The Lakewood City School District has dropped $12 million from its budget since 2006 and projects it must remove another $4 million over the next two fiscal years as expenses like health insurance and salaries outpace tax and state funding support.

Superintendent Jeff Patterson held a community forum last week at Hayes Elementary School to solicit public input about perceptions of the district and its future. It was the first stop of a seven-school road show that will culminate on March 8th at Lakewood High School where Patterson will present a summary of the feedback he receives.

Patterson outlined the basic facts of the district’s financial situation and its immediate goals for the future. To help the approximately 20 citizens in attendance follow along, a handy card of talking points was provided at the door.

If not for the prior years of budget reductions – many of which were made possible through school consolidation – the district “would have been in a world of hurt,” according to the superintendent.

Experienced educators paid to retire early

Although it is in better financial shape than some of its peers, Patterson said the district has given buyouts to longtime (and well-paid) teachers that will result in a $1 million savings this year and $425,000 in the next fiscal year. “Fortunately, the talent pool coming up is very large,” he noted.

The bulk of the 90-minute event was spent engaging the audience with a pre-selected set of questions that seemed to be designed to get a flavor for their attitude toward the school district and what sorts of services they felt were most valuable.

Take note of the questions, which presumably will be repeated at the other meetings:

1. What criteria will you use to judge the wisdom of our ultimate plan to the district’s budget?
2. What district characteristics, programs, and services make your school district special to you?
3. As we cut the projected expenditures by $4 million, what should be the last things affect by the reductions
4. What rumors or assumptions about our school district must be addressed in order for us to maintain the respect and support of our community as we go through this budget-balancing process?
5. Please offer any additional thoughts or recommendations you want us to consider as we develop a plan that balances the budget while minimizing negative impacts on our students, staff, citizens, and community support.
6. Please ask specific questions about our progress completing Phase Three.

There would have been a more serious exchange of ideas had the questions been provided beforehand. Nevertheless, the crowd, with its mix of parents and teachers, did a decent job within the parameters of the program.

Audience offers budget saving tips, wonders about Phase Three

Gregory “Woody” Calleri, a one-time school board candidate, offered a bevy of cost saving ideas from reducing the number of pay periods and allowable sick time for teachers to revitalizing the recreation department, which he claimed loses $100,000 a year. “I’m telling you, it can be very profitable,” he said.

Patterson politely listened to his suggestions, but indicated the district was limited in many ways because of its union contracts.

Another audience member wondered if the school budget gap could be lessened through grants and service collaborations with other organization.

“Grants can be a very positive thing or they can be a lot of work,” and take resources away from other areas, Patterson replied.

Christopher Bindel asked if the recent increase in elementary school enrollment would have any impact on the Phase Three construction plan to close one elementary school, renovate two others and rebuild the second half of the high school.

School Board member Linda Beebe doubted it. “It’s not really huge,” she said, adding the state would probably do another enrollment assessment just to be certain. Patterson suggested redistricting might get some consideration.

Betsy Shaughnessy, the other School Board member present, called the Phase Three decision to close Grant Elementary “well-founded.”

“I personally don’t feel the need to reconsider it,” she said.

The Phase Three construction project will cost around $75 million, with $47 million coming from the state and the rest coming from what will need to be a voter-approved bond issue and tax levy. The district is on a waiting list for state funding and it’s not known exactly how soon the money might be available.

The next community engagement meeting is scheduled at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, January 24 at Grant Elementary.

Lakewood Police rounded up a half-dozen people as the result of a prostitution sting at the financially troubled Days Inn on Lake Avenue in the East End.

Police declined to release many details about the bust, which took place two weeks ago.

The four incident reports generated regarding the event identify only three of the arrestees. Police dispatch traffic heard afterward suggested at least one of females was found to be in possession of crack cocaine.

A Google search of the phone numbers contained in the reports shows that some of the women operated on the notorious website Backpage.com.

Lakewood Municipal Court records indicate 22-year-old North Ridgeville resident Megan Rouwenhorst was found guilty of prostitution and fined $250. She was given one year of probation and banned from the Days Inn. 29-year-old Cleveland resident Amanda Rose was issued the same sentence. 26-year-old Cleveland resident Shannon Ayende skipped her arraignment and is now wanted by police on a non-appearance warrant.

The 66-room hotel, which has been the site of similar arrests in the past, is in foreclosure and under a court-ordered receivership. It has also been the subject of scathing online reviews by unhappy patrons.

Receiver Mike Guggenheim did not respond early last month to a request for a comment on the situation.

Representatives from the city’s Division of Housing and Building, Division of Fire, and Cuyahoga County Board of Health inspected the premises in August.

Records from the inspections show just a handful of fire code violations, but around 15 building code corrections. As per regular operating procedure, the building department inspected just 25% of the rooms.

Details from the Board of Health review will be posted when they become available.

Foreclosure strikes Kenilworth Tavern, Avenue Tap House buildings

In an odd coincidence, foreclosure proceedings were initiated one day apart against the side-by-side buildings on Detroit Avenue that house the Kenilworth Tavern and the Avenue Tap House.

At face value, Doowekal LLC, the corporation which owns the recently renovated Avenue Tap House building, would seem to be in less of a bind. Its foreclosure is based upon an $8,210 tax certificate payment.

Kenilworth Tavern business and building owner Paul Kriaris, on the other hand, has Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company on his tail for $106,095.

The city’s Planning Commission last year rejected Kriaris’ request to build a rooftop-dining patio. Kriaris said at the time he wanted to add the feature in order stay competitive in the changing marketplace. He also mentioned that the second floor apartments above the bar were vacant.

Lakewood Plaza: Destination Shopping Summer 2012?

There may soon be a sign that the long-awaited plan to renovate Lakewood Plaza will finally begin – literally.

The city’s Sign Review Board has received a request to install a 10-foot by 10-foot sign on Detroit Avenue trumpeting the property’s revitalization. It takes liberty with the phrase “destination shopping,” but people will get the point.

Blockbuster Video, one of the strip mall’s current tenants, is not featured on the billboard. Given their Chapter 11 bankruptcy last year it would not be a surprise to see them fold, although a worker at the store today said he was unaware of any plans to close.

Ownership of the property is a little fuzzy. One Lakewood Co. LLC, controlled by Canton-based developer Giltz and Associates, is listed as the owner of record with the county recorder’s office.

However, the sign application shows the owner as LRC-G Lakewood Investors, a company that was formed in May, according to Ohio Secretary of State records.

The court-appointed receiver said in a July report that negotiations were underway involving sale of the foreclosed property and/or mortgage note. The receiver’s most recent report was submitted to the court on September 28, but hasn’t been made available for public review.

Councilperson Smith finally submits financial disclosure statement

For the third consecutive year, At-Large Councilperson Monique Smith’s financial disclosure statement to the Ohio Ethics Commission arrived either late or incomplete. In this instance, it was both: 105 days late and unsigned.

Not to worry though, she’s in good company. Law Director Kevin Butler and former Ward 1 councilperson turned his statement in 61 days late.

Late filers are subject to a $10-per-day fine up to a total of $250. A Commission representative said the process of collecting completed statements is confidential and he was prohibited from disclosing if either Smith or Butler was fined.

What better time of the year than Labor Day to pause and examine the behavior of a couple of Lakewood’s largest corporate employers: AT&T and GrafTech.

In an era where corporations frequently threaten to relocate and pit one city against another to shamelessly extract incentives, AT&T must be commended for its decision to invest in its Detroit Avenue building, where approximately 150 people work.

The five-story structure houses telephone switching equipment on the bottom three floors and administrative personnel on the top two floors.

At first glance, the building seems fairly unremarkable, but a close inspection of its brick exterior shows a mismatched brick and color pattern. It was originally built as a two-story facility. Three additional floors were later added at two separate points in time.

AT&T decided earlier this year to make a significant investment in the building and install a second elevator. The existing unit was unreliable and not ADA accessible.

The AT&T design team presented the city’s Architecture Board of Review (ABR) with a plan to build the elevator shaft on the highly visible Detroit Avenue-facing side of the building.

Placement on the east side of the building was deemed unsuitable due to the presence of underground service cables. The west side of the building was too close to the property line, and the south side of the structure was ruled out because of parking concerns.

AT&T’s initial rendering called for a pronounced elevator lobby and a wide elevator shaft enclosure with a white accent. The ABR felt it didn’t balance well with the rest of the building and asked the design team to make some adjustments.

The team agreed to lose the elevator lobby, thin the width of the shaft, and use material more closely matching the color of the rest of the building.

It may not be an in-your-face act of good corporate citizenship, but it’s worthy of applause. AT&T invested in the building, and then agreed to work with the city on the design so it did not detract from the neighborhood.

As an unrelated aside, the traffic signals to the east of the building at Detroit Avenue and Manor Park/Blossom Park will soon be removed as part of the Detroit Avenue Resignalization Project. The state studied the intersection and found the signals to be unwarranted. It would have cost the city about $125,000 to keep the lights up.

Hopefully, the folks at The Westerly – who compose the single oldest-aged precinct of voters in the entire city – won’t have many dangerous encounters on their jaunts to Giant Eagle.

GrafTech: A toxic polluter without a conscience

GrafTech International has a long history with the city of Lakewood. More than 100 years ago, back when it was known as National Carbon Co., it played a key role in the development of Birdtown.

The Parma-based corporation still occupies a large swath of industrially-zoned land in the city’s southeast corner and does a generally nice job of maintaining appearances in a not-so-great neighborhood.

It will soon employ a total of 170 people at its Madison Avenue graphite production facility, according to spokesperson Betsy Keck, including 20 to 25 new workers it will hire for good-paying jobs in the coming months.

All of this is good news, although it doesn’t obscure one very important: GrafTech is the city’s single largest corporate air polluter.

It has pumped thousands of tons of toxic chemicals in the air over the last couple of decades. Worse yet, it received EPA permission earlier this year to emit 43 percent more carbon monoxide.

With a track record like this, one would think GrafTech would be looking for opportunities to exercise excellence in corporate citizenship. I can tell you without reservation that GrafTech’s concern for the well-being of the community is sadly lacking and superficial.

First, let’s touch on some of the good deeds GrafTech touts when it is pressed to provide concrete recent examples of its concern for the good people of Lakewood.

- It sponsors and maintains the Lakewood Mini-park near the bus stop at the corner of W. 117th Street and Madison Avenue.
- It is a long-standing member of the Lakewood Chamber of Commerce.
- It is involved with the youth organization H2O, which provides summer jobs and projects for local high school kids.
- It participated in the clean-up of Madison Park for the “Keep Lakewood Beautiful” event on Earth Day and contributed 125 pairs of gloves for all volunteers.
- It donated several boxes of extra office supplies to Harrison Elementary School.

These acts of generosity are woefully inadequate coming from a corporation that reported a 2011 second quarter profit of $29 million on sales of $320 million.

Worse yet, GrafTech has officially declined to donate a single dollar to replenish the city’s reforestation fund, which was exhausted on the effort to remove a crop of dying century old trees on Clifton and West Clifton Boulevards.

Normally, the city spends around $50,000 a year to plant trees. It will not do any new plantings this fall due to a lack of funds.

If ever there was a picture perfect opportunity for a chronic toxic air polluter to demonstrate responsible corporate citizenship, this is it. It’s pretty clear what drives the leaders at GrafTech, and it isn’t love of the community.

St. Ed’s and Lakewood Hospital want to raze houses

Two non-profit institutions have asked the city for permission to demolish houses they own.

Lakewood Hospital received permission from the ABR last month to knock down its house at 1457 St. Charles Avenue contingent upon submission of a detailed post-demolition site plan.

In cases where a house will be removed, the ABR wants to be sure the new landscape will not result in the “missing tooth” look. The hospital also owns the houses on either side of the property.

A hospital representative indicated there were no immediate plans for the lot, but construction of a Habitat for Humanity house might be considered down the road. “The hospital wants to do the right thing for the community,” he said.

He said the house has to be leveled because of extensive termite damage. Although the house looks fine from the outside, the interior support beams crumble when touched, he claimed.

Jeff Fillar, the city’s assistant building commissioner for residential housing, said the house hasn’t been rented in five or six years.

A nearby resident was miffed that Lakewood Hospital had failed to inform the neighbors about the termite problem and wondered if the problem could spread. “This is a serious problem,” she said. “The landlord has not been a very good neighbor.”

St. Edward High School would rather demolish the vacant house it owns at 1350 Nicholson Avenue than spend $50,000 to repair it.

A St. Ed’s representative asked the ABR in July to approve the project. He said the property, which is currently vacant, was in disrepair and the empty parcel would be reserved for future development.

The ABR deferred a ruling on the request until St. Ed’s submits a more acceptable post-demolition site plan. They did not like the rending of an empty grass lot the representative provided.

“This picture kind of breaks our hearts,” one board member commented.

Annual ‘do-not-knock’ address registry off to a slow start

So far, only six residents have signed the city’s annual do-not-knock address registry. It was created by the City Council in late June in response to complaints received last year from residents due to the inappropriate behavior of some door-to-door salesmen.

Law Director Kevin Butler said the city expects to add a function on its website that will enable residents to sign-up for the registry online. One note of warning: The registry expires every year at the end of December, so residents must remember to re-up.

Residents not interested in fooling around with the registry can post a “no soliciting” sign on their doors. The signs have the same effect as the registry and never expire.

More background checks and limits for solicitors

Because it is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, the city cannot completely prohibit all salespeople from traveling house-to-house, but it can create a system to encourage civil behavior.

The changes made in June do several things, including:

- Create an annual “Do-not-knock” address registry
- Narrow the time solicitors can be out to between 9:00 a.m. and whatever time is sooner, sunset or 8:00 p.m. – previously, the end time was 9:00 p.m. and that caused some situations where residents received door knocks after dark.
- Expand the variety of prior criminal convictions committed within the last five years that would disqualify someone from receiving a license to solicit.
- Expand background checks to include national databases beyond just the city and county
- Increase the cost of a solicitor’s license to $35 from $25 to cover the added cost of background checks
- Decrease the period of time a solicitor’s license is valid to six months from 12 months
- Require companies to disclose if they have had a permit denied or revoked
- Clarify the difference between a solicitor and a peddler (permit required), and a canvasser (no permit or registration required)

Some groups exempt from permit requirement

Just about anyone going door-to-door, with the exception of canvassers and local newspaper carriers soliciting new business, must stop at city hall and either register or purchase a permit.

A person working for a for-profit business, such as a commercial roofer, must acquire permit.

Individuals soliciting or peddling for “recognized” non-profit, educational, civic, religious, political, or charitable organizations – girl scouts selling cookies, for instance – must register with the city, but are not subject to background checks.

Candidates for political office, as long as they are not asking for money, are considered canvassers and don’t need to register or get a permit

And last but not least, no one may solicit or peddle on Sundays or legal holidays.

A disabled veteran has filed a request in Lakewood Municipal Court to compel the police to return a cache of weapons they seized from her Edgewater Drive condominium.

In the court filing, Francesca Rice alleges Lakewood police had an employee at Edgewater Towers open her condo without her presence, consent, or knowledge.

She claims to have legally acquired the firearms during and following her military service. The collection of arms is valued at $15,000 and includes some hardcore weapons of death, including:

- SKS M-21 Sniper Rifle
- Ruger Blackhawk .357
- Sentinel Arms 12 Gauge
- Gemtech .22 LR
- Ruger Mark II .22 LR
- Antique double barrel percussion shotgun
- Springfield Arms .45 ACP
- Thompson M1928 .45 ACP Semi-automatic
- Mossberg 500A 12 Gauge Shotgun
- Valkyrie Arms M3 .45 ACP Semi-automatic
- Smith & Wesson M-686 .357
- Makarov 9mm
- Colt Model M1851 .44 Revolver

Rice’s complaint indicates she is not under any disability and has not been convicted of any offense that would preclude her from gun ownership.

The complaint also says police have not filed any charges related to the weapons, and have refused to return them to Rice without a court order.

Representatives from both sides will be in court on Thursday to discuss that matter.

Lakewood Observer lawsuit hints at ‘questionable accounting practices’

An unsubstantiated rumor posted on LakewoodBuzz.com a few weeks ago claimed that Lakewood Observer publisher Jim O’Bryan was trying to sell the newspaper without success.

The message also indicated O’Bryan was being pursued in court for $16,000 in delinquent credit card debt and owed about $10,000 in back taxes on an investment property.

Two small claims complaints filed last week against O’Bryan suggest there may be a hint of truth to the rumor.

Charles F. Birchall, Jr., of Mentor, is seeking unpaid salary of $3,000 for employment from April 1 to April 30 with AGS Software Development, Inc., the parent company of the Observer newspapers. In addition, he is seeking $1,160.82 for unpaid expenses.

In the suit, Birchall says he quit in early May “after reviewing some questionable accounting practices.” He claims multiple e-mails and a letter sent over a period of 90 days requesting compensation went unanswered.

Birchall did not return a phone message seeking additional comment on the situation.

Hired to help sell the company

According to an employment letter provided with the complaint, Birchall was to work on a part-time basis to help find outside investors for an eventual sale of the business.

He was to be paid $3,000 per month, or 20% of revenue, whichever amount was greater. However, due to cash flow concerns, the compensation could be deferred until a later date.

In addition, he would receive $1,000 toward health care insurance costs and reimbursement for travel and entertainment costs not to exceed $2,000. Furthermore, he was offered a stock option representing 25% of the issued shares (250) at a price of $25,000.

He would also be included on the board of directors, which would be modified from nine members to five members.

Option to develop Mentor Observer, all Lake and Geauga Observers

As part of the deal, Birchall had the opportunity to develop the Mentor Observer at no cost and no fees for a period of six months and the right of first refusal for Lake and Geauga Observers for a period of one year.

The initial court date for Birchall’s complaints is September 14.

Apex Mortgage Company has launched a lawsuit at the city accusing Department of Planning and Development representatives of making “false and fraudulent” statements about the city’s interest in acquiring a former East End rooming house.

The legal action filed last week in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas by the Fort Washington, PA-based company seeks damages in excess of $25,000 for each of three separate counts.

Accusations in the lawsuit echo comments made by Apex Mortgage President Ted Kapnek in May after the Board of Building Standards upheld the Division of Housing and Building’s nuisance designation of the one-time rooming house at 11900 Madison Ave., known as Newman Corners.

In essence, Apex Mortgage maintains that the city reneged on a deal to buy the property and is now preventing the company from repairing and reopening the building.

City’s interest in property began in December 2009

Apex Mortgage specializes in loans to small businesses that are unable to obtain traditional commercial real estate loans. It acquired the 16-unit rooming house in May 2009 when the previous owner defaulted on the mortgage. It expected to repair and market the property for sale.

According to text from e-mail messages revealed in Apex Mortgage’s complaint, then-Director of Planning and Development Nathan Kelly began internal inquires about buying the property in December 2009.

He wrote to Mary Leigh, a program manager in the Division of Community Development:

“Would you dig around on the above? It’s a nuisance property that is in foreclosure and would be a good one to purchase.”

A few days later, he wrote to Leigh again:

“Dru [Siley] is going to see if he can get some info on the inside of the building. This is the kind of property that would warrant going to council, even if it’s under $60k, to purchase.”

Leigh wrote to Emma Petrie Barcelona, a development officer with city, about the possibility of using federal funds to acquire the property – noting it had to be vacant to qualify:

“To my question. The property is 11900 Madison. Need to know if, based on the below circumstances, would qualify for [federal Neighborhood Stabilization Program funding].

Not sure if vacant (but obviously would need to be). A foreclosure action filed in 2007 but it appears that instead of going through that whole process, the owner signed the property over to the bank.

If vacant could 1) nuisance? And/or purchase and either rehab or demolish with intent to redevelop with some new purpose (commercial or residential).”

County land bank raised red flag over city official’s inquiry

In September 2010, the city filed a building code violation complaint in Lakewood Municipal Court against Apex Mortgage due to the condition of the building.

Apex Mortgage alleges the complaint was filed in an attempt to pressure it to sell the property to the city.

Later that month, Director Kelly contacted Kim Steigerwald with the Cuyahoga County Land Bank, who the city works with to use federal funds to acquire and demolish or rehab failing properties.

Kelly wrote that the property would soon be vacant and he wanted to see it turned into a parking lot, even though it would be an expensive acquisition:

“I’ve come across a property that has a number of blighting influences, will be vacant, and should probably be torn down. My guess is that we could own it for $80k, would cost about $40k to tear it down. I’m using larger numbers. It would be a nice development site in the long term and [a] nice place to park in the short term. It’s in our NSP II area. It is bank owned- Apex Mortgage.”

Steigerwald replied that it was “not a good idea” to discuss any property that wasn’t already vacant because it would create a sticky legal situation:

“My first concern is the ‘will be vacant’ note. Last thing we want to do is consider a property w/tenants in it and trigger not only URA but the Tenant Protection Act. Even discussing this property at this point is not a good idea—as it would trigger both.”

Steigerwald also noted that the land bank usually paid “little, if nothing at all” to acquire properties for demolition. She hinted the city would have to make a contribution to any effort to buy the property.

An under-the-table agreement or a misunderstanding?

Apex Mortgage says in its lawsuit that the city decided not to purchase the building outright. Instead, it wanted to have the building vacated in order to acquire it through a less expensive nuisance/demolition process.

In October 2010, Apex Mortgage President Ted Kapnek claims to have had a conversation with Kelly who said the city was interested in buying the property, but could only do so if it was vacant for at least 90 days and not used in any manner.

Based upon the conversation, Kapek evicted several of the tenants and emptied the building, which had been grossing $3,000 in monthly rent income.

Kapnek further alleges the city withdrew its building code violation case due to his agreement with Kelly.

New mayoral administration, new direction

The city’s interest in the Madison Avenue property significantly dwindled earlier this year after Michael Summers was appointed mayor and Dru Siley effectively took control of the Department of Planning and Development.

Kapnek believes Siley intentionally failed to inform him of the city’s disinterest in the property in order to keep the building empty and prevent it from being reopened as a rooming house.

The building was declared a public nuisance by the city in March. The decision was upheld by the Board of Building Standards in April, not long after which the building was vandalized and rendered “economically unfeasible to repair,” according to Kapnek.

The city informed Apex Mortgage it would never permit the building to be used as a boarding house again. It gave the company the option of either donating it to the county land bank as a tax deduction or paying the city’s cost of demolition.

In May, Apex Mortgage appealed the Board’s ruling in county court, where the case is still pending. The city has temporarily agreed to hold off on its demolition plans.

City accused of ‘false and fraudulent’ behavior

The lawsuit asserts that the city’s actions have damaged Apex Mortgage’s property rights and caused “a loss of distinct investment backed expectations.”

It calls the representations made by Kelly “false and fraudulent” and uses the same term to describe Siley’s omissions.

The city has not yet filed a response to the accusations alleged in the lawsuit.

Is it all just blustery posturing?

One has to wonder if this lawsuit is merely a strategic effort by Apex Mortgage to motivate the city to cut them a modest-sized check in exchange for the property.

The mortgage companies that owned nuisance properties on West 117th Street and Lakewood Avenue each claimed they had every intention of repairing the properties for resale – similar to what Apex Mortgage claims.

In each case, the mortgage companies ended-up dropping their court appeal challenges, and selling the properties to the city at a cut-rate price.

Don’t bet on it, but this matter could go in the same direction.

Lakewood Plaza ownership and the proposed Quaker Steak and Lube

About a month ago, the Sun Post-Herald ran a story indicating Quaker Steak and Lube will open in December, and renovations at Lakewood Plaza will begin in mid-August.

Overlooked by some may have been a July 19 article in Nation’s Restaurant News that described the type of QSL slated to open in the plaza as a “mini-lube.”

It will not be the full-sized restaurant some residents dread. It will take up about 5,500 square feet – that’s just about the size of the Blockbuster space. The mini-lube opened in Madison, WI features a slimed-down menu and smaller portions targeted at a younger, more health-conscious audience.

Plaza renovations may still go forward, but possibly under new ownership, according to a recent court filing. The property has been under court-appointed receivership since April.

The receiver’s report filed on July 27 noted negotiations are currently taking place involving the sale of the mortgage note and/or property. The current owner, Giltz and Associates, defaulted on the $6 million mortgage and has been involved in foreclosure proceedings since the beginning of the year.

Incidentally, the report revealed Discount Drug Mart paid $22,750 in rent for the month of May. Blockbuster, Dots, and Radio Shack paid $5,155, $4,556, and $2,383, respectively.

Other commercial buildings in foreclosure trouble

The economy is still causing havoc in the local commercial real estate market.

Several buildings on Detroit Ave. – some housing notable businesses – are in foreclosure including the Baker Motors building, the Edgar Building (next to Merry Arts), the Donatos Pizza building, and the Two Dads’ Diner building.

Another building in foreclosure and under court-ordered receivership is the Days Inn at 12019 Lake Avenue. Last week the mortgage company received a default judgment when the building owner failed to show up at a foreclosure hearing.

A glance at some of the online reviews (see below) of the hotel suggests there are some major issues that need to be addressed.

I e-mailed the Division of Building and Housing regarding these issues in June. Remarkably, the department director indicated the city didn’t have any active violations on file for the property. He said he’d investigate the matter further, and possibly involve the county board of health.

Unfortunately, he was laid-off in the interim and the new department head didn’t exactly express the same urgency or concern. When queried, he replied with a one-sentence answer indicating the property would receive an inspection before the end of August.

http://www.hotels.com/ho124943/days-inn-cleveland-lakewood-lakewood-united-states/#reviews

http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g50532-d122185-Reviews-Days_Inn_Cleveland_Lakewood-Lakewood_Ohio.html

http://www.expedia.com/Lakewood-Hotels-Days-Inn-Cleveland-Lakewood.h42775.Hotel-Information#reviews

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on August 3, 2011:
“This hotel was cheap, and centrally located to the sites we wanted to see around Cleveland. But it wasn’t clean at all. There was hair in the shower drain and butt fuzz on the toilet seat. The wall paper was peeling a little bit.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on July19, 2011:
“The ceiling seemed to be caving in on our room, the wallpaper was falling off the walls, and the bathroom was disgusting with long brown hairs stuck to the shower walls, We even had to walk to the store at the end of the street for a can of air freshener because it was so smelly. While checking in the guy at the front desk wouldn’t even look at us. […] But I guess you get what you pay for.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on July 2, 2011:
“Stay away!!! This place wins the “Slum King Award”…Body fluids on floor, filthy towels, peeling wallpaper, paint chippings, mold/mildew stained shower…only thing missing was the rats…”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on June 17, 2011:
“Refused to fix a fire hazard in our room. I expected a budget buy, but not to have no working lamps and clock only to find out that there was a prong of an extension cord snapped off in the plug. The night staff refused to fix it and said they couldn’t call maintenance either.”

Reviewed by a TripAdvisor.com guest on May 28, 2011:
“First, the room was the dirtiest I have ever seen, without exaggerating, cobwebs on the ceiling, dirty carpeting, leaking toilet, tub that wouldn’t go down, filthy mirrors bedside lamps without light bulbs, dirty lampshades, nasty furniture and a tv with very few clear stations…By the way, the people at the front desk know exactly what this place is really used for, they just turn their heads and take the cash.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on May 20, 2011:
“…when we actually got to our room there was a stain on the sheets, a leak at the base of the toilet, and a clogged bathtub. So it’s safe to say during my shower I ended up having water up over my ankles. I felt unsafe to have my 5 year old son walk around without shoes on let alone socks…”

Reviewed by a TripAdvisor.com guest on Reviewed May 17, 2011:
“The dirtiest hotel what I ever seen.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on May 15, 2011:
“…Worn wallpaper and carpets, and cigarette holes in the comforter. Cheap sheets and pillows…”

Reviewed by a TripAdvisor.com guest on May 7, 2011:
“I am laughing because I only have to stay one night here. This is probably the worst hotel I have ever seen. Dark and dirty. Burns in the carpet and on the bedspreads. There is not enough room to type all that is wrong here. The BATHROOM! Oh my dear Lord, the bathroom. I am a little scared to use it.”

Reviewed by a TripAdvisor.com guest on March 11, 2011:
“The bathroom sink handles were broken and there was a mildew/cigarette stench in the room. These things could have been overlooked but when I crawled into bed, the top cover smelled of a dirty man and cheap cologne.”

Reviewed by john t of fl on Oct 18, 2010:
“I have never seen a hotel so dirty in my life. The first room was so dirty wall paper comming off the walls. The 2nd room was just as bad so bad that I cleaned the room myself with bleach cleaner very very bad mold problem.”

Reviewed by Ryan P of Timberville, VA on Oct 10, 2010:
“The building is aged, the floors are creaky, and the shower was moldy.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on Sep 30, 2010:
“..the first thing I saw when I turned on the lights was the dark stains on the dark green carpet. At this point I was to tired after a ten hour car ride. How ever when I got into bed just before I turned off the light I saw that the ceiling was peeling.”

Reviewed by a Expedia.com guest on Sep 1 2010:
“My room, the bathroom walls the paper was peeling, and it was marginally clean at best. One of the other rooms, the socket was hanging low, you could see mold behind it, and it was obvious that the wall had a major amount of water damage to it. They merely slapped some wall paper over the damage, but it did little to hide how bad of shape the room was in. I would not go back.”

Reviewed by a TripAdvisor.com guest on July 19, 2010:
“The wallpaper in our room was peeling off the walls, there was water damage on the ceiling, the door had to be forced shut.”

Reviewed by a TripAdvisor.com guest on July 19, 2010:
“We were in Non-Smoking rooms that had cigarette burns in the carpet and on the bed spread. The bathrooms were tiny with no bathtub, just a shower stall. The walls were bulging out and not in great shape.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on June 6, 2010:
“Unfortunately, when we got to the hotel we found our room had no air conditioning and was unbearably hot. The room was also cramped, dirty, and stuffy. All in all it felt like I was back in college in a hot dirty dorm room. When we asked the receptionist to fix the air, her reply was that the unit was “very old” and to just wait about an hour. Of course after waiting that long, the air never turned on and we were forced to leave.”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on Dec 9, 2009:
“The coffee table with the leg barely hanging on. The bedspread with the numerous cigarette burns and *BONUS!* mystery stains”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on Oct 20, 2009:
“The room however, was not very clean. It smelled musty and I later realized it was coming from the AC unit, which by the way was very noisy. I didn’t get the impression that the bathroom was clean either and the towels were stained (yellow stains!).”

Reviewed by a Hotels.com guest on Oct 5, 2009:
“I am traveling cross country and have stayed in a lot of “economical” hotels, this was the WORST!!! Burn holes in the blankets, mildew shower, dirty bathroom, cob webs, holes in the carpet. It was so gross!! Pay a little more and stay somewhere else.”

Reviewed by Renee A of Wilkes-Barre on Aug 21, 2009:
“The shower stall rod was falling off the wall it was barely hanging on, the bathroom sink was all chipped and cracked and the vanity looked like it had been through hell and back. My son couldn’t find his shoe so I looked behind the bed to see if it had fallen and I don’t think anyone really wants me to say anymore about that!!! GROSS!!!”

China Garden liquor license appeal still pending

Even though the city successfully objected to the transfer of China Garden’s beer permit in December, the carryout restaurant is still selling beer.

The owner of the restaurant has appealed the decision and is able to sell beer in the meantime.

David McCallister, the executive director of the Ohio Liquor Control Commission, said the appeal hearing hasn’t been scheduled yet, and likely won’t occur anytime before October at the earliest.