The Observation Deck

These two questions were written by an elected representative on December 2, 2015 as part of Council's secret Communications Strategy.

They were contained among more than 27,000 pages of public records that Butler withheld and claimed did not exist until after Court orders that they be produced.

Can anyone guess who wrote this?

‐ The method by which this legislation was introduced to Council and Lakewood residents appears to be aimed as restricting
public comment and reaction ‐ not on the original docket (add on), no public prior access to the introduced legislation prior to
its introduction, scheduling special Council sessions to get it passed by a self imposed deadline. Why is the biggest issue facing
Lakewood in a generation or more being handled in such a way?

‐ Characterization of the proposal states it to be better than the original LOI. If so, quantitatively, how much better is this
proposal than the LOI which was defined as a $120 million investment in the delivery of healthcare in Lakewood?

Brian Essi wrote:These two questions were written by an elected representative on December 2, 2015 as part of Council's secret Communications Strategy.

They were contained among more than 27,000 pages of public records that Butler withheld and claimed did not exist until after Court orders that they be produced.

Can anyone guess who wrote this?

‐ The method by which this legislation was introduced to Council and Lakewood residents appears to be aimed as restricting
public comment and reaction ‐ not on the original docket (add on), no public prior access to the introduced legislation prior to
its introduction, scheduling special Council sessions to get it passed by a self imposed deadline. Why is the biggest issue facing
Lakewood in a generation or more being handled in such a way?

‐ Characterization of the proposal states it to be better than the original LOI. If so, quantitatively, how much better is this
proposal than the LOI which was defined as a $120 million investment in the delivery of healthcare in Lakewood?

The answer doesn't matter. By December 21, 2015, the Winter Solstice, darkest day of the year in more ways than one, Lakewood was betrayed by all seven without those questions (and many others) being answered adequately. That remains true today.

Thank you for speaking up Mr. Anderson, you showed more courage than most.

Ms. Ostrowski,

You have correctly identified the author, and I agree that we were betrayed by all.

I too give Mr. Anderson credit for displaying courage up to a point, but when he wrote the words above he was participating in the development of a secret agreed upon "communications strategy" to roll out the announcement of the Master Agreement in violation of the Open Meetings Act.

However, I disagree with you---it does matter.

Please note below that Cindy Marx was an active participant in the unlawful scheme and eager to play her role in the "7-Member Communications Army."




.

Before we start handing out Profiles in Courage Awards, please note Mr. Anderson's reply to my questions around the infamous December 7 presser.

Kate McCarty -

Your questions are fair. Council cannot vote in executive session. Obviously, we discussed the deal before us but did not vote because we can not vote in executive session. Council voted to authorize the city to enter into new contracts after the third reading of the legislation (the very evening after Judge Friedman's ruling).

My "off script" comment was a personal characterization of what I knew was is my remarks compared to what my colleagues stated before me that evening as well as the month prior. I was not handed a script and was not asked for my written comments in advance. It was an off the cuff comment and I can see why you interpreted it the way you did.

I personally asked and was briefed by Council's Thompson Hine legal team that the press conference was appropriate and not in any way a violation of any open meetings law.

Skindell's lawsuit sought to prevent Council from voting. Judge Friedman ruled and Council voted after the third reading. The very thing the lawsuit attempted to prevent took place 11 months ago.

I apologize for the delay in my response.

David Andersonhttp://lakewoodobserver.com/forum/viewt ... pt#p172641

It appears to me that Mr. Anderson fibbed. Regardless, this is even more evidence that these folks knew what they were going to do and how they were going to vote from day one (or before day one). Meanwhile, it appears that how many (millions?) of our tax dollars were spent on this charade when everyone apparently knew the outcome. That sounds like not only waste to me, but fraud.

Ms. McCarthy and Ms. Allen,

It is indeed a fraudulent abuse attorney-client privilege to skirt the Open Meetings Laws.

Notice Butler's email where he instructs: "Councilmembers, please provide your responses to me and I'll ensure they get to Eileen. This helps preserve confidentiality."

This is an intentional and willful abuse of Butler's duties to the Citizens of Lakewood to uphold the laws as he swore an oath to do. Butler has turned the law and his sworn duties on their heads---and he intentionally led council in breaking the law.

Notice to other participants in this scam, including two lawyers from Thompson Hine who Mr. Anderson was likely referring to in his Deck missive to Ms. McCarthy she referred to above. How much money did we pay "those people" who cowered in the closets at City Hall and betrayed the fine people of Lakewood, including the most vulnerable among us?

May I suggest that when Mr. Anderson used the advice of counsel defense on a Public Forum, he likely waived attorney-client privilege on this entire subject-- if and when the depositions begin he will have to tell all.

May I also suggest that a true act of courage would be for him to come on the Deck and tell us all the full story now.

Perhaps Ms. Marx could do the same or...better yet, just resign and end the damage she has caused to the women and children of Lakewood.

Folks,

Our elected officials and public officials have an opportunity time to fess up and come clean and begin the healing process.

Rest assured though, this is just the tip of the iceberg---there are more self-indicting records to be published and everyone on the email chain played a role--Bullock, Nowlin, O'Leary, Madigan, Juris etc.

Another bald faced lie from a council member.

Am I surprised?

Sadly, no. It's the modus operandi in Lakewood.

Why do we tolerate this?

Get out and vote these people OUT!

BTW, the records referred to above were released by Butler 462 days after my original request and only after a Court Order.

Butler originally released only 13 pages (after 122 days) in response to the relevant requests and denied originally he had any more records.

Then (only after the Court Order) the above records were among 3,768 he recently released.

This is but one example of Butler denying the existence of records, but then producing hundreds of times more records than he originally claimed he had.

So, the evidence suggests that Butler (in his role as the records custodian and attorney defending the records case) was engaging in corrupt activity to cover up his own corrupt activities in his anointed role as the leader of the "communications strategy."

There appears to be a growing cancer at City Hall.

"people are going to start perjuring themselves..."

Anderson might be the most cowardly and spineless one on that entire council.
He obviously knew the deal was terrible, but he went along with the crowd like a teenager being goaded into smoking weed with his buddies. #PeerPressure

Then he had audacity to come on here and defend City Hall's corruption a few months ago.
This is the guy many of you labelled "honest"?

Michael Deneen wrote:Anderson might be the most cowardly and spineless one on that entire council.
He obviously knew the deal was terrible, but he went along with the crowd like a teenager being goaded into smoking weed with his buddies. #PeerPressure

Then he had audacity to come on here and defend City Hall's corruption a few months ago.
This is the guy many of you labelled "honest"?

Mr. Anderson not only knew the deal was terrible, he knew the process was dishonest.
When the moment called for integrity, for principles, he failed. He failed to speak up in public.
When confronted by a direct question about what was going on behind closed doors, He Lied.
Mr. Anderson,
You are an embarrassment.
You should resign.

m buckley wrote:

Michael Deneen wrote:Anderson might be the most cowardly and spineless one on that entire council.
He obviously knew the deal was terrible, but he went along with the crowd like a teenager being goaded into smoking weed with his buddies. #PeerPressure

Then he had audacity to come on here and defend City Hall's corruption a few months ago.
This is the guy many of you labelled "honest"?

Mr. Anderson not only knew the deal was terrible, he knew the process was dishonest.
When the moment called for integrity, for principles, he failed. He failed to speak up in public.
When confronted by a direct question about what was going on behind closed doors, He Lied.
Mr. Anderson,
You are an embarrassment.
You should resign.

Mr. Buckley,

There is an old adage: "If two people in business always agree on everything, one is not necessary."

If 7 always agree, then 6 are unnecessary.

Mr. Anderson started out disagreeing---some called him "The Thinker" early in the process.

He cared about the process, but Butler and Thompson Hine sold him to Big Daddy and Toby and told him it was all legal business and it would not hurt.

With the 27,000+ pages of the filthy TRUTH that Butler, et al have released in the last 60 days, the game is up.

He was played.

Brian Essi wrote:

m buckley wrote:

Michael Deneen wrote:Anderson might be the most cowardly and spineless one on that entire council.
He obviously knew the deal was terrible, but he went along with the crowd like a teenager being goaded into smoking weed with his buddies. #PeerPressure

Then he had audacity to come on here and defend City Hall's corruption a few months ago.
This is the guy many of you labelled "honest"?

Mr. Anderson not only knew the deal was terrible, he knew the process was dishonest.
When the moment called for integrity, for principles, he failed. He failed to speak up in public.
When confronted by a direct question about what was going on behind closed doors, He Lied.
Mr. Anderson,
You are an embarrassment.
You should resign.

Mr. Buckley,

There is an old adage: "If two people in business always agree on everything, one is not necessary."

If 7 always agree, then 6 are unnecessary.

Mr. Anderson started out disagreeing---some called him "The Thinker" early in the process.

He cared about the process, but Butler and Thompson Hine sold him to Big Daddy and Toby and told him it was all legal business and it would not hurt.

With the 27,000+ pages of the filthy TRUTH that Butler, et al have released in the last 60 days, the game is up.

He was played.

Mr. Essi,
We have 7 councilpersons they all have a voice.
Mr. Anderson knew the deal was terrible. He knew the process was dishonest.
He chose not to speak up in public when speaking up in public might have made a difference.
When integrity mattered, when character mattered, Mr. Anderson sat in silence.
Mike Summers was counting on that. Mike Summers needed that sort of weakness to pull this off.

I would like to express a few points in Council-member Anderson's defense:

He was poorly served by his colleagues in the city administration and the two council members that served on the board of LHA. How?

1. It was never disclosed to him that the Mayor and LHA had already secretly rejected the offer from Metro Health System to invest in and operate the Hospital as a going concern;

2. It was never disclosed to him that LHA board members knew that the $120 million dollar investment claimed as benefits were "bogus" and had told city officials just that;

3. It was never disclosed to him that Huron Consulting was not an independent consultant, but had an ongoing relationship with CCF;

4. LHA board members unconscionably messaged to council that LHA would file for bankruptcy, if their deal was not enacted.

I personally cannot excuse Mr. Anderson's conduct. In fact, it is my opinion that Mr. Anderson knew the outcome of this from day one, just as the rest of the bunch apparently did.

I agree with Mr. Buckley. Mr. Anderson sat in silence. He had many paths he could have taken. Unfortunately, he chose the path of Mister Summers and the rest of the bunch. I don't believe anything was stopping him from resigning, "blowing the whistle", and/or going to the authorities and turning over evidence.

No arm of government is going to investigate or prosecute any aspect of the Hospital debacle. Trust me. I'm completely confident on that point.

My goal is to understand what exactly occurred at the most granular level that I can obtain--document-by-document.

As citizens, we must continue to protest unethical conduct and demand reform.

As voters, we need to elect new public officials who are deeply committed to public integrity.

Over several years, the diligent and ever persistent Mr. Essi (and his commendable legal counsel) have achieved court orders finally compelling the partial production of documents after long and improper delay. The Lakewood Observer has been valiant in publishing stories on these issues. The Observation Deck and its contributors are meaningfully advancing a key reform discussion. Senator Skindell and the "Taxpayers" pursued crucial legal cases.

We are motivated citizens and we can pressure our elected and appointed local officials to improve their performance in the areas of openness, accountability and ethics-in-government.