality and enact comprehensive ethics reform legislation that will protect you?

Quiz Guide:

If you chose Answer "A", then you are likely to have previously served as a Lakewood City Council-Member and are unlikely to be elected to office again.

If you chose Answer "B", then you are likely to have been a Mayor of Lakewood, have been incarcerated, may be incarcerated, or are unlikely to be elected to office again.

Obviously, Answer "C" is the optimum choice.

As an elected official in one of the most corrupt counties in the United States, I would want to be protected by duplicate ethical regimes at both the State level and the Municipal level, especially since my 'home rule" authority allows for the creation of an ethical regime that has a broader scope and encourages active compliance, thus reducing the risk of ethical violations. This is "belt & suspenders" protection for me.

The answer is C, but what is more upsetting is current City Council leadership is preventing the conversation from even happening. Nothing should come before the integrity of our city and our elected officials. Integrity means doing the right thing when no one is looking. I applaud Laura’s stance on having a transparent, consistent view of ethics. We need more candidates for office willing to take an official stance on issues like this and finance reform than trying to walk a tight rope of ambiguous neutrality.

This should get done before the election, or by the end of the year. However, I have little confidence that the presently constituted council, with the current mayor looking over their shoulders, will not cut corners. So I'd prefer they wait until January.

Brad Presutto wrote:The answer is C, but what is more upsetting is current City Council leadership is preventing the conversation from even happening. Nothing should come before the integrity of our city and our elected officials. Integrity means doing the right thing when no one is looking. I applaud Laura’s stance on having a transparent, consistent view of ethics. We need more candidates for office willing to take an official stance on issues like this and finance reform than trying to walk a tight rope of ambiguous neutrality.

As I have said previously, Candidate Brad Presutto has established a clear leadership position in the Ward 2 race with this statement and his earlier statements on the importance of ethics-in-government and the pending reform legislation.

While I do not expect Mayoral Candidate O'Leary to make a position statement here, as President of City Council and a leading Democrat, he has a duty to be clear and informed on this legislation and move it to a timely vote.

It would disappoint me to no end, to witness young Democrats waffling in "ambiguous neutrality" on improved ethics-in-government and campaign finance reform.

This is the election that will test that proposition in real life.

Announcement of Phony "Good Government" PAC Strengthens Case for Ethics and Finance Reform In Lakewood

What Ms. Madigan knows about "good government" would barely fill a thimble, if that.

Why Do We Have Temporary PACs Constantly Meddling In Our Local Elections?

Don't they just facilitate "pay to play" politics? Don't they open the door to "dark money" influence?

Remember "Build Lakewood".

Thanks to "Build Lakewood' we no longer have a public hospital.

Thanks to "Build Lakewood" tens of millions of dollars in hospital assets and value wound-up in the hands of private entities including the former mayor's developer client.

Thanks to "Build Lakewood" our community is stuck with the former mayor's lame development project, all subsidized at the cost of our community's healthcare.

Of course, we all remember the former mayor's phony PAC that with the help of the City Law Director brought us the bogus "Lakewood Neighborhood News."

Democrats need to deliver a strong program of ethics-in-government and campaign finance reform for Lakewood.

Same old encrusted cronyism just won't do for the 21st Century.

Note the date of the signature on the form: September 23, 2019. A little over a week ago.

Dan Alaimo wrote:Note the date of the signature on the form: September 23, 2019. A little over a week ago.

I think they’re worried about the races.

Mark Kindt wrote:Why Do We Have Temporary PACs Constantly Meddling In Our Local Elections?

Don't they just facilitate "pay to play" politics? Don't they open the door to "dark money" influence?

Remember "Build Lakewood".

Thanks to "Build Lakewood' we no longer have a public hospital.

Thanks to "Build Lakewood" tens of millions of dollars in hospital assets and value wound-up in the hands of private entities including the former mayor's developer client.

Thanks to "Build Lakewood" our community is stuck with the former mayor's lame development project, all subsidized at the cost of our community's healthcare.

Of course, we all remember the former mayor's phony PAC that with the help of the City Law Director brought us the bogus "Lakewood Neighborhood News."

Democrats need to deliver a strong program of ethics-in-government and campaign finance reform for Lakewood.

Same old encrusted cronyism just won't do for the 21st Century.

So here we witness the creation of another local sleazoid PAC.

That arrives conveniently on the heels of promises from the Mayor to donate millions of dollars to his friends of "wellness" for another bogus non-profit funded with public money.

That doyen of good government, Mary Louise Madigan, gets to form a new slush fund to support Sam O'Leary in his race against Meghan George.

"Developers open your wallets, get out your checkbooks."