"President" O'Leary Is Objectively Worse In Every Measurable Way
Posted: Mon Dec 11, 2017 9:30 pm
O'Leary has caused Negative Personal Politics to Overtake Lakewood---O'Leary's Council Presidency is a failure.
In the coming months, I plan to present a series of concealed public records that further expose O'Leary's duplicity, but here is a brief review of what we already know about his lack of intellectual honesty:
1. H sat silently and secretly supporting the withholding of 30,000 pages public records for over a year.
2. He made false and misleading statements under oath that were proven to be false by public records he actively withheld with Butler's complicity.
3. He led voters to believe he would vote to keep the hospital open, but right after he won his election, he voted to close it---He claimed the $5M cost of renovating a parking garage was a major reason he voted to close the $120 hospital after 100 years. Huh?
4. O’Leary Continues His 2 Year Long Delay in Delivery of Charity Care to the most vulnerable--all for Political Purposes---Recall that he delayed formation of the Foundation Task Force until after the pending referendum in 2016. After the election he appointed a CCF employed doctor as his pick for the Task Force.
The harm O'Leary has caused to Lakewood's most vulnerable citizens was first pointed out in two factual articles from a year ago---Since then, O'Leary has cowered from any public response--remaining in his shadowy Council closet.
http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2017/0 ... -political
“New Foundation” Is Objectively Worse In Every Measurable Way.
http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2016/1 ... e-in-every
The facts set forth in Bad Government 11 (http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2016/1 ... e-in-every) were delivered to City Council during the public comment portion of the Council Meeting on December 19, 2016.
In response to those facts, Council President Sam O'Leary doubled down on his previous claim saying, “I absolutely 100% stand by my comment that it [the Master Agreement] is in every measurable way objectively better.” Again, the facts show that City Council negotiated backwards from the original Letter of Intent (LOI) and ended up with about $7 million less money for the new charitable foundation under the final agreement (based upon the present value of the delayed funding).
To defend his claim, Mr. O’Leary said on December 19, 2016: “We were able to get an amount certain for the community health foundation whereas previously it was amounts that would be left after a wind down uncertain.” However, the original LOI guaranteed $24.4 million and provided: “The amount of such payment is fixed and will not vary due to the value of assets remaining following the Hospital’s cessation of operations.” So, O’Leary’s latest claim is untrue.
O’Leary further stated on December 19, 2016 that: “The city and the other parties to the agreement might have moved more swiftly this year [to form the new foundation] were it not for the fact that there was a ballot referendum [Issue 64] challenging the legitimacy of the action at large. So, certainly I think that had we acted this year to say spend $12 million we would have come under significant public scrutiny for spending money that was then subjected to a referendum without having actually allowed for a second blessing by the voters of this transaction.” Of course, they could not have spent $12 million in 2015, because the new foundation will not even have $12 million until sometime in 2022 due to delayed funding.
In addition, City Council, led by Mr. O’Leary, promoted all the following actions and positions while the “legitimacy” of the Master Agreement was being challenged:
Closure of the hospital.
Termination of nearly 1,200 hospital employees.
Transfer of all medical equipment and bed licenses to the Cleveland Clinic.
Cancellation of all Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance contracts.
Transfer of millions of dollars of cash and title to real estate.
Commencement of demolition of two buildings.
A “legal” opinion of Law Director Kevin Butler that the outcome of Issue 64 did not affect the “legitimacy” of the Master Agreement.
So, O’Leary advanced all those things, but now claims he refrained from appointing task force members to discuss a health foundation because he and other public officials would be “under significant public scrutiny” if they had not delayed this less significant action until after the vote on Issue 64.
The complete list of the 17 task force members was made public on January 3, 2017 and included City Hall insiders and people associated with the Clinic.
So, it appears that the delay in making the task force appointments public was to avoid significant public scrutiny while Issue 64 was pending.
Under O’Leary’s leadership, the parts of the Master Agreement detrimental to the health of citizens were immediately implemented, but the part that was supposed to advance the health of citizens was purposely delayed for political purposes.
In the coming months, I plan to present a series of concealed public records that further expose O'Leary's duplicity, but here is a brief review of what we already know about his lack of intellectual honesty:
1. H sat silently and secretly supporting the withholding of 30,000 pages public records for over a year.
2. He made false and misleading statements under oath that were proven to be false by public records he actively withheld with Butler's complicity.
3. He led voters to believe he would vote to keep the hospital open, but right after he won his election, he voted to close it---He claimed the $5M cost of renovating a parking garage was a major reason he voted to close the $120 hospital after 100 years. Huh?
4. O’Leary Continues His 2 Year Long Delay in Delivery of Charity Care to the most vulnerable--all for Political Purposes---Recall that he delayed formation of the Foundation Task Force until after the pending referendum in 2016. After the election he appointed a CCF employed doctor as his pick for the Task Force.
The harm O'Leary has caused to Lakewood's most vulnerable citizens was first pointed out in two factual articles from a year ago---Since then, O'Leary has cowered from any public response--remaining in his shadowy Council closet.
http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2017/0 ... -political
“New Foundation” Is Objectively Worse In Every Measurable Way.
http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2016/1 ... e-in-every
The facts set forth in Bad Government 11 (http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/2016/1 ... e-in-every) were delivered to City Council during the public comment portion of the Council Meeting on December 19, 2016.
In response to those facts, Council President Sam O'Leary doubled down on his previous claim saying, “I absolutely 100% stand by my comment that it [the Master Agreement] is in every measurable way objectively better.” Again, the facts show that City Council negotiated backwards from the original Letter of Intent (LOI) and ended up with about $7 million less money for the new charitable foundation under the final agreement (based upon the present value of the delayed funding).
To defend his claim, Mr. O’Leary said on December 19, 2016: “We were able to get an amount certain for the community health foundation whereas previously it was amounts that would be left after a wind down uncertain.” However, the original LOI guaranteed $24.4 million and provided: “The amount of such payment is fixed and will not vary due to the value of assets remaining following the Hospital’s cessation of operations.” So, O’Leary’s latest claim is untrue.
O’Leary further stated on December 19, 2016 that: “The city and the other parties to the agreement might have moved more swiftly this year [to form the new foundation] were it not for the fact that there was a ballot referendum [Issue 64] challenging the legitimacy of the action at large. So, certainly I think that had we acted this year to say spend $12 million we would have come under significant public scrutiny for spending money that was then subjected to a referendum without having actually allowed for a second blessing by the voters of this transaction.” Of course, they could not have spent $12 million in 2015, because the new foundation will not even have $12 million until sometime in 2022 due to delayed funding.
In addition, City Council, led by Mr. O’Leary, promoted all the following actions and positions while the “legitimacy” of the Master Agreement was being challenged:
Closure of the hospital.
Termination of nearly 1,200 hospital employees.
Transfer of all medical equipment and bed licenses to the Cleveland Clinic.
Cancellation of all Medicare, Medicaid and private insurance contracts.
Transfer of millions of dollars of cash and title to real estate.
Commencement of demolition of two buildings.
A “legal” opinion of Law Director Kevin Butler that the outcome of Issue 64 did not affect the “legitimacy” of the Master Agreement.
So, O’Leary advanced all those things, but now claims he refrained from appointing task force members to discuss a health foundation because he and other public officials would be “under significant public scrutiny” if they had not delayed this less significant action until after the vote on Issue 64.
The complete list of the 17 task force members was made public on January 3, 2017 and included City Hall insiders and people associated with the Clinic.
So, it appears that the delay in making the task force appointments public was to avoid significant public scrutiny while Issue 64 was pending.
Under O’Leary’s leadership, the parts of the Master Agreement detrimental to the health of citizens were immediately implemented, but the part that was supposed to advance the health of citizens was purposely delayed for political purposes.