My recent post Rumors about Cleveland Clerk of Council Debunked and the revelations in the press the past week or so has made me look somewhat out of the loop.
I have remained silent until now out of respect for my source that led to the above-post. The source has now made it clear to me that I will not be jeopardizing our friendship if I disclose some additional facts that tell a bit more of the story than you'll read in the PD or see on local TV news.
My "source" for nay saying the rumors about Emily Lipovan, was Emily herself. She did not mislead me, nor did she use me and my blog to mislead you.
Emily is both my friend and my neighbor. We met when she was running for City Council and became instant friends, having a common bond for wanting to fight for the City of Cleveland even when it seems to want to destroy itself.
While I am not at liberty to divulge all of the gory details, I would like to point out that Emily is the only one who has remained silent through all of this. The only people talking are the Council President, Martin Sweeney, and a few council members, some critical and some coming to the defense of a person they consider to be a colleague and friend.
This is much more about a power play in City Council than it is about Emily Lipovan. For reasons that are personal to her and that she intends to keep private, at least as long as she can, although under the circumstances it looks less and less likely that she'll be able to; Emily decided some time ago that she wanted to return to her work with neighborhood development groups. She was more than willing to continue to fulfill her duties as City Clerk until she found another opportunity to return to the work she loves. She never asked for a severance package. In fact, a severance package was not her idea at all, but was proposed to her by others out of an apparent attack of guilt (that's my commentary and did NOT come from Emily).
Emily didn't go to the press. Martin Sweeney did. Emily didn't threaten a lawsuit, Martin Sweeney became preemptively defensive against the possibility of a lawsuit. But why? We may never know. Emily didn't raise any issue of sexual harassment in the press or the public eye, Martin Sweeney and other councilpeople did, ostensibly in Emily's defense, but it's my distinct impression that while she's appreciative of their support, she'd rather the whole thing be kept more private.
Perhaps there are other councilpersons who are unhappy with Martin Sweeney and are using this opportunity to weaken him to take over as council president. Perhaps Emily Lipovan inadvertently got caught up in this mess. She didn't say that to me, that's just my own commentary and educated guess.
Emily Lipovan is a discreet and consummate professional. I am not sure the same can be said for some of her co-workers at City Council.
Oh, as an aside, and this information did not come from Emily, but another source, the reason that you read on Cleveland.com today that Marty Sweeney withdrew the severance package and stated that Emily would be back to work this week is because under the City Charter, Marty does not have the power to hire or fire the City Clerk, the City Council does that. Marty doesn't have the votes to fire her or to give her the severance package he came up with.
I think this adds credibility to the supposition I alluded to earlier in this post. This is more about a power play for the Council President seat than it is about Emily Lipovan.
In any event, it'll be interesting to see what happens next.
CEP
Monday, September 10, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
Boy have you allowed yourself to be deluded.
sorry, but i have to agree with bbc on this one. these folks never experience an attack of guilt. the longer you're around, the more you'll come to understand this. it's all about the dollars -nothing else. that's why this town is all screwed up. i used to believe that they had good intentions, but now that i'm in my late forties, I've seen all too often how they operate.
Well, may "guilt" was a poor choice of words. What I was trying to say was that he wanted to keep it quiet, so he offered hush money. I guess guilt is the wrong word.
Anyway, the cat is out of the bag now. He left Emily no choice but to go public with the dirty laundry of Marty Sweeney. I am not a huge fan of PD columnist Phillip Morris. But he hits the nail on the head in his column today.
CEP
What about Emily Lipovan's dirty laundry? Not one councilperson at Tuesday's meeting had the balls to ask the obvious question: Were you both involved in a consensual relationship, and, if so, when did that relationship begin and end? Extrapolate from there--how did council arrive on Emily Lipovan as Clerk of Council, how was Emily Lipovan designated as Merle Gordon's successor. Expect a Cuyahoga County appointment for both of them a la Patrick O'Malley and the "democratic" machine.
I am not aware of any dirty laudry on Emily's part. I think you're reading WAY too much into the claims of sexual harrassment that have been bantered about. Sexual harrassment in the workplace can be as simple as someone telling off-colored and sexually explicit jokes, which is my understanding of what's been taking place here. It doesn't require any type of a sexual relationship consensual or otherwise to have sexual harassment.
I am aware of numerous amounts of rumors about Emily Lipovan, but few of them have been substantiated to me. I realize I am her friend, but I'm also not naive, and understand a lot more than you may realize how politics works in this city. I am, however, concerned that your unwavering cynicism and your painting all people with such a broad brush will make it really difficult for any person with good motives and who really wants to work for positive change in the community to put their hat in the ring so to speak and assume a public role. I think the fact that you feel compelled to post comments from a position of anonymity, which I respect to a degree, bears me out on that.
Is there a political machine in Cleveland? Of course there is. There's one in practically every major metropolitan city and the suburbs as well. Political machines aren't inherently evil, provided that folks working in, through, and for the machine use it to advance the whole community and not just themselves. There is academic scholarship in the field of urban studies that will back me up on that notion.
I any event, I hope you'll keep contributing to the dialogue and won't mind if I try to encourage you to do so with more equanimty that your recent comments have demonstrated
CEP
I say wait and see. E.L. and santiago are indeed extremely close allies and one could claim not to have said anything while having others do it for them/her.
It appears that Ms.Lipovan has a history of claiming although not charging or following through with such sexual harrassment claims.
That in itself is a diservice to those who have endured such harrassment factualy. Shame on all of them. Tom foolery at city hall while residents are besieged with crime is a travesty.
I say wait and see. E.L. and santiago are indeed extremely close allies and one could claim not to have said anything while having others do it for them/her.
It appears that Ms.Lipovan has a history of claiming although not charging or following through with such sexual harrassment claims.
That in itself is a diservice to those who have endured such harrassment factualy. Shame on all of them. Tom foolery at city hall while residents are besieged with crime is a travesty.
Mr. Bundy, you should choose your friends with greater care. If the Plain Dealer reporters checked their archives, they'd see that Emily Lipovan has a trail of controversies behind her. She apparently thrives on turmoil. As executive director of Tremont West, she battled first Frank Johanek, the former head of Clark Metro Development (a mediator was called in) and more notoriously E.L. was constantly at war with former councilman Nelson Cintron.
Local political news junkies must remember this. Before long, the Plain Dealer will unearth less than pleasant facts about Lipovan.
All is not what is appears to be.
The way the most recent anonymous commenter drops inferences without facts makes me thing they actually are a PD writer.
I don't know who Frank Johanek is or what all the bruhaha was all about, but without more facts regarding what EL went to battle with him over, I am not inclined to re-evaluate my friendship with her or anyone else based upon those scanty details and inferences without any substance.
As for Nelson Cintron, from what I know about his skeletons, anyone that did battle with him, deserves respect and I would certainly be on the side of his foes and not in his corner any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
If there's really more to the story on EL and you have "facts", then spill 'em. You are protected by anonymity, so what do you have to lose; unless of course the facts you know would reveal your identity, which to me makes it as much likely as anything else that you have a personal ax to grind.
Seems to me that folks who both hide their identity and then still only take pot shots with inferences and not hard facts (or even detailed opinions) are good people to ignore.
CEP
If you don't know Frank Johanek then I'm assuming you're a fairly recent "friend" of E.L. Frank served as the executive director of Clark-Metro Development Corp., while E.L. led neighboring Tremont West. As I said, E.L. thrives on fights, conspiracies and plans to sabotage. These are not inferences; just facts contained in the PD archives and the memories of Tremont residents who witnessed E.L.'S battle over service territory.
I've already notified the PD reporters covering this story. Hopefully, they'll look into Emily's past through their own reporting.
Anyone who actually knows Emily would find it difficult to imagine her as a victim of sexual harassment. Emily is not victim material. Her response to a unwelcome advance, joke, etc., would be a swift kick -- literally and/or figuratively. I can't imagine her cowering or worried about her job, as is generally the case.
Think about it. Something's up here.
I graduated from Midpark HS w/ EL back in 1985. I knew her from some classes, not a close friend, but we were on friendly terms.
I also have trouble seeing her in the role of "victim". She's too strong a personality for that. I also remember her as someone who wouldn't be likely to back down from a confrontation.
I think the ultimate truth of this story lies somewhere between the two sides: in part, she's caught up as a pawn in someone else's fight, but at least to a degree, she's done it to herself.
At any rate, I wish her the best.
SCC
I also know E.L, she is not the type to take part in a conversation that she feels is inappropriate. Think about it. She was a councilwomen and head of a development corporation. She made a name for herself and has been involved in many professional battles. She would not hesitate to tell someone off if they offended her, boss or not. She is also not caught in the middle, she started it. Probably supported by those who wanted the Council President position, mind you. She is not a victim in any sense of the word. She can play nice when she wants, depends on what is in it for her. severance package was offered because it's probably cheaper to give it to her than go to court. It's not in the Council Presidents control to offer severance packages.Publicity also hurts the council as a whole. Can't imagine it does much for her future prospects either.
At Tremont West, I had an African American colleague; her boyfriend was white. One day, flowers were delivered to the office for the woman and I personally witnessed Emily tell the delivery guy that the woman did not work there or something like that. The delivery guy just left and I don't think the black employee ever knew what really happened.
I lost all respect for Emily after that incident. I'm only telling this story because it's a reflection on how conniving and mean-spirited (for no good reason) Emily can be. If she sees this post, she won't object because she knows it's true.
what does the employee's race have to do with it? wouldn't it be just as bad if the employee had been white?
How naive. The incident would not have happened if the female employee had been white. The delivey was sabotaged because certain people were offended by the interracial romance.
can't dignify your naive comment with a response (if you only knew -heh heh).
Oh, I do know...and soon the investigator will know too.
i AM the investigator. heh heh.
Mediation? Is that what happens when you know you've had a consensual relationship, it didn't work out and now you're just embarassed?
Post a Comment