New Restraining Order Blocks Razing Of Lakewood Hospital

LAKEWOOD, OH — The Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals has granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the city of Lakewood, preventing the city from razing the Lakewood Hospital site. The TRO does not prohibit council from moving forward with the Carnegie Development proposal, it merely prohibits the demolition of the hospital.

The TRO was granted by Judge Patricia Blackmon, with Presiding Judge Mary Boyle and Judge Anita Laster Mays concurring. It is the latest development in a protracted legal battle over the fate of Lakewood Hospital. In theory, the TRO should not prevent City Council from voting on the agreement, it should only prevent demolition at the hospital from moving forward, at least until legal matters are resolved.

Mayor Mike Summers said the TRO is not a particular concern for the city since the agreement with Carnegie would include many months of planning. Summers feels the TRO will not be in place for long.

The lawsuit from which this TRO stems was filed against the city in August 2017. Closing arguments in the lawsuit were heard late last month and some insiders believe a final decision could be issued in the next 60 to 90 days.

The city argued in it's brief that while the agreement with Carnegie may include language about the demolition of the Lakewood Hospital site, there was no irreparable harm actually being committed because, "demolition of Lakewood Hospital, at the earliest, could not commence until September, 2018."

Chris DeVito, one of the attorneys representing the appellants suing the city, disagrees.

"We believe that, unfortunately, the city is continuing to show their abuse of corporate powers by running forward without understanding the implications. There is a pending appeal and they gave it little credence and we find that a little insulting," DeVito told Patch. He said he believes that behavior represents a pattern for city hall.

Summers, for his part, said the continued stalling of progress at the site, despite a public vote on the issue, has been "disappointing." He said the opposition has failed to address any of the pertinent issues facing the hospital. He added that the opposition, "have never offered a credible alternative to any of these issues and/or opportunities."

"It is important to remind our community that the citizens of Lakewood voted to affirm the master agreement that directed the transformation of healthcare and the redevelopment of the hospital site," Summers told Patch in an email. "The proposal before City Council honors the will of the majority."

The mayor is referring to the public's vote on Issue 64 in Nov. 2017. Voters were asked to affirm or reject an ordinance from city council that authorized the signing of new contracts involving the demolition and construction of the former hospital property. If voters rejected the ordinance, it would not have re-opened the hospital but made null the ordinance.

Issue 64 went to the "For" side by a count of 11,489 to 10,804, a fact trumpeted by the city when filing against the appeal. "Because Lakewood voters have conclusively supported the closure of Lakewood Hospital through a number of elections, Appellants attempt to subvert the will of Lakewood voters, through this latest motion for injunctive relief, must not be countenanced."

Notably, this is a separate lawsuit than the one filed against the city by State Senator Mike Skindell.

Photo from Rick Uldricks, Patch