Save Lakewood Hospital
Save Lakewood Hospital supporters, dressed in red, turn out for Tuesday night's Lakewood City Council meeting.
(Bruce Geiselman, cleveland.com)
LAKEWOOD, Ohio -- City Council likely will vote March 7 to put an issue on the ballot that would repeal a December 2015 ordinance calling for the closure of Lakewood Hospital.
Yet to be decided is whether the issue would appear on a special election ballot in August or the November general election ballot. If a special election were held, it could cost the city more than $100,000, City Council President Sam O'Leary estimated.
City officials and supporters of Save Lakewood hospital disagreed during a more than two-hour meeting Tuesday about what impact the vote would have.
Lakewood Law Director Kevin Butler said last week that he believed even if voters pass a ballot issue to repeal the ordinance, it is too late to stop the closure of Lakewood Hospital. However, supporters of saving Lakewood Hospital said that is a smokescreen, and they believe voters could decide to reopen the hospital with either the Cleveland Clinic or another operator providing services.
The hospital stopped inpatient services Feb. 5, although the emergency department remains open.
Supporters of Save Lakewood Hospital presented petitions to the city last month calling for council to either repeal a December agreement with the Cleveland Clinic to close the inpatient facility or allow a public vote on the matter. Butler last week told council that he believes an Ohio Supreme Court decision in the case of Middletown v. Ferguson means a vote by the public couldn't stop the plan from moving forward. The problem, Butler said, is the city and Cleveland Clinic already have begun executing the contract.
However, supporters of Save Lakewood Hospital, including Avon Lake attorney Gerald Phillips, disagreed with Butler Tuesday and argued that for a variety of reasons, the case he cited should not set a legal precedent for the Lakewood Hospital shutdown. Phillips accused the city of dragging its feet by not putting the measure on the March ballot, and he said the city should have sought competitive bids for the hospital. Phillips also argued the city should not have approved an ordinance in December closing the hospital as an emergency measure, which allowed the city and Clinic to almost immediately begin the shutdown.
Tom Monahan, vice chairman of Save Lakewood Hospital, accused the city of "attempting to smother the opposition." However, he said the city's efforts have energized members of Save Lakewood Hospital.
"You've done everything you could to block citizen input," Save Lakewood Hospital supporter Dean Dilzell said.
More than a half dozen supporters of Save Lakewood Hospital spoke, denouncing the closure and the loss of jobs at the hospital, which at one time employed more than 1,000.
However, city officials said they negotiated the best deal they could to ensure continue health care services. They also said the public was given opportunity to speak. The Lakewood Hospital Association, which oversaw operations of the hospital, was spending more money than it was bringing in, they argued.
Jay Carson, a spokesman for Build Lakewood, a group that supports plans to close Lakewood Hospital and open a Cleveland Clinic family health center and 24-hour emergency room in its place, defended council's actions.
Carson denied allegations voiced by critics of the plan who have said the process to close the hospital was improper, that other operators of the hospital should have been found, and that the new free-standing emergency department would be nothing more than an urgent care center.
"It's time to move beyond the myths and focus on the real opportunities before us," Carson said.
City Council will resume the discussion March 7 at 7:30 p.m.
Follow cleveland.com on Facebook and @LWOhio on Twitter.