The Observation Deck

If you enjoy reading between the lines, you would have enjoyed tonight’s Committee Of the Whole meeting.
But first, I need to warn you, that my writing is somewhat erratic as I'm trying to get my thoughts straight to paper, or er... to the Deck.

Planning Director Bryce Sylvester presented a powerpoint on One Lakewood Place and deferred some questions to Carnegie Management as they arose from council members.

Now….never mind that retail is dying a slow death due to online shopping.

The key word around this upcoming development is that it will be VIBRANT.

One Lakewood Place https://www.onelakewoodplace.com will be a First Class Community Gathering Space. 100,000 sq. feet of Class A office/retail space. 140 residential units at minimum. Easy access parking….. AND MORE!

Sylvester seemed a bit proud that there will be over 600 jobs throughout the process of construction. Yup. 600 jobs during the 4-year process that is expected to bring One Lakewood Place to completion.

But…. didn’t Lakewood Hospital employ over 1200 folks? Year after year after year after year……

For some reason, most of the numbers that Sylvester rattled off, do not quite match those in other documents. Things like jobs, units, size of public space, etc.

The allotted Public Space is a confusing issue. Since Carnegie will be the private owner of One Lakewood Place, just how much input or allowance will the public actually have? I’m curious as to what happens if a Class B (or lower) person tries to utilize this Class A space. Plus, the size of this ‘public space’ seems nebulous. Possibly 3/4 of an acre, but maybe only 1/2 acre. Things like tables for outdoor dining might have to encroach upon the space. (I'm unclear if one has to apply for usage of the public space.)

Tom Bullock took a shot at talking. He mentioned that it was a great day. He mentioned basketball. He thought some cobblestones and victorian-like architecture like in London or the south of France would be good. He also mentioned Vegas and Trump’s orange hair.

Council-At-Large Meghan George asked about the former Mayor of Lakewood, Ed Fitzgerald. Such as, has there ever been any conflict of interest with Fitzgerald having been a mayor and now being a consultant for Carnegie? How did he get involved with Carnegie to begin with? George Papandreas of Carnegie went on record that Fitzgerald has only been involved with Carnegie for the last 3 years. That he is not a consultant; however, he does bring ideas for consideration to the developer, i.e. boutique hotel.

What is the financial benefit to Lakewood? Well, a conservative estimate of real estate taxes is $1.2 million per year. These tax dollars will help fund the schools, city government, the MetroParks, county human services programs, the public library and the port authority.

So…. how much actually comes to the city of Lakewood? Try 13%. That amounts to $156,000. Yup. $156,000.
How does that compare to all that the hospital contributed in city tax? And…. all of that money went to the city.

I urge you to read everything you can re: this development. I also urge you to attend upcoming Committee Of the Whole meetings.

On pg. 14 of the docket:
Section 5. This ordinance is hereby declared to be an emergency measure necessary for
the immediate preservation of the public peace, property, health, safety and welfare in the City
and for the usual daily operation of the City for the reasons set forth and defined in the preamble to this ordinance, and provided it receives the affirmative vote of at least two thirds of its
members of Council this ordinance shall take effect and be in force immediately, or otherwise shall take effect and be in force after the earliest period allowed by law.


Why the urgency? Remember the urgency over the hospital? Yet... no urgency over Charlie. I smell something unpleasant.

pj bennett wrote:
Council-At-Large Meghan George asked about the former Mayor of Lakewood, Ed Fitzgerald. Such as, has there ever been any conflict of interest with Fitzgerald having been a mayor and now being a consultant for Carnegie? How did he get involved with Carnegie to begin with? George Papandreas of Carnegie went on record that Fitzgerald has only been involved with Carnegie for the last 3 years. That he is not a consultant; however, he does bring ideas for consideration to the developer, i.e. boutique hotel.

First, THANK YOU MEGHAN GEORGE!

Finally, someone has the balls to publicly question Fitzgerald’s relationship with Carnegie!

And fancy that - it’s the lone woman on council!

Too bad the rest of them are eunuchs.

Second, is Carnegie Management LYING when they claim Fitzy is not a consultant? According to this PD article, they announced his hiring AS A CONSULTANT!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/articles.c ... ospita.amp

Apparently, lying is so normal in this administration that even anyone associated with it thinks it’s OK to fudge the truth.

I’d say Summers and Trump have a LOT in common.

Oops, sorry! Fitzgerald IS a consultant, but not for the One Lakewood Place project. He just shares ideas, that he might happen to have.

pj bennett wrote:Oops, sorry! Fitzgerald IS a consultant, but not for the One Lakewood Place project. He just shares ideas, that he might happen to have.

That guy is full of ideas!

Like his idea that it’s OK to drive for over 10 years without a drivers license!

Thank you Meghan George. Thats what we like to call political courage!

To answer my own question, I know of one reason, why ‘the hurry’. The Mayor, Council President/Ward 2 Sam O’Leary, and Bryce Sylvester want to tie the bow on this package, because demolition of the hospital is scheduled to begin in September 2018.

In the same manner as stealing the hospital from the people, there will be multiple Committee Of the Whole Meetings to push this project through. Probably every Monday, beginning on April 23rd, and maybe even during the week.

What’s the emergency? So far, there has not been an appraisal, though an appraisal in early May has been promised. (I don't remember the hospital ever being appraised.) It seems senseless to rush the process for a transformative development that will be around for years to come.

A request for Surveying & Engineering Services by Stephen Hovancsek & Associates, Inc. in the amount of $43,000.00 was in the agenda for yesterday’s Board of Control meeting. This will be paid through the Lakewood Hospital Special Revenue Fund.

At last night’s COW meeting, Ward 3 John Litten expressed concerned about being sensitive to the citizens of Lakewood as demolition begins. He realizes that many will be upset by the tearing down of the 100 yr. old structure.

(Why, oh why, did I feel that he had been orchestrated to say this? I’m imaging the Mayor taking him aside and saying, “John, I think that it would be good coming from you, if you show that the emotions of the citizens are important to us.” A friend asked me, if therapists will be on hand to soothe and offer comforting words.)

It’s interesting that Lakewood prides itself on being diversified, but I think, that it is far from that. There is a definite class distinction. And, as I see it, One Lakewood Place being privately owned and touted as Class A, only increases that segregation.

Routine maintenance is essential to any and all properties. There was a time, when inspectors stayed on top of landlords to make repairs necessary to keep a building in good livable order. It would have been a win-win, if this had continued. By maintaining a building, rents could have been stabilized and even increased, accordingly. Now, city hall is scrambling to gentrify this town of 52,000.

Btw, it was Ward 4 Dan O’Malley, who raised the question as to the percentage of real estate taxes that actually comes to the city. (Only 13%)
He asked Sylvester to provide more detail on some other economic factors.

If you haven’t had time to look at the TERM agreement, here’s the link:
http://www.onelakewood.com/wp-content/u ... 112018.pdf

pj--thanks for the update on .48 lakewood place- location of real estate banalities

A few observation on the term sheet for One Lakewood Place.

1. Lakewood Hospital has been closed for more than two years, but the City still does not have an independent appraisal of the former hospital site. It is providing an estimate, not an appraised Fair Market Value.

2. The City has not provided an estimate for the site demolition and site preparation costs that it will incur under the project (see Paragraph 10).

3. Site demolition and site preparation are covered by $7M from the Master Agreement (in my understanding).

3. The City may be providing incentives to tenants at a future date (see Paragraph 11(b)).

4. The project may be relying on additional county, state or federal funding opportunities (see Paragraph 11(a).

Like many citizens, I would still prefer a community hospital there. Oh, well, never mind.

Thank you, Meghan George.

Thank you, Council-member George.

Once again, the city administration is blowing smoke at City Council, at its citizens and at its bond holders.

The projected tax revenues cited by Mr. Sylvester are illusory for two reasons:

1. The projected tax revenues to the City of Lakewood are more than off-set by the proposed taxpayer subsidies for the project for most of the next decade (2026).

2. The projected tax revenues to the City of Lakewood will never equal the tax revenues and lease revenues that the city administration abandoned under a lease that would not have expired until 2026 and that also had a renewal option.

3. The city administration is proposing additional unknown subsidies to unknown third-party tenants of the project.

This sales pitch to City Council if fraught with the kind of puffery that we've all grown tired-of.

Mark Kindt wrote:
This sales pitch to City Council is fraught with the kind of puffery that we've all grown tired-of.

Correction noted.

I, too, commend Council-At-Large Meghan George. Though she may be the most diminutive person sitting on that raised dais, she didn’t hesitate in asking the big questions. She asked the questions that many of us have had, but had no way to get a straight answer.

It was clear that she had no intention in backing down.

She will certainly gain merit amongst many of us, as someone we can count on to speak for us.
Are we looking at a future mayor?

Meanwhile, Sylvester plans on presenting some of the mixed-use developments that are being built in the Van Aken area of Shaker Heights and elsewhere in Cuyahoga county.

Remember Jason Russell, the former city planner of Lakewood? Well, unless there’s another Jason Russell, he is now the Neighborhood General Manager for the Van Aken District.

http://thevanakendistrict.com

(There are vast differences between Lakewood and Shaker Heights, but there’s no point in listing them.)

What I really want to hear from Sylvester is how these neighborhoods acquired the land for their mixed-use developments.

Did any of them deliberately sabotage and steal the land of their largest employer?

Did any of them take that public land and turn it over for private enterprise?

Did any of them experience a mass exodus of their medical community as a result?

Did any of them withhold entirely pertinent facts from their constituents en route to a wholly less than honest set of decisions that ultimately led to the loss of their biggest employer?

Just wondering……

Mark Kindt wrote:Thank you, Council-member George.

Once again, the city administration is blowing smoke at City Council, at its citizens and at its bond holders.

The projected tax revenues cited by Mr. Sylvester are illusory for two reasons:

1. The projected tax revenues to the City of Lakewood are more than off-set by the proposed taxpayer subsidies for the project for most of the next decade (2026).

2. The projected tax revenues to the City of Lakewood will never equal the tax revenues and lease revenues that the city administration abandoned under a lease that would not have expired until 2026 and that also had a renewal option.

3. The city administration is proposing additional unknown subsidies to unknown third-party tenants of the project.

This sales pitch to City Council if fraught with the kind of puffery that we've all grown tired-of.

One Lakewood Place is not a viable redevelopment project absent significant taxpayer subsidies.

Please pay close attention to Section 11(b) of the Term Sheet.

It tell us that the city administration is planning not only to subsidize the developer, but it is also prepared to subsidize retail and commercial tenants of One Lakewood Place.

The flow of red ink is endless. The mayor and the 2015 council traded a use that generated both income tax revenue and lease revenue for a use that will only be effective if the taxpayers pay for it.

None of this bodes well for city finances. Many people anticipate increased taxes - both on property and income.

At some point, those increases will put a damper on home sales and people moving into Lakewood.

Also, no one talks about the criticality of maintaining a minimum of 50,000 residents so that federal funding still comes out way. We are very close to losing those funds which will impact city finances further.

I’m sure that is part of the push for additional housing in the city, but I fear it’s too little, too late.

The city has posted a list of questions that it's been asked about One Lakewood Place. Here's the link to the One Lakewood Place Term Sheet FAQ.

http://www.onelakewood.com/wp-content/u ... t-FAQs.pdf

Note: Item 3 The amount of taxes, which will go to the city is only 13% of the $1.2 million estimate. That amounts to $156,000.

And, here's the link to the powerpoint that was presented. http://www.onelakewood.com/wp-content/u ... 12018.pdf

A Special Meeting of Council is scheduled for this coming Monday, April 23rd at 6 pm. The meeting this past Monday (April 16th) has been considered as the 1st Reading for this ordinance.