Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

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

todd vainisi
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby todd vainisi » Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:42 pm

Okay Todd, you are making yourself look silly! Too bad you are not introspective. Respectfully speaking.


Too bad I'm not introspective?? If I'm anything in life, it's introspective. Did you read all 270 pages of this deposition, James? I did. I've read through quite a lot of these long documents in the last year or so. I liked the mayor's answers. A lot. I wasn't expecting too. I was expecting this attorney to pin him down on something, anything. Maybe I'm imagining an episode of law and order and that's not what a deposition is. If I was the judge I would have bought all of the mayor's testimony hook, line, and sinker (of course, I'm not a judge).

If the main thing that LHA or the city needed to do was sue, why didn't the SLH lawyer hammer that home in the deposition? He basically just went methodically through just about every major piece of evidence that has been brought to this board and let the mayor answer eloquently and thoughtfully. I wish Summers had just done this 7 months ago - answered all the questions point blank.

Will there be further court proceedings about this deposition - is it testimony? Can the SLH lawyers seek to show that he falsely represented himself or his actions or pick this apart now? Is it like a police interview from the Closer? 'Cause if the process of this deposition itself was the big bullet in the SLH lawsuit gun... if that's the case, I think the lawsuit is in big trouble. But again maybe I don't understand how these things work.

From a layman's standpoint, with little bias, the mayor's answers were quite understandable and convincing.


todd vainisi
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby todd vainisi » Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:56 pm

Summers testimony and numerous videos recordings of Summers prove that he misrepresents both proposals


Brian, thanks, this is the kind of refutation I was talking about.

Maybe instead of refuting the mayors points, I could ask you to explain in a broader sense, what this deposition is, how it will be used to make the SLH case in court, and what opportunity the plantiffs will have to refute what the mayor said as a matter of record to the court? Do you understand what I am asking? Put this piece of the proceedings in context please.


Brian Essi
Posts: 2378
Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby Brian Essi » Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:56 pm

todd vainisi wrote:
Summers testimony and numerous videos recordings of Summers prove that he misrepresents both proposals


Brian, thanks, this is the kind of refutation I was talking about.

Maybe instead of refuting the mayors points, I could ask you to explain in a broader sense, what this deposition is, how it will be used to make the SLH case in court, and what opportunity the plantiffs will have to refute what the mayor said as a matter of record to the court? Do you understand what I am asking? Put this piece of the proceedings in context please.


Todd,

I am not an attorney in the case so I can't comment on what their plan is. It appears to me from the style of the questioner that his goal was to let Summers tell his story and not to cross examine him--that is a common tactic in discovery. The cross examination is for trial and that might never happen--I think that less than that 2% of cases go to trial.

I don't think eloquently saying something that is untrue is the standard.

Truthfully, I have not read most of the briefs lately so I am not qualified to even comment on the status of plaintiffs' case. I have a completely different agenda than the plaintiffs. I do still harvest facts from that public filIngs of the case for my purposes.

I've made just a couple of key points and narrow points from the dozens that I harvested from the depo, but it seems that you and others don't think what I have pointed to is important. That's fine.

I still think just a few telling things from the depo in conjunction with previously known facts establishes are:
1. Summers: "We weren't selling this hospital"
2. Summers: No valuations were made of the hospital or its assets (when there was evidence of substantial values well over what he gave it away for)
3. Master Agreement: Summers and his freinds will control a completely vague, non existent and purposely undefined "foundation" with $16'M+ of public money (they say $32M) with no transparency and accountability.

Summers' explanation as to why he did not explore obvious alternatives such as selling the hospital are telling.

There is nothing in the record anywhere that anyone (except the plaintiffs) ever asked CCF to restore services or enforce the City's or LHA's rights under either of the agreements. The only exception to that is Summers effort that apparently ended in less than one day and he surrendered without a fight and without any inquiry as to the legal rights of the city or Lakewood. Summers has been fighting the plaintiffs since April of last year to defend his deal that he claims is Bronson's and CCF's.

The Lakewood planning department has a motto "we're digging while others are still planning"
This "Fire, ready, aim" approach does not explain what Summers did.

Summers is in deep horse pucky.


“Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. It is the courage to continue that counts." Winston Churchill
Dan Alaimo
Posts: 1575
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 8:49 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby Dan Alaimo » Fri Mar 18, 2016 11:56 pm

"The problem with the Metro proposal was in the context of their execution capacity. They didn’t have any money."

Since they didn't have any money, where did they get it for the many health clinics they are opening and the HealthSpan acquisition (doctors and emergency centers) that have happened since the proposals.

I went over this ground once before with Jim Kenny and if I recall correctly (I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong) he acknowledged that Jenn Pae may have erred in her assessment of Metro's financial strength.


"When tyrants tremble, sick with fear,
And hear their death-knell ringing,
When friends rejoice both far and near,
How can I keep from singing?"
--from the Pete Seeger version of "How can I keep from singing?"
Brian Essi
Posts: 2378
Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby Brian Essi » Sat Mar 19, 2016 5:33 am

Dan Alaimo wrote:"The problem with the Metro proposal was in the context of their execution capacity. They didn’t have any money."

Since they didn't have any money, where did they get it for the many health clinics they are opening and the HealthSpan acquisition (doctors and emergency centers) that have happened since the proposals.

I went over this ground once before with Jim Kenny and if I recall correctly (I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong) he acknowledged that Jenn Pae may have erred in her assessment of Metro's financial strength.


It would be convenient to count Pae in Summers' circle of folks "in way over their heads", but the evidence shows otherwise--she knew what she spread was patently false.

This is simple--look 180 degrees from where Summers & Co. direct us and that's usually where the truth is. They accused Metro of a money grab to obfuscate their money grab.
They accused Metro on having a weak board and poor execution to disguise their feeble faux board. They said Metro wanted our land and money--Club Summers wanted it.

Metro's annual reports show that they were far more efficient than the clowns "managing" Lakewood Hospital.

The Master Agreement is no change at all--it is a perpetuation of non profit greed and incompetence that crossed the line to criminality by several of the bad actors combined in their zeal to retain control of money land and "status."

Ask yourselves: Why are these alleged "volunteers" who are allegedly "unpaid" many of whom have no connection to Lakewood so passionate about retaining control?


“Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. It is the courage to continue that counts." Winston Churchill
james fitzgibbons
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:34 pm

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby james fitzgibbons » Sat Mar 19, 2016 7:31 am

todd vainisi wrote:
Okay Todd, you are making yourself look silly! Too bad you are not introspective. Respectfully speaking.


Too bad I'm not introspective?? If I'm anything in life, it's introspective. Did you read all 270 pages of this deposition, James? I did. I've read through quite a lot of these long documents in the last year or so. I liked the mayor's answers. A lot. I wasn't expecting too. I was expecting this attorney to pin him down on something, anything. Maybe I'm imagining an episode of law and order and that's not what a deposition is. If I was the judge I would have bought all of the mayor's testimony hook, line, and sinker (of course, I'm not a judge).

If the main thing that LHA or the city needed to do was sue, why didn't the SLH lawyer hammer that home in the deposition? He basically just went methodically through just about every major piece of evidence that has been brought to this board and let the mayor answer eloquently and thoughtfully. I wish Summers had just done this 7 months ago - answered all the questions point blank.

Will there be further court proceedings about this deposition - is it testimony? Can the SLH lawyers seek to show that he falsely represented himself or his actions or pick this apart now? Is it like a police interview from the Closer? 'Cause if the process of this deposition itself was the big bullet in the SLH lawsuit gun... if that's the case, I think the lawsuit is in big trouble. But again maybe I don't understand how these things work.

From a layman's standpoint, with little bias, the mayor's answers were quite understandable and convincing.


Todd if you are not a judge how can you give an opinion as a judge? So, Okay, Fine, you like the mayor and his answers, do you like or really believe that it was necessary to close the hospital with out a fight? Mr. Mayor was elected to be the caretaker of Lakewood, instead he gave the keys to LHA and CCF. If he was not capable of doing the job he should have asked for help. I am sure there are many smart people (some are lawyers) that would have gladly helped him, he asked the wrong people to help him ( or as far as he is concerned maybe he did not ). " Come on Man " It was a well orchestrated plot and he played his part to perfection. Too bad he was on the wrong side. His side uses grandiose statements to spread propaganda to fool people.
This deal stinks from so many angles, Introspectively you know it. We are surely going to be the healthiest city anywhere with out a full service hospital a real emergency room and less doctors. Gimme a break! How stupid do you think people are!


todd vainisi
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby todd vainisi » Sat Mar 19, 2016 7:42 am

I've made just a couple of key points and narrow points from the dozens that I harvested from the depo, but it seems that you and others don't think what I have pointed to is important. That's fine.


I have tried to look at much of the information you present here and I usually see your point in it. Often I have been outraged.

But then I read this deposition and it all sounds about how I would expect a city government to handle such a complex matter - by being outfoxed by the professional healthcare operators at all times. Did you read the part of the deposition where Summers says that city council / LHA / whatever "lakewood entity" was on the spot failed to meet every single deadline. I think that is extremely telling, and I think he volunteered that information to demonstrate that city council and LHA are not designed or equiped to deal with these kind of complex, time sensitive issues (like Metro giving them 90 days to accept their proposal for something they'd been trying to figure out for years already).

But the key thing here is what you said - the strategy seems to be to let the mayor tell his story. I was expecting that if SLH had evidence of untruth that they would have exposed it during the deposition and made the mayor account for the discrepency. Why didn't they show the mayor the estimate provided by Subsidium after he said Subsidium didn't give him one? Was that not part of the evidence?

I guess I don't understand a legal strategy (surprise surprise) that involves letting the mayor spin a yarn for everyone there without trying to refute it. Seems to me like SLH is left now with the task of trying to undo the excellent job the mayor did of explaining his side (truthful, half-truthful, untruthful, whatever he said, it was very convincing to people not already 100% decided). In fact, if this were an legal eagle tv show, this deposition would be shown to be a huge mistake on the part of the plantiff - to let the one of the most eloquent and practiced speakers in town talk for the judge for 3.5 hours. His ability to connect with people while talking is a big part of how he became mayor. If this deposition had happened prior to the election, and it were put out there for whomever to read, I think that issue 64 vote wouldn't have been close at all. True or not, the mayor gave a convincing account of the decision making process.

We'll see what they do with what he said.


todd vainisi
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby todd vainisi » Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:00 am

James (The "Come On" Man),

I'm going to ask you to stop using various forms of the word "introspection" until you learn what it means and how to use it. And I'd like you to stop accusing me of "liking the mayor". I said I liked his answers. Your response here is completely lacking in fact or specifics, just a bunch of "this deals stinks and you know it".

There's no reason to ask me how I can give an opinion as a judge, since I qualified it already by saying my legal opinion is garbage. I have a feeling your legal opinion is crap too, so maybe just withhold your responses unless you are going to respond intelligently. The one who looks silly is you.

So, Okay, Fine, you like the mayor and his answers, do you like or really believe that it was necessary to close the hospital with out a fight? Mr. Mayor was elected to be the caretaker of Lakewood, instead he gave the keys to LHA and CCF. If he was not capable of doing the job he should have asked for help. I am sure there are many smart people (some are lawyers) that would have gladly helped him, he asked the wrong people to help him ( or as far as he is concerned maybe he did not ).


This kind of summary is worthless. Your belief that the mayor should have had a fight with CCF is fine, but it's irrelevant. I'm looking for concrete evidence of improper conduct. Brian has shown us lots of documents that seem to suggest problems with the bidding process. And I didn't read any of that as sticking during this deposition. Brian suggests that it wasn't the plan to expose him during this deposition. So you should have drawn many of the same conclusions as me, except, bless your heart, I'm pretty sure you didn't read it.


Brian Essi
Posts: 2378
Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 11:46 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby Brian Essi » Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:02 am

Todd,

Good points.

However, from my perspective the lawsuit is one act in the play and it is in the first quarter of the play.

I don't buy the missed deadline yarn with Metro.
Summers was in charge and manufactured the result-- more than one trustee told me that he said "I don't want those people in my city" referring to Metro so his testimony about his consideration of Metro is also manufactured. While he is "smooth", he isn't a very good businessman and he is not honest. You have acknowledged that there was no good reason for him to not tell this story earlier. The reason is that he is making it all up as he goes along calculated to cover up his trail. That is very dangerous as the next act in the play starts on the "justice" phase.

This play is about bad government and always has been. CCF is a bad actor, but Summers is the leading man in the play.


“Success is not final. Failure is not fatal. It is the courage to continue that counts." Winston Churchill
todd vainisi
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby todd vainisi » Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:21 am

Brian thanks for your patience with me. I think there are many others who don't actually write comments here (just read) that will benefit from my questions and the answers to them that you've provided.


james fitzgibbons
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:34 pm

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby james fitzgibbons » Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:03 am

todd vainisi wrote:James (The "Come On" Man),

I'm going to ask you to stop using various forms of the word "introspection" until you learn what it means and how to use it. And I'd like you to stop accusing me of "liking the mayor". I said I liked his answers. Your response here is completely lacking in fact or specifics, just a bunch of "this deals stinks and you know it".

There's no reason to ask me how I can give an opinion as a judge, since I qualified it already by saying my legal opinion is garbage. I have a feeling your legal opinion is crap too, so maybe just withhold your responses unless you are going to respond intelligently. The one who looks silly is you.

So, Okay, Fine, you like the mayor and his answers, do you like or really believe that it was necessary to close the hospital with out a fight? Mr. Mayor was elected to be the caretaker of Lakewood, instead he gave the keys to LHA and CCF. If he was not capable of doing the job he should have asked for help. I am sure there are many smart people (some are lawyers) that would have gladly helped him, he asked the wrong people to help him ( or as far as he is concerned maybe he did not ).


This kind of summary is worthless. Your belief that the mayor should have had a fight with CCF is fine, but it's irrelevant. I'm looking for concrete evidence of improper conduct. Brian has shown us lots of documents that seem to suggest problems with the bidding process. And I didn't read any of that as sticking during this deposition. Brian suggests that it wasn't the plan to expose him during this deposition. So you should have drawn many of the same conclusions as me, except, bless your heart, I'm pretty sure you didn't read it.


Todd, I respect your opinion, but I do not agree with it. Sorry, I finished high school in the army in 1964, quit school in the 10th grade, took 5 tests, never had to take class, guess I am not as literate as you.


todd vainisi
Posts: 355
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 8:41 am

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby todd vainisi » Sat Mar 19, 2016 11:54 am

James, you think calling me a fool is respecting my opinion?

I graduated from night school in 1992 and taught myself to program in the 90s. So, you'll get no free pass from me for your literacy level by blaming your formal education. I'm more than willing to treat you with respect if you don't start by telling me I'm silly and to search within myself for the answers to the Lakewood Hospital debacle. None of the answers we are looking for are to be found inside of me, I promise. Maybe I'll realize that Leia is actually my sister, but, I don't think I'll come to understand why the mayor didn't like the Metro proposal.

I'll tell you what what, sir, let's just start over and pretend our little exchange here didn't happen. We obviously both are interested in getting to the bottom of this civic matter so, in that, we are united.


james fitzgibbons
Posts: 412
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:34 pm

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby james fitzgibbons » Sat Mar 19, 2016 1:20 pm

todd vainisi wrote:James, you think calling me a fool is respecting my opinion?

I graduated from night school in 1992 and taught myself to program in the 90s. So, you'll get no free pass from me for your literacy level by blaming your formal education. I'm more than willing to treat you with respect if you don't start by telling me I'm silly and to search within myself for the answers to the Lakewood Hospital debacle. None of the answers we are looking for are to be found inside of me, I promise. Maybe I'll realize that Leia is actually my sister, but, I don't think I'll come to understand why the mayor didn't like the Metro proposal.

I'll tell you what what, sir, let's just start over and pretend our little exchange here didn't happen. We obviously both are interested in getting to the bottom of this civic matter so, in that, we are united.


Todd, Okay good idea let us start over.


Bill Call
Posts: 3168
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:10 pm

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby Bill Call » Sat Mar 19, 2016 2:50 pm

todd vainisi wrote:From a layman's standpoint, with little bias, the mayor's answers were quite understandable and convincing.


Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Your analysis is not way off base, but I disagree with your conclusions.

In his deposition the Mayor indicated that he was unaware of the Cleveland Clinics "decanting" plan until August of 2015. We know from other sources that the plan was formulated in 2009 and perhaps as early as 2008. The decanting plan called for the removal of services from Lakewood Hospital with the intent to close down the Hospital. It is still unclear when the Cleveland Clinic intended to close down the Hospital, possibly in 2016 or more likely at the end of the lease term.

(I applied for a position on the Hospital Board a few years ago. During my interview I suggested that the Clinic intended to loot the Hospital of its business and assets and leave behind an empty shell. My comments were not well received.)

What we do know is that the LHA and City Council and the Mayor were not told of the decanting plan. We also know that the Clinic was secretly implementing the plan while assuring Council and the people of Lakewood and the LHA that the Vision of Tomorrow would insure the success of Lakewood Hospital far into the future. Were the Clinics actions a fraud committed against the people of Lakewood? I guess we will have to wait for the results of further discovery.

What we do know is that the City had an asset with a book value of approximately $135 million dollars. The question is: How best to realize the true value of those assets?

The Mayor and the LHA had choices to make: (Please keep in mind that the Clinic and LHA owned nothing. ALL of the assets of the Hospital are City assets.)

1. Allow the Clinic do drain away the assets and business and be left with no assets and no business at the end of the lease term, 2026.
2. Demand that the Clinic live up to its lease commitment to maintain services, maintain the Hospital as on ongoing concern, maintain the Hospital in "substantially the same condition" and to honor the commitments made under the Vision for Tomorrow.
3. Remove the Clinic and the LHA for their failure to perform their contractual obligations and their numerous violations of the lease agreement, demand their cooperation in restoring the Hospital and in finding a new operator for Lakewood Hospital.
4. Close down the Hospital as soon as possible and retain all of the assets for the people of Lakewood. The book value in 2014 was about $135 million.

In his deposition the Mayor admitted that he and his associates were in over their head. So, what he decided to do was implement a hybrid plan that contained the worst elements of the 4 above options.

1. The Mayor and LHA decided to help the Clinic drain away the assets of the Hospital by approving the transfer of City owned assets to Avon and Fairview with no adequate compensation.

2. The Mayor and Council voted to provide a release and total indemnification for the Cleveland Clinic and LHA for all past wrongs and all breaches of contract and retroactively approve the Clinics "decanting" plan.

3. Rather than remove the Clinic and LHA the Mayor approved a plan that would give members of the LHA control over City assets and provide the Clinic with a monopoly on health care in Lakewood. The Mayor failed to market the hospital, engaged in a sham bidding process, ignored other viable offers and then lied about it all.

4. The Hospital will be closed down but the City will NOT GET the $50+ million in cash and investments, will NOT GET its beneficial interest in the Lakewood Hospital Foundations $33 million, will NOT RECEIVE full value for the Columbia Road property and WILL NOT get one penny from either the LHA or the Clinic for
their willful destruction of City property.

What do we get? A small medical office building that will act as a referral facility for Avon and Fairview. The Mayor has created a health care desert and calls it the future of health care. (Well, in Lakewood I guess. The Clinic is building hospitals in Avon, Mentor, Twinsburg, Medina and IN LONDON just down the street from Buckingham Palace.

Years ago the same person that told me about the plans for Avon and the plans for the destruction of Lakewood Hospital told me about the Clinics String of Pearls Strategy. The Clinic intends to drain away the business in Cuyahoga County and encourage the outmigration of business and people from Cuyahoga County to surrounding areas.

Armond Budish are you listening?


Kate McCarthy
Posts: 447
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:25 pm
Location: Lakewood

Re: Mayor Summers' Deposition In Its Entirety

Postby Kate McCarthy » Sat Mar 19, 2016 3:55 pm

todd vainisi wrote:
But the key thing here is what you said - the strategy seems to be to let the mayor tell his story. I was expecting that if SLH had evidence of untruth that they would have exposed it during the deposition and made the mayor account for the discrepency.


Todd, my impression while reading through the deposition was that the attorneys for SLH were giving Summers all the rope he needed to potentially hang himself later. Both Janice Murphy and David Bronson of CCF are due to be deposed, and a subpoena has been issued for Akram Boutros of Metro. Only time will tell if future depositions support or refute Summers' account of what happened. I would hazard a guess the SLH attorneys already know.



Return to “Lakewood General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Matthew Lee and 10 guests