What Do They Mean By That?

The jumping off discussion area for the rest of the Deck. All things Lakewood.
Please check out our other sections. As we refile many discussions from the past into
their proper sections please check them out and offer suggestions.

Moderators: Jim DeVito, Dan Alaimo

stephen davis
Posts: 575
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 9:49 pm
Location: lakewood, ohio

Re: What Do They Mean By That?

Postby stephen davis » Thu Aug 18, 2016 11:25 pm

Image

It gives me no pleasure to revisit this thread, but I received this letter from Lakewood Voters for Progress today.

Lakewood Voters for Progress wrote:A small group of activists has been opposing this agreement since the beginning, and using conspiracy theories and blatant inaccuracies to spread fear and doubt. They put an initiative on the ballot last year to try and block the hospital agreement, and voters soundly rejected them.

I have no knowledge if it is a large or "small group", but those "activists" are fellow Lakewood citizens and neighbors. You may disagree with them, but they should not be enemies.

The initiative was a proposed charter amendment that would require a citizen vote for approval of a hospital agreement, if and when Council approved one. It is my understanding that when signatures were gathered for the ballot petitions, and all the way through election day last year, there was no hospital agreement to block, based upon what the city said publicly.

I’m not arguing whether a vote allowed by this amendment would have blocked a hospital agreement or not. I’m not arguing the benefits of blocking an agreement or not. As a matter of fact, I’m not going to argue the value of the hospital or of Lakewood's final agreement with Cleveland Clinic. I'm unaffiliated with any pro or anti group, but I have my concerns.

For the past 17 years, I have had more citizen involvement with the Charter of the City of Lakewood than any other person. Dr. Larry Keller may be the only possible exception. He and I could debate that. Regardless, in my view, it’s all about the process for effective and ethical government.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, there are many reasons to vote for or against a charter amendment, and this one in particular. The reasons for voting one way or another may not have anything to do with the hospital. For example, a vote on this type of charter amendment may have to do with an individual's philosophy about representative government versus direct democracy. (Personally, I generally favor representative government, but I understand citizen initiatives and remedies.) Voter motives are not always measurable. I don't think either side should claim a mandate in this case.

Lakewood Voters for Progress wrote:A committed group of Lakewood residents is working to pass this referendum, but we know this campaign will be challenging. The opposition has shown a willingness to spread false information in an attempt to scare voters.

You don’t want to scare voters. Better to inform them.

Lakewood Voters for Progress wrote:But all of those benefits, and a great many more, are now at risk.

Hmmm. Sounds scary. A great many more benefits now at risk? Really?

I would counsel that Lakewood Voters for Progress be detailed and accurate in their presentation of their opposition’s “inaccuracies to spread fear and doubt,” if any, and stop spreading "false information" based on the supposed rights and privileges gained by a self-defined mandate.


.


Nothin' shakin' on Shakedown Street.
Used to be the heart of town.
Don't tell me this town ain't got no heart.
You just gotta poke around.

Robert Hunter/Sometimes attributed to Ezra Pound.
Meg Ostrowski
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:42 am

Re: What Do They Mean By That?

Postby Meg Ostrowski » Fri Aug 19, 2016 8:25 am

stephen davis wrote:Image


I can barely get past the first paragraph of this letter. It implies that "Lakewood's city government" spent “several long years” carefully studying and considering the plan to close Lakewood Hospital and build a medical center. It is my understanding that it was the Lakewood Hospital Association (dominated by Cleveland Clinic appointed members), not city government that worked for years developing this plan. Except for the mayor and two council members (including Bullock) that served on LHA, the rest of council seemed as dumbfounded as residents when that plan was announced in January 2015, less than a year before council voted to approve the deal without so much as an appraisal of the assets.

Also, unless I missed the news, isn’t the new medical center to be built on the adjacent SW corner of Belle and Detroit not “on the site of the former Lakewood Hospital?”

I could take issue with several other statements made in this letter but my point is that if the first paragraph is misleading and inaccurate, should you trust the rest?


“There could be anywhere from 1 to over 50,000 Lakewoods at any time. I’m good with any of those numbers, as long as it’s just not 2 Lakewoods.” -Stephen Davis
Marguerite Harkness
Posts: 232
Joined: Thu May 14, 2015 10:42 am

Re: What Do They Mean By That?

Postby Marguerite Harkness » Fri Aug 19, 2016 9:09 am

Recall that the Master Agreement was put on First Reading on December 7, 2015 - even though THE MASTER AGREEMENT WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE.

Ordinance 49-15 that proposed accepting the Master Agreement, had an attachment for the Master Agreement, which said it would be provided later.

So on the first reading, they didn't even have anything to read.

(And at least one Council member admitted months ago, to not reading anything. And Council President Madigan refused to allow me to ask the Council members if each one had actually READ the Master Agreement they were "reading" tonight [12/7/2015].)

(But we may never know whether Council was discussing the in-process Master Agreement, in all those behind-closed-doors Committee of the Whole meetings.)


Brian Essi
Posts: 1798
Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am

Re: What Do They Mean By That?

Postby Brian Essi » Fri Aug 19, 2016 2:24 pm

stephen davis wrote:Image

It gives me no pleasure to revisit this thread, but I received this letter from Lakewood Voters for Progress today.

Lakewood Voters for Progress wrote:A small group of activists has been opposing this agreement since the beginning, and using conspiracy theories and blatant inaccuracies to spread fear and doubt. They put an initiative on the ballot last year to try and block the hospital agreement, and voters soundly rejected them.

I have no knowledge if it is a large or "small group", but those "activists" are fellow Lakewood citizens and neighbors. You may disagree with them, but they should not be enemies.

The initiative was a proposed charter amendment that would require a citizen vote for approval of a hospital agreement, if and when Council approved one. It is my understanding that when signatures were gathered for the ballot petitions, and all the way through election day last year, there was no hospital agreement to block, based upon what the city said publicly.

I’m not arguing whether a vote allowed by this amendment would have blocked a hospital agreement or not. I’m not arguing the benefits of blocking an agreement or not. As a matter of fact, I’m not going to argue the value of the hospital or of Lakewood's final agreement with Cleveland Clinic. I'm unaffiliated with any pro or anti group, but I have my concerns.

For the past 17 years, I have had more citizen involvement with the Charter of the City of Lakewood than any other person. Dr. Larry Keller may be the only possible exception. He and I could debate that. Regardless, in my view, it’s all about the process for effective and ethical government.

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, there are many reasons to vote for or against a charter amendment, and this one in particular. The reasons for voting one way or another may not have anything to do with the hospital. For example, a vote on this type of charter amendment may have to do with an individual's philosophy about representative government versus direct democracy. (Personally, I generally favor representative government, but I understand citizen initiatives and remedies.) Voter motives are not always measurable. I don't think either side should claim a mandate in this case.

Lakewood Voters for Progress wrote:A committed group of Lakewood residents is working to pass this referendum, but we know this campaign will be challenging. The opposition has shown a willingness to spread false information in an attempt to scare voters.

You don’t want to scare voters. Better to inform them.

Lakewood Voters for Progress wrote:But all of those benefits, and a great many more, are now at risk.

Hmmm. Sounds scary. A great many more benefits now at risk? Really?

I would counsel that Lakewood Voters for Progress be detailed and accurate in their presentation of their opposition’s “inaccuracies to spread fear and doubt,” if any, and stop spreading "false information" based on the supposed rights and privileges gained by a self-defined mandate.


.


Remarkably, I have nothing to add.

Bump.


“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
Albert Einstein

“Nothing once begun should be abandoned, unless it is proved to be morally wrong.”
― Mahatma Gandhi,
Brian Essi
Posts: 1798
Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am

Re: What Do They Mean By That?

Postby Brian Essi » Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:25 am

Meg Ostrowski wrote:
stephen davis wrote:Image


I can barely get past the first paragraph of this letter. It implies that "Lakewood's city government" spent “several long years” carefully studying and considering the plan to close Lakewood Hospital and build a medical center. It is my understanding that it was the Lakewood Hospital Association (dominated by Cleveland Clinic appointed members), not city government that worked for years developing this plan. Except for the mayor and two council members (including Bullock) that served on LHA, the rest of council seemed as dumbfounded as residents when that plan was announced in January 2015, less than a year before council voted to approve the deal without so much as an appraisal of the assets.

Also, unless I missed the news, isn’t the new medical center to be built on the adjacent SW corner of Belle and Detroit not “on the site of the former Lakewood Hospital?”

I could take issue with several other statements made in this letter but my point is that if the first paragraph is misleading and inaccurate, should you trust the rest?


Ms. Ostrowski,

As I previously noted in my "Bad Government 8" piece, "we are witnessing an era in which lies by elected officials are the first recourse in any public discussion."

Your first point above is yet another example of how the "first recourse" in the campaign of two elected officials---they launched their dark money solicitations by making a false and misleading statements.

I take issue slightly with your second point---While it is true that the LHA board was largely a captive of CCF, Summers led and selected the members of the Select Committee--and Madigan and Bullock were on it--The Select Committee (Summers/Bullock/Madigan and others) issued a TOP SECRET report on December 12, 2013 that was numbered passed out to our elected leaders and others by CCF's attorney and then collected at a SPECIAL MEETING and discussed in executive session and remains TOP SECRET today. See page 4 of the attached.

12.12.2013 LHA Select Committee Report.pdf
(2.37 MiB) Downloaded 18 times


Also note on page 5 of the attached SPECIAL MEETING minutes that Summers led and chose the members of the Secret Step 2 Committee. Dr. Boutros at Metro believed he was dealing with the Mayor of Lakewood in what we all now know was a rigged/steered Faux "bid" process---led by Summers. Dr. Boutros refers to it as Summers' committee.

A. Boutros to M. Summers, LHA 10032014.pdf
(300.86 KiB) Downloaded 12 times


But Summers, Madigan, Bullock and Butler have all withheld from the public their TOP SECRET Select Committee report from December 12, 2013 through today. The report was one cornerstone of what Insiders PAC leaders claim was city government study and consideration--but it was does secretly.

So they have essentially admitted they are engaged in a cover up of governmental activity by giving the CCF attorney custody and control of public records.


“We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
Albert Einstein

“Nothing once begun should be abandoned, unless it is proved to be morally wrong.”
― Mahatma Gandhi,

Return to “Lakewood General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests