The Observation Deck

Looking over the past couple of campaigns for the councilpeople, I am sorry to say that I am not shocked to see donations to our councilpeople from CCF doctors, CCF employees, LHA members, Ed Fitzgerald, and other general mayor friends that supported the decanting of the hospital. Notice it appears that even Brian Powers, an ex-councilman, may have known about this deal.

The biggest problem of all is a possible ethics violation by Cindy Marx. I noticed that James W. Kemp Jr., the managing director of Huron Consulting, (a consulting firm council hired for advice about the hospital deal) donated $1,000 to Cindy Marx's campaign. I guess the idea of an independent evaluation was out of the question. It is also worth noting that on the actual campaign finance report, Kemp's address was listed as Lake Rd. in Lakewood, 44107 and not Avon Lake, 44012, which is where he is registered to vote. While this may have been an oversight, I don't believe it is legal to put non-existent addresses on a campaign finance report. Additionally, does anyone know if Marx abstained from voting when council voted to hire Huron? If not, I feel this could be an ethics violation (giving contracts/business to campaign contributors or their companies).

From the looks of these contributions, it appears that any hope that Cindy Marx or O'Leary would be unbiased went out the window long ago.

Source: http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/camp ... ports.aspx

I also forgot to add a few other sources:

http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stock ... Id=2413126
http://www.walkersresearch.com/profileP ... 20485.html

I will post more sources later if I find them.

Lori, this is very good work.
Did you notice any developers among the contributors? They also stand to gain from this deal, as well as future deals. I spent a few minutes looking, but I don't know them by name.

Another avid Hillary supporter.
Is anyone noticing a trend?

Dan,

Thanks for your tip. I appear to have uncovered more. I went through and Googled each and every one of the mayor's campaign contributors whose names I did not recognize (especially those that lived outside of Lakewood). I found that the CEO's and higher-ups at several companies that the city contracts with gave contributions, many significant, to the mayor's most recent camapaign. See attachment below.

If you are out during the day, you will see CT Consultants vans out driving around the city and frequently doing surveying work. I know that I have seen their name listed numerous times on city contracts for various projects, including some very recent projects.

You will also see South Shore Cable doing work on the cable lines in Lakewood for the fiber-optic system that the mayor wanted. They are working on Clifton now, I believe. From what it appears, the owner of this company donated $250.00 to the mayor's most recent campaign.

I believe that this is an ethics violation. Regardless if it is or not, a mayor should have better sense and a higher moral code than to accept money from those he is contracting work out to. Since they all donate to each other's campaigns, council and the law director should have noticed this too. The law director should also be looking over the contracts each and every time the city enters a contract to ensure there are no conflicts of interest.

Maybe he is too busy delivering his newspaper.

Sources:

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/en-US/camp ... ports.aspx
http://www5.sos.state.oh.us/ords/f?p=100:1
http://www.lakecountydevelopmentcouncil ... f-members/
https://www.linkedin.com/

Contributions from companies who do business with another entity seems standard business practice. If you want dirt, see which came first the chicken or the egg. Otherwise, I see it as common business practice that happens in all types of industries each and every day.

Corey is right about it being fairly standard business practice, but also about the chicken and egg.

I'm more interested in those who might benefit from the hospital deal, and where the 10-1 spending advantage came from, besides CCF.
Also it seems to me that the very curious no-compete also benefits the potential developers of that land.
I don't expect there was anything illegal - they were under scrutiny and probably being very careful - but it would be good to know where the money came from.

Dan,

I conducted some research on the 10-1 campaign figure that was brought up by some in SLH. In fairness to the group, I couldn't find the figures. I have the unaudited campaign finance reports (from Jan. 2016) and it doesn't show a 10-1 figure. If someone has a more updated version, I'd love to see it.

As Corey has pointed out, the campaign finance system is perfectly legal. However, I agree that many of the donations were unethical.

Mike- Hillary Clintons unfavorables are very high (67%). The same "Lakewood Democrats" who supported Fitzgeralds disastrous candidacy, will likely support Clinton in the primary.

Nadhal

To clarify, I did not say donations were unethical. I did not do any research to deduce that. I am just saying that if someone wants to see if there are any "not standard practice" donations, look to see which came first.

Also in the interest of transparency, I have a motive in this beyond the hospital closing debacle. I am concerned with the developing of the few precious acres of green space within Lakewood, specifically but not limited to Kauffman Park. The location of Kauffman makes it an ideal addition to our downtown amenities. It also makes it a prime target for developers. So I am hoping to find out how many elected officials are beholden to developers who might be interested in this very attractive parcel of green space.

I have heard lip service that Kauffman Park is safe. But if money is dangled, we all know how much that lip service is worth.

So who are the developers, and how much are they into elected officials for?

by Nadhal Eadeh » Sat Feb 27, 2016 11:30 am

I

conducted some research on the 10-1 campaign figure that was brought up by some in SLH. In fairness to the group, I couldn't find the figures. I have the unaudited campaign finance reports (from Jan. 2016) and it doesn't show a 10-1 figure. If someone has a more updated version, I'd love to see it.

I am the one who made that statement and it is based on the issue 64 campaign. The numerous postcards sent (to everyone in Lakewood I think I remember 5 times it might be 4 - will check) out by the anti 64 group outspent the pro 64 groups 1 postcard (& not even to every household) by 10 to 1. Their group was a pac and that group had the money to fight 64. Despite their funding, they only won the issue 64 by 4% and despite the fact that the postcard contained a misleading statement. The anti 64 postcard stated that voting for 64 would "hurt" Lakewood Hospital when in fact voting for 64 would have put the issue on the ballot immediately upon any city effort to close or diminish the hospital below the legal standard of acute care, inpatient hospital. That would have the effect of HELPING Lakewood Hospital by offering a chance for voting DIRECTLY on whether the citizens wanted their hospital.

There is some dispute about how much money the anti 64 pac had but postage is postage... the funds came from somewhere on the Build Lakewood.

The 10-1 figure does not address any other campaign. Hope this helps.

pam

I'm guessing that we might never know where the money for Fitzi's "news"paper(s) came from. I don't know much about him, but my impression is he's not in a position to personally bankroll such an enterprise.

Fitzgerald has control of the remainder of funds raised for his failed and disastrous campaign for governor. He is spending that money as HE sees fit.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... chall.html

Bridget Conant wrote:Fitzgerald has control of the remainder of funds raised for his failed and disastrous campaign for governor. He is spending that money as HE sees fit.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... chall.html

Thanks. It looks like he has plenty, with enough for a special referendum edition.

All,

I will look into any developers (they are sneaky), as nobody's occupation or employer is ever listed on these finance reports. I will post if I find anything out.