[nfbmi-talk] Fw: Approved MCB quarterly commission meeting minutes from September 15 & 16, 2011

[joe harcz Comcast]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Luzenski, Sue (LARA) 
To: MCB2020-L at LISTSERV.MICHIGAN.GOV 
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 10:51 AM
Subject: Approved MCB quarterly commission meeting minutes from September 15 & 16, 2011


APPROVED

 

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

COMMISSION MEETING

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2011
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2011

CONSTITUTION HALL

525 W. ALLEGAN STREET

CONFERENCE ROOM A/B

LANSING, MICHIGAN

 

 

MINUTES

Thursday, September 15

 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT

Mr. Larry Posont                             Ms. Lydia Schuck        

Mr. John Scott    

 

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT

There are 2 Commissioner vacancies.

 

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND STAFF PRESENT

Mr. Pat Cannon                               Ms. Sue Luzenski

Ms. Susan Turney                          Mr. James Shaw

Ms. Elsie Duell                                Ms. Julia Burdgick                                                       

 

GUESTS/ATTENDEES

Mr. Joe Harcz                                  Mr. Joe Sontag

Mr. Fred Wurtzel                             Ms. Sylvia Scott

Mr. Dan Morgan                              Mr. Joel Hoffman

Mr. Ken Stucki                                 Mr. David Robinson

 

The meeting began at 12:13 p.m.

 

          Commissioner Schuck welcomed everyone, introducing the Commissioners and stating that she will be Chairing the meeting today.  She referenced the minutes from the last meeting stating that meetings will be longer to help clear up a backlog of discussion items.  

 

Public Comment (Verbatim Transcript)

 

          Mr. Joe Harcz:  Joe Harcz, um, we're making some improvement on the ADA but we have a long way to go before we sleep.  Twenty-one years old this is civil rights law.  Today I came to this building early to do a partial survey.  I got kind of stalled around, uh, for about an hour before I could even do that.  Finally, you know, laid down the letter of the law in that they cannot stop someone from doing an accessibility survey and I did get a walk through on this floor only.  There were a few technical violations, uh, including (inaudible) which aren't supposed to be there, but it's a big improvement.  Uh, this entire building is supposed to have program access so as every State building is and it's not on every permanent room of this building let alone other State buildings.  We also have severe problems going on within the Commission and within the State of Michigan to this day related to receiving information in accessible format in a timely manner and the most effective format to the individual.  You'll see the implications of that in the Stelmach case tomorrow.  You'll see this today, uh, you know, in the inequities of your packages, uh, where the blind people got audio files related to the exhibits and the other Commissioner got her's in the most effective format for that Commissioner.  The inequity is quite clear and that's not a blame on you Madame Chair, by any means, it's just a statement of fact that goes to the responsibility of the Agency.  Finally, last Thursday I was at American's with Disability Act Forum with the ADA Steering Committee.  We went over the changes in Title II which applies to public entities.  But it went over them and reiterated the obligation for more effective communication for the people who have hearing, blindness or visual and speech impairments.  Those are seemingly lost on this organization.  This is the Michigan Commission for the Blind, they should know how to put out information in Braille, digitally and everything else to consumers to people in the public, to employees in a time period that doesn't exceed, oh, I don't know exactly, oh I'm being sarcastic on that.  I try. Bye.

 

Mr. Fred Wurtzel:  Fred Wurtzel here. Um, I want begin by commending the, uh, Commissioners by being proactive and involved in things.  As this meeting goes on, um, I'm hoping that we can do some things that show improvement.  College policy is on the agenda, I'm glad to see that.  Um, we have to fix this abusive policy that has to do with the financial aid form. Um the call back situation really needs to be resolved once and forever.  There is a 48 hour policy that has been in effect for years and, uh, the CIC has been dealing with this, uh, then we have the case of, um, staff leaving and not notifying their clients that their leaving with no notice of who to talk to.  So these are some kind of general things and I don't want those to be perceived as micromanagement.  Um, they're only raised to the level, this level when there's nothing else left to do.  They're not being dealt with at the administrative level.  I also have to give kudos to Elsie and her team.  I think they're really making a great effort, um, at improving the quality of the production of the meetings.  I'm pleased with the improvements made that Joe just talked about on the ADA.  Some of the issues we still need to work on but there's somebody working on it.  But that's an improvement.  That's something that ought to be recognized. Um, so, there, there's a lot of things the whole catering issue with the Business Enterprise, the whole point system for the Business Enterprise, um the way that the (inaudible) transfers are being taken care of.  There's a lot of stuff at your level that needs to be addressed and I'm really, really pleased to see the proactive and, um, willingness to work on these issues with the Commission Board. Thank you.

 

Mr. Joe Sontag:  Hi, uh, Joe Sontag here and uh, I realize that BEP things aren't likely to come up on the agenda this afternoon but I've got so many things to say and little time to say it that I'll  make it fast with just one thing.  As you consider BEP related issues tomorrow, whether it's the Stelmach case or the other things that are brought to you or other things that might come up in public comment there's one promulgated rule I want you to bear in mind.  That would be Rule  393.52 (5) which states in relevant part "the Commission is ultimately responsible for administering the State vending program and may reject the recommendations of the Committee."  Now as an operator who has served on the Committee and actually chaired it at various times during my career, I felt very strongly the Committee needed to be listened to and as the current rule set was established, um, this states many times this and that and other things shall be done with the active participation of the Committee.  The Committee as important as its input is, because after all we're the folks on the front lines, um, it is not strictly speaking accountable.  But the Commission, the BEP staff and the Commission Board is accountable and I look forward to the day we see more evidence that that accountability is taken seriously.  Thank you.

 

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

 

Commissioner Activities

 

Commissioner Scott reported he met with Ellis and Daniel of Visually Handicapped Services in order to get a better understanding of the relationship of the Michigan Commission for the Blind and Visually Handicapped Services in Detroit due to the reputation of the Detroit Area not having the kind of benefit distribution that are carried out in other parts of the State.  He also noted that he attended a light rail information meeting the previous evening.  He stated Detroit will eventually get light rail and the meeting was well represented by various disability organizations helping to determine needs of the disability community. Commissioner Scott also met with the Image and Identity Committee over the telephone.  He shared that a lot of good things are going on in terms of information going out.  

 

Commissioner Posont stated that he met with Joel Hoffman, the DTMB Coordinator for State Facilities looking at signage in the building related to the snack bar and other issues.  He further stated that he believes that Mr. Hoffman is committed to making this building totally accessible along with the Ottawa Building.  Commissioner Posont also shared that he had an opportunity this past week to visit the Training Center facility where he met clients and staff.  

 

Commissioner Schuck reported on the Training Ad Hoc committee which she attended with Bob Robertson.  The group will be bringing recommendations to the Board at the December meeting.  Commissioner Schuck also added that she will be asking Christine Boone about staff training at the Training Center during the next days meeting.  Commissioner Schuck announced that her survey launched for parents of transition aged children of blind and visually impaired youth, finding out what parents want and whether IEP discussions are identifying important topics that need to be pursued.  

 

Commissioner Posont commented on the BEP/EOC Ad Hoc Committee remembering that there was discussion on ending the committee by the end of the year.  He added that next month the committee will be talking about areas which hadn't been touched so far. Commissioner Posont asked for clarification on when the award ceremony was going to be held.  Ms. Susan Turney stated that the awards ceremony will be held October 21 in the House of Representatives in the Mackinaw Room as a luncheon.

 

Commissioner Scott added that the Lions Club and the Braille and Talking Book Library will be collaborating on a Braille literacy project at the next Braille-a-Thon to be held in June, 2012.  

 

Commissioner Schuck also gave tentative information she received from Collette Bauman about a Fill the Bus event.  She will share more information with Commissioners as it is received.

 

MCB Meeting Accessibility

 

Commissioner Schuck asked Mr. Joe Harcz to comment on accessibility at the buildings where MCB meetings are held.  She also asked that he go to the Ottawa Building next month to check the accessibility there.  She stated that we can be reactive building by building as we meet places.    

 

Mr. Harcz stated that the State as a whole is required to be proactive, to have conducted facility surveys and to have removed the barriers under the Transition Plan by July 26, 1995.  Mr. Harcz said that, through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the Department of Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB), survey's were not done until 2008. He added all meetings are supposed to be accessible regardless of the disability and there was a directive that was not followed where there was a walk through on the facilities to ensure full access, including for wheel chair users.  Mr. Harcz stated that he was very concerned about the Ottawa Building because it is outrageous.   He also went on to talk about due to all the security in place there is discrimination by policy and how one wheelchair user who was with her lawyer at the Ottawa Building was denied access in her wheelchair because the door was locked.  He stated signage should be posted at the most frequently path traveled and while these are serious violations on meeting day, these too are serious violations every day.  He added anytime MCB uses a building that doesn't allow public access it's not only violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, or Section 504 which relates to recipients of Federal funds there's a requirement in Title 1 of the Rehab Act.  Mr. Harcz stated these things are required by law but there hasn't been enforcement although these violations have been reported to the appropriate people, including the State ADA coordinator.  Mr. Harcz went to the State Library for the Automark announcement and there were violations reported to Michigan Protection and Advocacy Services and others.  He asked the question if rooms are numbered and labeled for sighted people then why aren't they labeled for blind people?  Mr. Harcz added another severe issue is signage for emergency access and egress.  Mr. Joel Hoffman is head of the facilities for the state.  MCB violated the ADA by selecting non-accessible sites for the State Plan Hearings.  Not only was the ADA violated but the requirements of the Title 1 of the Rehab Act.  

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked Director Cannon where the next meeting is to be held.  Director Cannon stated that it will be held in the Ottawa Building as Constitution Hall is not available.  Commissioner Schuck asked should we be holding meetings in sites that we deem as not accessible.  Director Cannon shared that since the Ottawa Building was chosen as a meeting site there have been talks with DTMB on the actions needed to be taken to correct any accessibility deficiencies and these will be addressed.  He added, security is an issue that often comes up and because of 9/11 security will trump the ease of accessibility.  Director Cannon said one of the things talked about with DTMB was adding signage at the other doors at the Ottawa building to provide better direction on how to get to the accessible entrances.  

 

          Commissioner Posont stated he believes we are on the right track but just not where we want to be and hopefully after this meeting we can be in contact with Joel Hoffman and advise him of the deficiencies that still exist in this building. 

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked that at the next meeting she is hoping to hear that Mr. Harcz has seen some improvement of the accessibility issues at the Ottawa Building.  Director Cannon guaranteed there will be improvement and has shared that since the ADA was enacted there was the requirement under Title II that required state and local government to do an evaluation or self-assessment to identify any deficiencies and impediments to program access and then set forth a transition plan.  He reported the surverys were done in the early 90's and the surveys done in 2008 were a follow up assessment to the earlier surveys.

 

Discussion of Director Evaluation

 

Commissioner Schuck stated that the Commissioners received the current Director evaluation and competencies in the meeting packet although it was requested at the last meeting.  She stated that Ms. Luzenski needs to be aware of things that can go out in a post meeting packet so Commissioners get them far in advance of the next meeting.  In the future, Commissioners will designate to the Board Secretary items that are needed post-meeting as opposed to making these items pre-meeting for the next quarterly meeting.

 

          Director Cannon gave an overview of what has been done in previous years on the Director objectives and competencies.  He shared that there are multiple layers to the process including a self-assessment by the appraisee of meeting the objectives and competencies which is done, generally, by the end of November.  Commissioners then do their own assessment of how these objectives and competencies have been met and Commissioner assessments have gone to the Chair or a designated Commissioner to be compiled.  Separately, Director Cannon has an appraisal by the Deputy Director of LARA (formerly DELEG) and there are two objectives that are required by the Department.  

 

          Commissioner Scott shared his Director evaluation experience from the previous year explaining that once you got into it, it wasn't confusing.

 

          Director Cannon explained that there are three categories of ratings:  Needs Improvement, Meets Expectations and Exceeds Expectations.  He added in previous years the categories have also included high performing ratings.  He went on to note in the past 13 years his evaluations have ranged from exceeded expectations to high performing.  

 

          Commissioner Schuck shared past procedures which was information she received from previous Chair Jo Ann Pilarski.  She also discussed how discussing the evaluation amongst Commissioners needs to happen in an open meeting but discussion of the procedure that will be followed does not need to be discussed during a meeting.

 

          Commissioner Scott clarified that no decisions can be made outside of the open meeting.  

 

          Director Cannon added that typically all decisions and discussion are done in an open meeting and there is an option to go into closed session for the appraisal if the appraisee requests it. 

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked that all evaluation submissions be collected and compiled but not averaged.  

 

          Director Cannon stated that the final letter to the Deputy Director of the appraisal results needs to be done by the end of December and at that same time objectives should be set for the next evaluation year.  

 

          Director Cannon shared that the Governor's Appointments office is hoping to appoint new Commissioners and when there is a full board will then designate a chair. 

 

Bylaw Revisions 

          Commissioner Schuck took the meeting out of the Committee of the Whole to vote on Bylaw changes.  She went onto say that the Board is happy to be there, there is no disarray amongst the Board members and when the general public is unhappy it, generally, isn't because of something that the Board did.   Commissioner Posont, handed to Commissioner Schuck and Ms. Sue Luzenski changes to the Bylaws, which had been shared with Commissioners but not discussed before the meeting.  

 

          Commissioner Posont stated that he found it interesting that there was no reference to the Rehabilitation Act in the existing Bylaws.  

 

          Commissioners asked Ms. Luzenski to read the old Bylaw and then read the proposed new Bylaw.

 

          Director Cannon commented that the Governor's Appointments office advised that changes to the bylaws be deferred until there was a full complement of five Commissioners and a designated chair.  Mr. Norm Saari, Director of the Governors Appointments Office would welcome a chance to speak with any of the Commissioners about this desire.  Director Cannon shared that Mr. Saari stated that to take action now would be premature and short-sighted and he would advise against it.

 

          Commissioner Schuck stated that Director Cannon going to the Governor's appointments office to discuss whether the Board would make changes to the Bylaws seemed inappropriate and ill-advised.  She went on to say that it seemed heavy-handed and she felt, at the time of the conversation, that she was being bullied.  Commissioner Schuck also shared that one of the adjustments about to take place is that the Board would like to determine their own agenda, with only the advice and request of the Director on what he would like to see on it.  She also shared that her feeling that once the Board exists, the Governor Appointments Director does not have a role here.  She went on to add that she would be happy to talk with Mr. Saari as a gentlemen who has knowledge of government but she doesn't think it appropriate that Director Cannon should have gone outside the Commissioners to get to the Governor to get her to change the agenda and that it was a bad move.

 

          Director Cannon recounted that him calling Mr. Saari was a result of a phone conversation that he, Commissioner Schuck and Ms. Luzenski had where Director Cannon shared his reservation about changing the Bylaws prior to a full board being appointed and Commissioner Shuck, at the time, said that she was feeling strongly about doing it and wanted to move forward.  During the phone conversation, Director Cannon stated he would be willing to contact the Governor's office to get their take on this being done and Commissioner Schuck said okay, leaving Director Cannon to interpret that as affirmation to make the inquiry of the Governor's Appointments office, which is what Director Cannon did.  Further, Director Cannon shared that Mr. Saari stated although he didn't have the authority to tell Commissioners whether they can move on Bylaws or not but it was his advice for them to wait out of respect for the Governor's appointment process.

 

          Commissioner Schuck stated that Mr. Saari is the Director of the Appointments Office and, as such, immaterial to this process.  If anyone on the Board wants to speak to the Governor about any issues they will, as in the past when issues have arose, go directly to the Governor or Lt. Governor and speak to them to get their opinion.  She again stated that she was feeling bullied by the Director and the changes about to take place weren't disastrous, but the Board wanted to take control of the agenda setting.  She also added that when there was a full Board the Bylaws could be revisited if it was found necessary to have that done.

 

          Commissioner Posont added that when he submitted his name to become a Commissioner and he spoke with different people within the Governor's office, he shared that those people stated if he makes good policy for the State of Michigan and blind people then they won't have a problem with it.  Commissioner Posont shared that his intention is to help make good policy on the Commission for the Blind to effectively rehabilitate, train, educate and become gainfully employed in society.  He added that the Board must take action when it feels correctly and that several issues or questions raised recently are items that are standard under the Rehab Act and this Board is an independent Commission as the Rehab Act allows it to be.

 

          Commissioner Scott shared an analogy supporting the Board moving ahead to make changes to the Bylaws.  He also added he wasn't aware of the Bylaws until recently and that it states in the Bylaws that the Commissioners function as a policy making board and we don't need to wait until two more people are appointed to the Board.

 

          Ms. Luzenski read the current bylaw followed by the proposed bylaw.

 

Section III Commission Board and Authority 

 

Motion 1

 

Item 9

 

Existing Bylaw:  The role of the MCB to the BEP is defined as participative management of the BEP through the Elected Operators Committee (EOC).  The Board and the MCB encourage active participation of the EOC in the management of their organization, including analyzing problems, identifying root causes, evaluating solutions and helping to implement solutions within the limits of available resources.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  The role of the MCB to the BEP is defined as participative management of the BEP through the Elected Operators Committee (EOC).  Active participation is mandated under the Randolph Sheppard Act.  The Board and the MCB require active participation of the EOC in the management of their organization, including analyzing problems, identifying root causes, evaluating solutions and helping to implement solutions within the limits of available resources.

 

Posont moved to accept new additions to the Bylaws; Scott seconded

 

Discussion:   Commissioner Schuck asked that the "s" be struck off the addition of the word "require" as stated in the proposed bylaw.  She also clarified that the changes reflect stronger participation in the BEP program and alignment with the Randolph Sheppard Act.

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Section V: Board Operations and Protocol

 

Motion 2

 

Item 5

 

Existing Bylaw:  Times and locations for quarterly Board meetings are set at the beginning of each fiscal year by the Chairperson and the Director of the MCB.  If a situation arises which requires prompt Board action which cannot wait until the next scheduled meeting, the Chairperson and Director may call a special meeting for the purpose of such action.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  Times and locations for quarterly board meetings are set at the beginning of each fiscal year by the Chairperson and the Commission Board, with advice from the Director of the MCB.  If a situation arises which requires prompt Board action which cannot wait until the next scheduled meeting, the Chairperson or any two of the five Commission Board members may call a special meeting for the purpose of such action.

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  Commissioners clarified the changes made to this Bylaw which has the Board setting the dates for the upcoming meetings taking into consideration the advice and schedule of the Director.

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Motion 3

 

Item 12

 

Existing Bylaw: The Chairperson establishes the agenda for each Board meeting in coordination with the Director of the MCB.

 

Proposed Bylaw:  The Chairperson establishes the agenda for each Board meeting in coordination with the other Board members and requests for Agenda items by the Director of the MCB.  The Chairperson will notify the Director of the Agenda three weeks prior to the Commission Board meeting.  

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  Commissioner Schuck asked that there be an amendment of "Board member, also considering requests...".  Commissioner Schuck went on to inform attendees that she worked with the Director to set this agenda and had to capitulate knowing that she would be taking Commissioners off the set agenda.  There was also discussion about the use of "requests" or "suggestions".  

 

Proposed Bylaw with Board Discussion Changes: The Chairperson establishes the agenda for each Board meeting in coordination with the other Board members, also considering requests for Agenda items by the Director of the MCB.  The Chairperson will notify the Director of the Agenda three weeks prior to the Commission Board meeting.  

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Motion 4

 

Item 13

 

Existing Bylaw:  If Commissioners wish items placed on the agenda, they should communicate them in advance to the Chairperson or the Director of the MCB.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  If Commissioners wish items to be placed on the Agenda, they shall communicate them to the Chairperson prior to the time and date that the Agenda is finalized.

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  Commissioners discussed repeating the sentence but starting it with "If the Director wishes items...".

 

 

Proposed Bylaw with Board Discussion Changes:  If Commissioners wish items to be placed on the Agenda, they shall communicate them to the Chairperson prior to the time and date that the Agenda is finalized.  If the Director wishes items to be placed on the Agenda, he/she shall communicate them to the Chairperson prior to the time and date that the Agenda is finalized.

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Motion 5

 

Item 17

 

Existing Bylaw:  Commissioners will listen to public comments but will not respond.  However, the Chairperson or his/her designee may respond on behalf of the Board if public comment warrants clarification of issues raised.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  The agenda shall include scheduled time for public comment with a minimum of three per day.

 

Public comments can be made in-person or sent electronically and are to be limited to five minutes per comment as spoken or when read aloud.

 

All written and verbal comments shall be appropriate and respectful.

 

Commissioners shall listen to public comments but will not respond.  However, the Chairperson or his/her designee may respond on behalf of the Board if public comment warrants clarification of issues raised.  A board member may ask a question for clarification after seeking the floor from the Chairperson.

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

 

Discussion:  Commissioners discussed limiting the number of public comment to two a day so they are not bound by three public comments per meeting day.  The question arose in the matter of a half day meeting would you still have two or three?  Discussion settled on a minimum of two a day.   There was also discussion about limiting the public comment to 4 minutes or having no time limit at all.  The Commissioners settled on 4 minutes.  There was also a discussion of email public comment, what email it comes into and how it is handled.  

 

Proposed Bylaw with Board Discussion Changes:  The agenda shall include scheduled time for public comment with a minimum of two per day.

 

Public comments can be made in-person or sent electronically and are to be limited to four minutes per comment as spoken or when read aloud.

 

All written and verbal comments shall be appropriate and respectful.

 

Commissioners shall listen to public comments but will not respond.  However, the Chairperson or his/her designee may respond on behalf of the Board if public comment warrants clarification of issues raised.  A board member may ask a question for clarification after seeking the floor from the Chairperson.

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Motion 6

 

Item 18

 

Existing Bylaw:  Minutes are recorded and distributed by the secretary to the Board who is a staff member from the MCB Director's office.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  Minutes are recorded and distributed by a staff member designated by the Board under the Open Meetings Act of 1976 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as Amended.

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  Commissioners discussed that according to the Rehabilitation Act this Board is considered the Rehab Council or an Independent Commission.   The Board feels that the secretary needs to be independent of the Director's office and it needs to be someone who answers to the Board.  Commissioners continued by stating that they are not looking for a new FTE, a possibility would be a contracted individual or someone who is already employed with the agency but does not report directly to the Director.  The details will be worked out in the future.  

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Motion 7

 

Item 19

 

Existing Bylaw:  Minutes and other documents for consideration on the agenda shall be distributed to the Board in a format meeting the needs of each individual Commissioner at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting.  All agenda items will be supported by accessible documentation in advance so the Commissioners can be well informed and respond to issues as expeditiously as possible.  

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  Minutes and other documents for consideration on the agenda shall be distributed to the Board in a format meeting the needs of each individual Commissioner according to the requirements of the Open Meetings Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act.  Prior to the meeting, if available, all agenda items will be supported by accessible documentation in advance so the Commissioners can be well informed and respond to issues as expeditiously as possible.  Any item may be discussed at a Board Meeting whether or not prior documentation is available.

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  Commissioners discussed that this was just to ensure following the Open Meetings Act and the ADA.  There was also discussion about putting the phrase "at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting."  Director Cannon brought up the subject of accessibility of documents distributed to the Board and the diligence and commitment of staff to provide accessible documents.  Ms. Luzenski added that Board members just need to let her know that they desire a document in a specific format and it will be available to them at the meeting.  

 

Proposed Bylaw with Board Discussion changes:  Minutes and other documents for consideration on the agenda shall be distributed to the Board in a format meeting the needs of each individual Commissioner according to the requirements of the Open Meetings Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, at least one week prior to the scheduled meeting.  Prior to the meeting, if available, all agenda items will be supported by accessible documentation in advance so the Commissioners can be well informed and respond to issues as expeditiously as possible.  Any item may be discussed at a Board Meeting whether or not prior documentation is available.

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Motion 8

 

Item 20

 

Existing Bylaw:  All matters of concern to Commissioners must be directed to the Chairperson and/or to the Director of the MCB or, with the Chairperson's and/or Director's approval, to others as appropriate.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  All matters of concern to Commissioners must be directed to the Chairperson of the Commission Board or, with the Chairperson's approval, to others as appropriate.  Any member of the Commission Board may include something on the agenda.

 

Discussion:  There was no discussion.

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Commissioner Schuck brought up for discussion the fact that there is no Vice-Chair and she would like to amend Item 6.

 

Motion 9

 

Section V

 

Existing Bylaw:  Board Operations and Protocols, Item 6: At the first meeting of the Board in the fiscal year, a Vice Chairperson is selected by the Board for the sole purpose of conducting the official meeting of the Board in the absence of the Chairperson.

 

 

Proposed Bylaw:  When a chairperson has not been appointed by the Governor the Vice chair shall carry out all duties assigned to the chair person.

 

SCHUCK MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED BYLAW; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  There was discussion about specific wording of the motion.  

 

Proposed Bylaw with Board Discussion Changes:  At the first meeting of the Board of the fiscal year, or when the vice chair position is vacated, a vice chair person shall be selected by the Board to carry out all chair functions in the absence of the chair person. 

 

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Issues/Questions from previous meetings

 

          Commissioner Posont just wanted to bring attention to the letter of 13 items he submitted at the last Board meeting in June. 

 

          Commissioner Scott asked for an update on System 7.  Director Cannon responded by saying updates on System 7 are ongoing and Ms. Elsie Duell will talk about this tomorrow during her report.  

 

          Commissioner Schuck stated she went back to the last meeting and reviewed public comment.  There were multiple public comments made about P & A.  She stated that the CAP and P&A programs are not well understood.  Commissioner Schuck also referred to a letter from 2007 from Advocates for the Blind that was resent to her.  She also asked if this needs to be a future discussion. 

 

          Director Cannon reminded attendees that at a previous Commission meeting there was a question of who makes the designation of the Client Assistance Program (CAP) and how much money they receive.  These questions were answered that the Governor designates CAP and approximately $350,000 is budgeted from the Rehab Services Administration (RSA).  Director Cannon suggested that a CAP representative be on the agenda for the next meeting so Commissioners questions could be addressed.  Commissioner Posont stated that when the CAP agency is called they do not respond and asked if there was another option.  Director Cannon suggested Elmer Cerano, the Director of P&A or someone from the Governor's office whom makes the designation to be on the next agenda.  There were also questions about the frequency of the designation and is the agency the same for MCB and MRS.  This was determined as an agenda item for the December meeting.

 

          Commissioner Schuck had several general topics that could be discussed at some point including document accessibility, recommended training of counselor staff and expanded core and whether Director Cannon thinks that MCB will remain under LARA.  The next agenda will include the Director evaluation, Training Ad Hoc recommendation, a report from the BEP Training Ad Hoc and hopefully a report from P&A.  A vote for vice-chair will take place on Friday.

 

          Commissioner Schuck brought up Camp Daggett, Commissioner designation for Committees, MCBVI and NFB conferences, attending a mini-adjustment program, and Commissioner Schuck will be going to the Training Center the next week.  

 

Public Comment (Verbatim Transcript)

 

Mr. Joe Harcz:  Hello? I do want to talk about the effective communications, I'm going to talk really fast because, oh, I've got 4 minutes now.  Title II Americans with Disabilities Act plus all entities of state and local governments sub-part E requires what they call auxiliaries and services for effective communication for people with hearing, speech and visual impairments. That does, yes include we folks that happen to call ourselves blind.  And that means that when it comes to blind people the entity is required to in a timely manner remit to the individual the most effective, not the preferred, the most effective format for that individual.  It's a thing called primary consideration and unless they can prove that another equally effective format is there, then the onus becomes on the entity.  It isn't just take it or leave it.  They have to prove that. Now when I heard today regarding these, uh, attachments or exhibits and whatnot, really it didn't even make me angry it made it made me sad.  We just heard how we make script accessible to the blind.  This is the agency for the blind and this is no offense Sue, no offense but what the heck we are the agency that is supposed to know how to do this stuff.  We are the lead agency for this.  If it was a matter of just this item it wouldn't bother me but it goes on internally left and right.  Internally.  People don't get their IPE's.  Their Seminole document and that's even noted in the consumer satisfaction survey.  I didn't even make this stuff up.  I get, what you see me document and I think all you folks have seen me document this list serve with requests for information in X format, it happens to be the easiest format to do. You know, and it happens to be my most effective format.  And you've seen me denied, delayed or thrown on the retard of another rule.  In violation of the FOIA you know, to be used as an excuse to delay timely delivery of information and we've all seen our kids, our kids who demand a need in finding the most effective format to be brought up. Oh, but the school district didn't get around to it.  I'm sorry, here, have some audio tape.  You know.  Here have some stuff from, uh, uh, oh what is that the name for that goofy outfit, you know that the school districts went to to give you a backdated copy. Or here, we gave you, we gave you half your text in Braille.  Half of it.  Oh, the school year is over oh we gave you up to Chapter 6, oh the rest of the class is up to Chapter 20.  If people don't see the disparities and the reason I'm so passionate, and the reason I'm so hard headed and so I will not say a bad word.  I'm so, I'm so assertive on this issue is that fundamentally is our most critical need.  The lack of access of information denies us informed consent and it keeps us literally in the dark and ignorant and controlled.  I will not abide it and I will not abide it when the agency who's very mission is to do things like make information accessible to the blind and to advocate throughout the entire state.

 

Mr. Fred Wurtzel:  Um, I'm really happy to hear the P&A issue coming up.  $350,000 without accountability, at least visible accountability to me, um is really um pretty bad um.  There is, you know you always have the the commission of insider trading, or the appearance of insider trading, um we have an appearance here with um, a lot of people from the democratic party being in charge of P&A, um all the way from Washington to, um, Michigan.  And I tend to vote democratic so I'm, um not trying to make a political statement here. It just seems like, um a possible perception of conflict of interest here.  Um, the um other thing I wanted to say, um was I was glad to hear System 7 be mentioned today again, Um.  I heard Elsie make a report and it sounds like Elsie is on it and working on the issue.  I'm particularly concerned about the Business Enterprise portion of System 7, um and that has to do with the point system.  The points system is in gigantic disarray even though this Board tried to resolve things.  It seems that it might have gotten even more mixed up in regards to the freeze and additions and subtractions of points and trying to set a benchmark point.  And this could be all resolved if we had a computer program that we could put information into and we could put out a report in real time.  There's no reason a person can't call up to the bid line and get their point score at any given moment and it shouldn't be a problem.  These are computers after all.  We don't need a super computer to do this particular job.  Lastly, I'd like to make a comment and a compliment, there's been a request by our organization, the National Federation of the Blind to, and others, to make, um, a lot of documents more accessible so we didn't have to access them through FOIA.  And recently there's a new link on the Commissions web page, uh, which, uh makes accessible a number of documents, uh, previously only, only reachable through FOIA.  Or mostly reachable through that method, uh, this should speed up access to information, it should make the agency more transparent, and um, it should make, uh, a good example for other, uh, places and I'm very pleased.  With regard to, um, a, a, technicality here John raised a minute ago, and its one feedback, um, that I have received from other sources that the financial data is being put up there in an Excel format.  Um, I think that Excel is not a commonly used program by most people, uh, on a daily basis.  Almost everybody uses a word processor or an (inaudible) program from time to time, uh, but very few people, well I shouldn't say very few, but not nearly as many use spreadsheet programs on a daily basis.  Um I would like to request that the Commission consider an alternate format for presentation, for presentation of financial data on that webpage.  It's not a criticism necessarily, I'm glad to see that the information is up there I'd just like to help make it a little more user friendly. Uh, thank you and I do, I do appreciate the change on the web page.

 

Mr. Joe Sontag:  Joe Sontag again, just in the interest of planting another seed regarding, uh agenda items that will come up tomorrow.  On the matter of, that was transmitted to you regarding cafeteria policy, the, as it relates to people who take on a cafeteria facility without having the cafeteria certification.  Uh I'd just like to suggest that unless it turns out that it's already been submitted to the committee and they've weighed in on it, I would say that at the very least that item needs to be sent to the Committee so it can have its chance to speak on it.  My personal opinion is that, uh, a person accepts such a facility and uh, as it stands currently we get an uncertified operator up to three years to obtain certification, um, in the event that that person transfers to another cafeteria before the three years is up it's my opinion that the three year clock remains running, that it should not be reset.  Um, speaking strictly from a, um, another comment I wanted to make quickly on the cafeteria situation and the difficulty finding competent, qualified operators is that after all this time it amazed me to no end that we have living in this very city an individual who is more than qualified to run any cafeteria in our program and to do it well.  He's, uh, he's served well in running anything that he's tackled in the Business Enterprise Program has been well run. And yet, unless there's some critical piece of information that I'm missing, um, he can't get back into the program. And, I think it's very, uh, I think it's sad, I think it degrades this program and it sends entirely the wrong message to people on the outside who are wondering what the hecks going on with the service these people are providing.  And, um, last but not least, on a positive note I really like what I've seen here this afternoon from the Commission Board with regard to the work that was done on the bylaws and I think, I think it's fantastic.  It makes this natural cynic a wee bit better about the world today.  Thank you.

 

Ms. Susan Turney:  This is Susan Turney. I am the webmaster for the MCB webpage and I just wanted to add that in the new section, how am I doing that, in the new section of the website titled documents and reports almost all that information, shall I start over. Ok.  Almost all that information has been on our website in different places.  The budget information is new and the approved State Plan is new because we just received it.  Everything else has been on our website for some time, some years and it's grouped in one place now.  

          Commissioner Schuck asked if there was any more public comment or if Commissioner's Posont or Scott wanted to add anything.  

 

                   POSONT MOVED TO ADJOURN; SCOTT SECONDED.

 

          The meeting adjourned at 3:02 p.m.

 

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

COMMISSION MEETING

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2011
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2011

CONSTITUTION HALL

525 W. ALLEGAN STREET

CONFERENCE ROOM A/B

LANSING, MICHIGAN

 

 

MINUTES

Friday, September 16

 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT

Mr. Larry Posont                             Ms. Lydia Schuck

Mr. John Scott

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT

There are 2 Commissioner vacancies

 

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND STAFF PRESENT

Mr. Pat Cannon                               Ms. Sue Luzenski

Ms. Susan Turney                          Mr. James Shaw

Ms. Elsie Duell                                Ms. Julia Burdgick

Mr. Chris Elliott                                Ms. Constance Zanger         

Ms. Christine Boone                       Mr. Dave Bowden

Mr. Leamon Jones                                   

 

GUESTS/ATTENDEES

Ms. Valerie Barnum-Yarger           Mr. Nick Wilcox

Mr. Joe Sontag                               Mr. Joe Harcz

Ms. Elizabeth Mohnke                    Ms. Diana Mohnke

Ms. Terri Wilcox                              Ms. Marianne Dunn

Ms. Cheryl Wade                                      Mr. Phil Kozachik

Mr. Tom Warren                              Mr. Ken Stucki

Mr. Fred Wurtzel                             Ms. Mary Wurtzel

Ms. Sylvia Scott                              Mr. Rutherford Beard

Mr. Dave Robinson                        Ms. Hazell Brooks

Ms. Risa Patrick-Langtry                Mr. Steven Langtry

Ms. Gloria Tatum                                      Ms. Sarah Norwood

Ms. Rachele Crawford                             Ms. Carrie Bradley

Mr. Leonard Gross                         Mr. Germain Milledge

Mr. James Chaney                         Ms. Sheila Stelmach   

Ms. Jane Willard                             Ms. Kathy Armstrong

 

 

Call to Order, Roll Call and Determination of Quorum

 

          Commissioner Scott welcomed everyone to the meeting and called the regular meeting to order at 9:02 a.m.  Roll call was taken and a quorum was present.

 

Approval of Minutes

 

Schuck moved that for the next 3 meetings the public comment should be transcribed verbatim in the minutes; Posont seconded

 

Discussion:  Commissioners discussed having the minutes reflecting better what consumers concerns were during the meeting.  Doing the public comment verbatim would eliminate the need for a summary.

 

THE Motion passed unanimously.

 

June 17, 2011 Meeting Minutes

 

Posont moved to accept the June 17 Board meeting; schuck seconded.

 

Discussion:       No discussion

 

THE Motion passed unanimously

 

June 23, 2011 Special Meeting Minutes

 

Posont moved to accept the June 23 special meeting minutes; schuck seconded.

 

Discussion:  Commissioner Scott stated he did not participate in this meeting.  

 

THE Motion passed unanimously with commissioner scott abstaining.

 

July 19, 2011 Special Meeting Minutes

 

Posont moved to accept the July 19 special meeting minutes; schuck seconded.

 

Discussion:  Commissioner Posont asked that a transcript be produced of this meeting because the Assistant Attorney General did excellent work.  Commissioner Posont said that Mr. Warren from the Attorney's General office made the statement during this meeting that the Board was not a policy making Board for all aspects of the Agency and he would like this to be corrected.  He wants this question to be cleared up because it calls into question the authority of the Board and where its authority lies.  Commissioner Schuck stated that previous Chair Jo Ann Pilarski conversed with Charles Sadler of RSA and it is his belief that this Board is a policy making board.  Commissioner Scott stated that the minutes are intended to reflect what happened at the meeting and changes to minutes should occur only when there is an error or if something was left out.  

 

THE Motion passed unanimously

 

Posont MOVED to make the July 19 Special Board meeting MINUTES in transcript form; schuck seconded

 

Discussion:  Commissioner's asked Mr. Warren if creating a transcript is the most educational way to gain all the information.  Mr. Warren agreed.  

 

THE Motion passed unanimously

 

Posont moved to clear up what the powers of the commission board in policy making are for future use; NO SECOND

 

Schuck moved that the board obtain a legal memorandum from Mr. Warren of the attorney general's office concerning the role of the board in policy making; Posont seconded

 

Discussion:  Commissioner Posont said he has not felt that what can and cannot be done has been clearly stated in policy or law.  Commissioner Scott stated that he does not want the opinion of the Attorney General because that becomes law, he added that the statute and the Rehab Act state we are policy making and until someone raises a legal objection then it should be left alone.  A memorandum would be more appropriate as it would state the Attorney General's views but not be a legal binding opinion and the Board opted for a "beg for forgiveness" method of operating rather than risk guidance that would be at odds with their conviction.  Mr. Warren agreed with Commissioner Scott's assessment that a legal opinion is in effect a law.  He added that advice from the labor division would be more appropriate as it is interpretation of the law.

 

the Motion was withdrawn.

 

Attendees introduced themselves and Commissioner Scott welcomed everyone.

 

Approval of Agenda

 

Schuck moved to approve the agenda; posont seconded

 

Discussion:  There was no discussion.

 

                   THE MOTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Board Correspondence

 

          Board Correspondence was read in its entirety per the request of Commissioner Posont.  There were three pieces read which are attached to the minutes:

 

·        Faith Meadows, received June 21, 2011

·        Fred Wurtzel, received September 10, 2011

·        Elizabeth Mohnke, received September 12, 2011 re:  College Student Worksheet

 

Commissioner Posont said that as a member of the commission board, a member supporting blind peoples issues he will make issue of issues that he believes are important to the blind population of the State and policy of the Board currently.  If Commissioner Posont said that if he would have read this, one of these letters before the meeting today he would have said that the letter shouldn't have been read publicly.  He added that he did not read the board correspondence.  Commissioner Posont reiterated that he believes in open government and if he would have previously heard the letter today he would not have supported the public reading of it.  He said that he believes in open government and open policy and he will continue that, even if it is against what he believes because he believes openness is honesty. 

 

          Commissioner Posont reminded attendees that they do not have to introduce themselves.  

 

Public Comment (Verbatim transcript)

 

Mr. Joe Harcz:  Joe Harcz, NFB and I speak in public meetings for the public record.  I identified yesterday, and over a long period of time, systemic violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504.  These are gross violations of our civil rights, period.  They're civil rights laws, they're going on today.  We made some progress but we need to be put on the public record and since the, the buck stops at the top.  The ADA says the (inaudible) is responsible for its actions.  Mr. Cannon knows the law therefore I must assume that his violations are malicious, intentional and willful in their gross. Now we've had a lot of comments over the past including by ex-Commissioners alleging conflicts of interest and nepotism and that's in the public record solely based on someone's affiliation, namely the National Federation of the Blind or I don't care, what, that is not a conflict of interest.  What we do have in an official capacity are conflicts of interest and I speak of facts, not allegations.  We have a regional supervisor who is on the Board of Trustees of Community Rehabilitation program in which this state does business funneling federal dollars back and forth.  That is a conflict of interest in the same entity, by the way, that was cited in the Rehabilitation Services Administration monitoring report for reversion to vendor.  Since we have the Attorney General's office here, I would like to publically ask that these and other activities be investigated.  This simply is not kosher, is not a kosher, uh, vendor state federal relationship to be on the Board of, of a community rehab program.  And I name New Horizons, one that got, got you know an award at one our award ceremonies a few years back.  Before they got their hands slapped and MCB got its hand slapped by RSA.  We also have, we talk about the training center thing, and this thing from Ms. Meadows today, a State employee, you know calling this Board an advisory Board.  And, and if we want to talk about Mr.'s closing comments relative to what happened, I mean Ms. Heibeck, again in a public record Ms. Heibeck said that Shig Toda was an O & M Counselor.  That's right in the CIC notes.  What type of, uh, this just isn't the case, it's inaccurate.  And yet she was administering that program?  Now people know, people know, I dearly care about most of the staff at that Training Center and I've said that before on the public record.  And I deeply care about most of the frontline staff but we have some real issues in upper management and we have some real issues in not abiding by the law and by the facts of the matter and not conjecture.  Thank you.

 

Ms. Cheryl Wade:  Good morning, my name is Cheryl Wade, I'm a new member, as I said, of the Consumer Involvement Council of the Michigan Commission for the Blind.  I represent students and you.  I have a few things to mention from our meeting a week ago.  We continue to be dismayed about a situation in which a staff member, um, left the office for a planned leave and, it was for an extended period and the result was students were not able to have their classes paid for in a timely manner.  At MSU, the information I received was, um, through the student disability center which is called the, uh, Resource Center for students, Resource Center for students with disability.  The problem apparently was with new students who had not attended MSU before and were somehow not contacted and didn't know that they're paperwork wasn't completed.   Um, I understand that the person who left the office called current clients, uh, in fact I received fine service from both the person who left and the person who was responsible for filling in for that person.  Both of these people called me, they answered my questions and in the case of the person who left, sent me some emails and told me exactly what to do in case I had any kind of a problem, if I needed any kind of service or to talk to someone.  So I'm not the person who was affected by this and I'm not trying to blame anyone, not either of these people, um, I hope, I expect that services here are done in a timely manner and that people truly do care about folks who are blind.  Uh but I do know of at least one student who did not get the class that he or she wanted because the paperwork was not, uh, done in time.  This is not acceptable and we hope that you will figure out whatever went wrong in the communication system and fix it.  We also would like to be continually apprised about budget spending for case services.  We hope that the Commission will spend the full amount of the money it receives each year on case services for people who are blind.  Thank you very much.

 

Ms. Terri Wilcox:  I'm Terri Griffin Wilcox between July 12 and August 11 I called the general Commission number twice and my husband called it twice.  We called it four times in a one month period to get our cases to be reopened to become gainfully employed.  We also wrote three letters during this time.  To this date we have never received a callback.  We are both college educated people who got our educations paid for by the Michigan Commission for the Blind.  Thank you very much.  However, neither of us have ever had a full time paying job that allowed us to give up SSI or SSDI.  Both of us would very much like this.  We would benefit from some more training for mobility and some other things but we would definitely like to be gainfully employed.  At this point, our cases are closed as successful with still being on SSI and SSDI for my husband being employed very, very, very part time.  And when I got done with school and they urged me to close my case teaching one or two voice lessons a week instead of being on SSI, I thought that that's what we were supposed to do and say thank you for paying for school.  I didn't realize that things could be better and I could get assistance to be gainfully employed.  Our goal for both of us is to get off of Social Security.  Thank you we would really like to receive services.  Thank you very much.  

 

Mr. Rutherford Beard:  Hello Board members, my name is Rutherford Beard.  Um, my goal is to see blind people have jobs and see um, things happen properly.  I know for a fact that I have been on the website on several different occasions to apply for a job.  I'm a black, African American male who is legally blind and not even the Commission for the Blind is hiring African American males.  I think this is a shame at this present time.  Even some of the other agencies I have applied for, and, uh, I can name several of them, but I've put in so many different applications, so I think this is discrimination against black African American males and also blind people as a whole.  Because if we can't find jobs and we can't get jobs, yes I have a facility and actually I thank the BEP program that I am making a little money right now, but right now I'm still trying to catch up and I'm still looking for a stable income and to use my degree.  With the help of the Commission for the Blind I did get a Bachelors degree but I (inaudible) around and went a step further and got a Masters degree.  I can't get back in and using my skills in helping blind people and I can't even find a job where I can help out blind people as a whole and be able to be successful.  I ask you all to look into this please and better yet begin, and give black American males a chance especially if they're legally blind because that's one of the things that they're not getting and I know a couple of my friends who have put applications in on the State website.  They are qualified but we're not given the chance to do what we need to do.  Thanks for giving me the chance.

 

Commissioner Scott:  Sir one of the Commissioners has a question for clarification.  

 

Commissioner Schuck:  Hi, um, I caught your first name, Rutherford, what's your last name again?

 

Mr. Rutherford Beard:  Beard.  B-E-A-R-D.

 

Commissioner Schuck:  Hi Mr. Beard, I'm Lydia Schuck, one of the Commissioners, I just wanted to ask, I wanted to get a little bit clearer picture of what you're saying.  You're saying that you have your, your degree qualifies you for positions that are open on the Commission website.

 

Mr. Rutherford Beard:  (inaudible)  Yes I have applied for several positions with the Commission for the Blind.  My degree is in Management with a specialization of Human Resources.

 

Commissioner Schuck:  Okay, that's what I wanted to know.  

 

Mr. Rutherford Beard:  you are welcome.

 

Commissioner Schuck:  I'd, I'd love to hear from you again when you are, when you've obtained a position and I hope you can get the right help. 

 

Mr. Rutherford Beard:  Thank you very much.

 

Commissioner Schuck:  Thank you very much for coming.

 

Mr. Joe Sontag:  Joe Sontag here, um, as some of you may recall at the, actually let me backtrack a step and just report that I received a complaint via cell phone uh, uh about the time that public correspondence was being read that the, the, that the audio on the phone and the stream was all but useless.  I don't know if there's been a change in that status.  I told the person that it was being worked on as Elsie reported and hopefully that can be straightened out.  Anyway, on to what I needed to say.  At the last Commission meeting I commented on the fact that as a result of action taken by this Board in March regarding the operator selection system, I faced a strong possibility of permanently losing points due to alleged performance in the profit percentage department.  I said at that time that I believe the loss would amount to about 8 points.  (Inaudible) undertaken by myself and to some extent with the help of others on one of the subcommittees of the EOC.  However, at this point, I must report that, uh, I don't lose 8 points and change I lose 15.28 points and change or something similar, 15.28 points.  Which just happens to be the very number that, uh, was assessed against me approximately a year prior when I asked for and received a profit percentage review.   There has been to date no expiration of, no documentation, no thorough cogent explanation as to my poor profit performance.   I am, as some of you know, a previous operator of the facility in this building and while I don't claim to be the star of the program, I believe I did an acceptable job and that was confirmed by a number of indications and yet, um, I've lost credit for reasons that cannot or will not be explained for an amount of time roughly equal to my amount of years of service to the program.  Slightly less.  And while I'm not one of those who just wants to take, take, take from the Commission  and sit on my duff and collect benefits for the rest of my life, um, for all fact and purposes my BEP career might just as well be over and you might set my points to zero.  And with respect to the difficulties we're having in filling some of the more difficult locations in the program, some of those who are performing badly or whose performance is not known, let this be a caution to you.  I'm not saying stay away, but it's not like the old days when it was worth the persons while, especially someone coming out of a class to accept anything just for the purpose of building seniority and gain experience.  Because you just might find yourself in a bind.  Now in my case it wasn't lack of experience or lack of confidence, I've been an operator, an active operator for approximately 17 years.  But, uh, in my case there were a number of problems, many of which I was making known to the Commission on a regular basis and yet the feedback to me from Agency staff was positive.  In fact, in fact, I, I won't characterize it as begging, but let's just say that a number of BEP administration tried very strongly to encourage me to stay on. And, uh, for reasons I won't bother you with here I made it very clear that I could not, I could not do that.  I didn't duck because I was an incompetent operator who could not run the place properly and I dare say my record speaks for itself especially if you look at the facts.  Take a look at the record of other operators.  Thank you very much.

 

Mr. Fred Wurtzel:  Good morning. Hi this is Fred, I do need a microphone for the people outside this room.  I'm Fred Wurtzel again, um, I did, um, send one Board correspondence.  I sent a second Board correspondence also, uh but with an official, I was asked to do it on behalf of the Consumer Involvement Council.  Um, which regarded, um, what did it regard, it regarded something.  Um, it was, it was important to. Oh Newsline, um that the Consumer Involvement Council is recommending to put Newsline on a, uh, five year trial, not trial but five year subsidy from the Commission while, uh, the Commission works with, uh, consumers, foundations, other places to find permanent funding that would be subsidized by Commission for the Blind.  Um, that was part of the Board correspondence also. I'm sure it was a mistake, not intentional.  Um, regarding the point system I'm a firm believer in rewarding people for performance and effort.  Um, when I was administrator of the Business Enterprise Program, um, I strongly advocated for a system that would give people recognition for going to classes, um attending food shows, doing other things that were in the benefit of the program and benefitted themselves.  Um, and apparently the system isn't really working that well.  I'm recommending that, uh, somehow Elsie and Constance work together with Libera to get the system working so that this is an arithmetic problem, uh, a person does something they get points for it, it gets recorded and put in the system and the system prints out reports of those points.  Uh, we shouldn't, it should be just like checking your bank balance or anything else.  You should be able to do it at a moments notice on the telephone bid line.  An operator should be able to call in and find out their points at any given time.  Um, it's merely a computer program and right now, um, it's causing all kinds of noise in the system that is unfortunate because the Business Enterprise Program is really a great opportunity for employment, uh, and, um, it's making it look like, uh, it's hard for people to participate in the system in a fair way.  Um, regarding, um, the college policy I think the letter I wrote probably speaks well for itself and I don't think I need to say a lot more about that except I think you should just throw that darn policy out that deals with that form and uh, and uh, let students go to school and get a job.  Um this telephone call back system needs to be worked on, um as was reported in the CIC meeting people weren't being called back and, um, that needs to be fixed.  Again, we can automate that, we can have an automatic, each phone call to a counselor could go into their case record automatically a recording could go right there and be part of the case notes. And, uh, that would at least be one way communication even if there wasn't a second direction communication.  So there are technical fixes, I like technical fixes because they document things and they make things measureable.  And one of the things, one of the things I think we need to be focusing on and I hope you as the new Board will focus on, um measurable ways of managing performance.  And it needs to be, we need jobs for blind people.  We had two hundred closures goals in 2000, we had 170 closure goal last year and we had 167 closures last year with eleven openings in the Business Enterprise Program.  That's measurable, we had only 70% of the money was spent, uh, to help blind people get jobs, yet we were way under employment.  That's measureable and those are goals that can be worked on.  And I encourage you to implement policies that do measure things.  Thank you.  

 

Ms. Hazell Brooks:  Good morning, my name is Hazell Brooks and, uh, I apologize for being late I had to deal with some issues, uh, of a current project that we're working on which is the (inaudible) of Michigan and also the Commission taking some operators down to the BLAST conference.  I learned this morning that there's going to be, uh, some snafu's in getting these operators down there.  It has to do with the hotel rooms.  The merchants have stepped up and we've had to put in some of our own extra money which is to the tune of maybe $2,000 and we just wanted the agency to meet us half way in terms of the hotel rooms and we needed to have this issue brought before you guys, this morning so can get these excited operators to go down to BLAST and be empowered with business things and learn a lot of things and network and reach out to other operators around the country so we can learn our craft and better hone our skills and be better at it.  Um, so we ask you guys to help us get this hotel room situation straightened out, it's people who have to go and they don't have the money to be putting up the money first for the hotel rooms and then coming back to be reimbursed.  It's not what we agreed on with the agency.  So I'd like you all to maybe do some brainstorming, we only have a few days to get this done and we have a lot of people counting on us to do it.  The merchants, again, have stepped up and we've done our part and again, we're asking that you do your part to get these people down to BLAST.  We'll come back and we'll give you all kinds of great stories about how we were empowered as operators and as blind people.  Thank you.

 

Ms. Mary Wurtzel:  Hi, I'm Mary Wurtzel I want to be able to walk around like Elsie does, you know, anyway, because she goes so fast.  Ever since I've had a brace I can't wear high heels and stuff and I really want to sound like some of those people that are tip tapping down the sidewalk.  That's beside the point.  You know I was listening, and I, I think the fact is that the Commission for the Blind has some very dedicated and wonderful staff and I don't think that the purpose of public comment is just to complain.  I was thinking about it, um, I started to be served by the Commission for the Blind when I was 17 years old, which I won't tell you how long ago that was, and while I have to tell you that I was actually, um, I had a male counselor and that counselor hit on me and I was 17 years old and I never told anyone.  I didn't know any better.  I'm just telling you that because you can say well you shouldn't complain and you shouldn't bring things up but there's people who really don't know, can't advocate or don't know how to advocate for themselves.  I just want to mention that it isn't always a bad thing to have things brought to the surface that are going on.  Um, and the last thing I wanted to mention which Fred mentioned was that I really believe that it is a good thing for the Commission for the Blind to fund Newsline.  The thing about Newsline is that we have a job bank on Newsline, and I've looked at it, not only for blind people, I've looked at it just to see what's going on for, uh, to know what the jobs are and what the vacancies are.  Because sighted people don't have jobs either, (inaudible), so I've been looking at it.  And, and it's really a great resource and I think that, you know, the purpose of the Commission is to help folks find jobs so I think that it would be a really great thing to fund Newsline and especially, uh, for the Counselors and people to teach how to use the job base on Newsline.  So, uh, I'm the last thing I was to say is that, um, there's a requirement nowadays that you have to have a degree in rehabilitation counseling or something, um, I applied to the Michigan Commission for the Blind, I have a degree, a masters degree in social work, I don't have this accreditation.  But I would know how to return phone calls even without that rehabilitation degree.  Thank you very much.  

 

          Ms. Luzenski informed Board members that there was another piece of board correspondence received, which was forwarded to the Board on September 8th.  She added that this was an unintentional oversight.  The Board correspondence was received by Fred Wurtzel on September 8, and was an official request on behalf of the Consumer Involvement Council for MCB to fund Newsline for a 5 year time period.  This letter is attached.

 

          The Board discussed adding Newsline to New Business on the agenda later in the day.  

 

Break:  10:20

Reconvene:  10:30

 

          Commissioner Posont asked that the hotel/conference issue that has arisen regarding the BLAST conference be discussed during the Business Enterprise Program report.

 

Business Enterprise Program Report

 

          Ms. Constance Zanger, Business Enterprise Program manager highlighted topics of the written report including the on the job experience training concluding for newly trained BEP operators from June allowing them to be eligible to bid on a facility in mid-October and a new training class beginning September 26 which will have 5 students.  

 

          Ms. Zanger informed the Board and attendees of an issue that arose for travel to the BLAST conference where the secondary conference hotel will not allow the State to set up a direct bill for payment and, at this point, staff is looking at options for payment so operators do not have to pay for the hotel bill out of pocket and be reimbursed.  One option was for operators to contact National Association of Blind Merchants (NABM).  There were ideas given including using a State credit card, using money from the National Association of Blind Merchants, finance cutting an emergency check or working with conference organizers.  The Board asked for a report from staff by the end of the meeting on whether a solution had been found.  

 

          Ms. Zanger reported on the two National Guard bases and the contracts with those bases which will not be renewed in one case and terminated in the other.  The contract termination of Fort Custer has arisen because of lack of quality of service and operator interest.  Fort Custer and the BEP have mutually agreed to terminate this contract when Fort Custer finds a food service replacement.  Ms. Zanger shared some of the difficulties with providing service to a military site.  

 

          Ms. Zanger introduced Chris Elliott, the current Promotional Agent in the northeast and Upper Peninsula areas who has been with the Commission for 18 months.  Mr. Elliott shared that his area covers from Marquette to Troy and includes vending routes, rest areas and a few snack bars.  He also stated that he is the PA for the Pontiac Metroplex which is quite a large facility and getting larger.  

 

          Mr. James Chaney, Elected Operator Committee Chair phoned in to share that he is planning on attending BLAST and his feelings are hurt and he is disappointed for all of the operators that were looking forward to attending BLAST.  He updated the Board on the process of getting approval for operators attending BLAST and that he thought the Agency and the operators were working together.  Mr. Chaney also shared examples of times when operators were feeling that they weren't getting the support of the Agency.

  

          Ms. Zanger updated the Board on facilities being remodeled.  She also reported that staff is working with the EOC Locations and Repairs subcommittee as the Committee goes through each facility to determine viability and remodeling needs.  Ms. Zanger also informed attendees that since 2002 there have been 10 facilities added to the BEP, 6 facilities remodeled and 17 highway rest areas have either been constructed or remodeled.

          Ms. Zanger reported on the EOC operator selection point system.  Operators were given the opportunity to request and review their points.  Staff has also been working with Libera to automate the points system and created an 18 month plan for the database to be reworked.  

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked for a clarification of the points award process with emphasis on why an operator may experience having less points the day after they bid on a facility. Ms. Zanger explained that point calculation varies from day to day for various reasons.  

 

Commissioner Schuck also asked if the EOC was satisfied with their involvement in the master plan and are the operators satisfied with that way of planning?  Ms. Zanger responded that master plans are developed with the Promotional Agent and the operator together once a year creating a list of needs and wishes and prioritizing them together.

 

Training for Catering

 

          Ms. Zanger reported on a meeting in May at which two BEP staff, two EOC members, Director Cannon and Commissioner Posont met with Lara Deputy Director Steve Arwood and Ms. Mel Brown to discuss development of a catering training class for new operators as well as refresher components for existing operators.  Some of the topics discussed included changes in state government which cycle around to less state funds available for beverages for internal meetings, employees not having a wage increase resulting in not spending money on lunch, working through lunch hours and eating lighter meals.  Deputy Director Arwood and Ms. Brown raised employee perceptions of BEP facilities including products being understocked, employees chafing at the requirement to use BEP, that menus haven't changed with the times and cleanliness is a constant concern.  They also asked who is BEP's market, who does the BEP want to serve, what is BEP's definition of catering and how is BEP looking at operations.  Ms. Zanger stated that a follow up meeting will be scheduled to answer these questions and get this project on schedule.

 

          Commissioner Posont stated that Ms. Zanger was accurate in her review of the meeting but he sees this is slipping through the cracks with the delays and in the meantime BEP operators are losing money.  

 

          Ms. Zanger stated that she sees this catering training as a credential for licensees, allowing operators to compete with other caterers, understanding what catering means, what their individual capabilities are and helping them obtain the skills to compete with the private sector.  Director Cannon added that the idea for catering certification came from Mr. Greg Keathley, an operator and staff are moving in this direction with the involvement of the full EOC.  He also stated that staff recognizes that catering is a terrific opportunity and although not all operators want to provide catering, MCB can provide training and certification for those operators who want to grab that opportunity.  

 

Cafeteria Certification Memo

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked Ms. Zanger if the EOC had active participation in the creation of this policy and if not then the Board wanted to send the policy back.  Ms. Zanger replied that this was created with the full involvement and active participation of the EOC and it is before the Board for final approval. 

 

          Discussion included an operator who chooses not to become cafeteria certified taking an opportunity away from an operator who is certified; Ms. Zanger stated that these cafeteria's are available on the bid line for two weeks for cafeteria certified operators only, before opening up to all operators for bid.  Commissioner Scott asked if different cafeterias required different types of training; Ms. Zanger replied that cafeteria training is standard.  

 

          Commissioner Posont asked Ms. Zanger about a scenario of a person who was an operator, has a hospitality degree and they are being denied being a vendor and denied the opportunity to be recertified.  He stated that this person, Mr. Terry Eagle, is being denied for political reasons and yet has more certification than what the MCB program offers.  Commissioner Schuck asked that by the December meeting something in this situation has changed.  Commissioner Scott suggested that this be an item on the next agenda.   

 

posont moved The three year period commences with the first cafeteria and continues whether or not the operator changes locations subject to the approval of the eoc; schuck seconded

 

Discussion:   There was none.

 

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

POSONT MOVED TO ACCEPT MS. ZANGERS REPORT; SCOTT SECONDED.

 

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Board Remand Order - Ron Fellows

 

          Mr. Tom Warren, Assistant Attorney General stated that the Ron Fellows case was the subject of a Board meeting in July 2010 and a review of the minutes and the audio of that meeting disclosed that the ALJ recommendation was presented and the Board did not agree with the recommendation that the issue be deemed moot or that the Board adopt a recommendation that staff had addressed the issue of competition in the Cadillac Place.  In July 2010 the Board remanded the issue back to the ALJ for consideration of the issue for damages.  

 

          Commissioners discussed what happened when the previous Board members considered this and Commissioner Scott noted that there were questions about possible damages being awarded.  Mr. Warren stated that because of the particulars of this case the staff does not have clear guidance on how to proceed with regards to these issues: re-litigate or is there a position to be taken on damages.   Mr. Warren suggested that the core issue, and for future clarification, the Board ask for an opinion on its ability to award monetary damages at all.  Commissioner Schuck stated that it is her understanding that the Board needs to stay out of the position of awarding damages.  Commissioner Posont added that under the Randolph Sheppard Act there is no provision for awarding damages.  Commissioner Scott asked Mr. Warren for his recommendation, but Mr. Warren stated he could not make a recommendation to the Board and shared that the Attorney General's office would be happy to take action on any request made to clarify the issue.  

 

Schuck Moved that the Board request that we request a memorandum of opinion of the order given by the Commission on the legalaties from the attorney generals office on the boards authority on THE Ron Fellows matter; seconded by Scott

 

Discussion:  Commissioner Scott pointed out that in the motion what needs to be asked is that the Attorney General comment on the issues raised with the actions of the Board.  The Board worked on rewording the motion.  

 

Schuck moved that the Board request a memorandum of legal advice be given by the Attorney Generals office of the issues raised by the decisions made by the Board on the Ron Fellows case; SECONDED BY SCOTT.

 

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Administrative Law Judge Recommendation - Sheila Stelmach

 

SCHUCK MOVED TO ACCEPT THE ALJ RECOMMENDATION IN THE STELMACH CASE; POSONT SECONDED.

 

Discussion:  Commissioners asked that Ms. Luzenski read the ALJ recommendation.  Discussion included does that say that Ms. Stelmach gets a priority bid.  Ms. Luzenski clarified, according to the ALJ, that Ms. Stelmach gets a "priority bid for a facility location that she qualifies for."  Commissioner Posont questioned the ease of tracking the points system and if the system was working.  Commissioner Scott stated that there were things that could have been done back in November of last year that could have avoided this situation altogether.  Commissioner Posont stated that he felt this is a control issue with the Agency, controlling vendors by controlling the points and the bid process.  The Board also discussed that Ms. Stelmach should be awarded the site and their options at this point.  

 

THE MOTION PASSED WITH SCHUCK AND POSONT VOTING AYE AND SCOTT VOTING NAY.

 

Elected Operators Committee Report (EOC)

          

          Mr. James Chaney was not on the line to give the Elected Operators report before lunch so was encouraged to call back in after lunch. 

 

          Commissioner Posont asked to be considered for the BEP/EOC Board liaison.  

 

Schuck moved for posont to be BEP/EOC liaison; scott seconded

 

Discussion:  There was none.

 

                   

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

          Commissioner Posont asked that his expenses be paid for his trip to the EOC meeting being held the next day in Grand Rapids.

 

 

Lunch Break:  12:18 p.m.

Reconvene:  1:19 p.m.

 

 

Public Comment - (Verbatim Transcript)

 

Mr. Joe Harcz:  Joe Harcz, uh, we have an issue of accountability of this agency overall.  It became very clear to the Board this morning that there are no remedies for the wrong actions of the Agencies.  If we look at the Stelmach case alone there are substantial violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and her right to get timely and accessible information done by the Agency, done by the EOC.  Then when the damage is done there's no repair, there's no remedy.  All of the, by the way, it is my belief that every past Board action on all the other, uh, ALJ decisions are invalid because until this one the Board didn't even get all of the exhibits.  Now we're talking about money for the BLAST conference, and I'll tell you where we can get the money, we can get it out of all the misspent money including thousands of dollars that went into the Lee's Inn before it was secured.  We can get it out of, you know, all the million of dollars of the legal settlements caused by certain parties, and, and the Director of this Agency.  We can get it from all the misspent actions.  There's also no accountability and the very core of this program is the VR program, the Title I program and yet, week in, week out everybody gets reports including people coming all the way to these meetings that they don't even get phone calls returned from the Agency.  Right from the point of application we're violating the Rehabilitation Act and our responsibilities as an Agency.  Where is the accountability for this and where's the justice and where is the remedy for all the people that have been wronged.  We need, there's a thing in the law that I'm sure John knows, about making people whole for violations of fundamental civil rights.  For violations of, of, of, due process.  Where are people being made whole, let alone where is this thing being repaired at the top.  We've heard, you know, major a, a, a, supervisors and others talk about the responsibilities of clients.  That's a key phrase word.  Where's the responsibilities, where's the accountability of the upper management of this organization for the actions that have gone on.  You know we've talked about the access rights and everything else, the ADA is 21 years old, well where's the responsibility, where's the accountability?  Why doesn't the Director of this agency at least fess up, and, and, apparently I haven't been doing my job very well.  For a long time, rather than diverting the responsibility and pointing fingers and blame.  You know, we often heard from the notes of the Director, you know that we should not have this soft bigotry of low expectations.  Well I have expectations of people that make a whole lot of money and, yes, they do hard work, or they can, some did.  But, but these are public paid employees and they have accountability for their actions.  We can't come up with money for, a, a, you know, this BLAST conference, but yet we can come up with $400 for an Xbox, you know to basically entertain people because, you know, they had to be in the Fetzer Center for a few weeks because we didn't have a transition, you know or a place to go from the Training Center.  What the heck?  Is this the Commission for the Blind?  I don't get it.  You know I want to touch on something else.  I think there's explosive discrimination and its fact based.  We have the last three PA's have one thing in common, they're all white males and they're all sighted.  Now I don't know whether they're competent or not, I don't know, I don't begrudge them, but the hiring practices and we have affirmative responsibility and affirmative requirements under the Rehab Act, we, we, can't find, we can't find qualified blind people to be PA's, qualified.. And maybe they might even be people of color and maybe they might even be a blind person who's a woman.  I think in the State of Michigan and around the country we likely could find somebody who's qualified to do that.  Thank you.

 

Ms. Carrie Bradley:  Hello, my name is Carrie Bradley.  First of all I want you all to keep my son, Matthew Bradley in your prayers, he leaves for Afghanistan on the 28th of September. You know I came to the Commission for the Blind because I was a woman, I was a child on the streets.  I got mislead by people in society.  I dropped out of high school, I had children out of wedlock but I went through the BEP program because Shawnese Laury-Johnson told me I could do better.  Well I went there and I was humiliated.  I was accused of doing a lot of things that my classmates did the same thing or worse and got away with it and now they have jobs and they have an income.  I went to college to become a cafeteria operator, I asked the Commission Board for a Braille mathbook, I still to this day haven't received it and my financial aid has been cancelled because I have 73 credits and I do not have the math to get a degree.  I stand before you today asking for your help.  I want a job because in the words of Martin Luther King "I have a dream", in the words of Barack Obama "I want to see change" and in the words of me "I want some fairness."  Be fair, be fair, would you please be fair.  Look into this case because nobody has given me anything (inaudible).  I was on the temporary operators list and James Hull told the Committee, the EOC Committee that I couldn't be trusted with that much, $87,000 in sales money.  But did he put that in writing.  (inaudible).  No one will tell me who's responsible for a bloody (inaudible)..they will not put it in writing.  I need 1,000 words because pictures do not do nothing for blind people.  Thank you.

 

Mr. Joe Sontag:  Hello, Joe Sontag again and I just have a few more things briefly to say about the BEP (inaudible).  If there's one thing remember among, uh, uh amongst anything else I've managed to blurt out here, it is that in my opinion and I believe that other's share this, that what's killing our program is not so much the changing expectations and desires of the Government employees that we largely serve, it's not so much the economic conditions that we're all dealing with, as bad as they are, what's killing this program and what's been killing it slowly for a number of years, in my opinion is the inconsistent enforcement of program rules.  I'll give you an example or two:  um, one relates to the rule that requires that an operator whose leaving a facility leaves the, uh, specified amount of inventory in the facility when they go.  Uh, past practice dictates that if the operator is short, that their not transferred until that shortage is repaid, either to that incoming operator or to the Agency as may be appropriate.  Now, just recently, uh within the, well within the last 9 months certainly we've seen a curious thing.  One operator is short significantly and is told that you're not moving.  Another operator is short approximately $1,400 and yet that operator skates on nothing more than a promise that the incoming operator will be repaid.  Now I'm getting conflicting reports on whether that repayment ever took place, but the fact is that, um, the fact is there is an uneven application of the rules.  And, um, I also have to say that I find it rather interesting, um that as, uh, as a member of the Business Enterprise Program, um, I find it rather interesting, that if I ask for basic information, public information about things that happen, about minutes, subcommittee and elected, meetings of the Elected Operators Committee and I do not get responded to, even though I know the BEP secretary, Lucy Edmonds, is one of the best, um I just have to wonder just what's going on.  What kind of, is there order in place by which all requests for information from anybody is being filtered?  What's happening?  There's no reason for anything to be kept under wraps when subcommittees meet and deliberate or when the EOC meets and votes and forms its recommendations.  We're all entitled to see that.  And yet, uh, it may be possible to eventually get to it if you're persistent enough, but I've got to wonder.  Um, and, uh, with that I'll turn it over.  Thank you very much.  

 

Commissioner Schuck:  I want to interject here that those of you who weren't here yesterday didn't see the discussion where my gentlemen friends, where between the three of us we arranged to give you 4 minutes, instead of 3.  We talked Larry down from 5, so you're all getting 4 minutes and I just want you to know that I was in favor of no limit at all and letting you talk.  But they got wiser heads for males and I'm happy about that.  But um, I just hate, you can (inaudible).  But anyway, just you get 4 minutes today.  

 

Mr. David Robinson:  Hello, my name is David Robinson, uh a couple comments to the Commissioners, um that might clarify a couple things.  As most of you know, um, I have a knowledge of the Business Enterprise Program and a number of years working inside the program so I know a little bit about the ins and outs of it and the rules.  Um, first of all, my question to the Commissioners is, maybe you should address it to the Agency at some point, when they were reviewed, in the Agencies report regarding the review of the two facilities that were, where the contracts were going to be postponed, that is the military installations, um, what about the other ones that are not viable operations as was directed by the EOC to look into.  They have 8 facilities, maybe on the bid line now and maybe one makes more than $75,000 in sales a year.  That $75,000 doesn't even equate to meeting the 120% of the prevailing Federal minimum wage requirement that would be a viable facility and yet, and yet the BEP in its wisdom decides well we're going to have another training class.  So now they're going to spend money training five new people to go into facilities that aren't viable, where they cannot make a living.  But that doesn't matter, as long as they fill the spot who cares whether they make a living or not, I guess is their position.  So I'd be very concerned about that, spending money on training people when there's no employment opportunity that's a real employment opportunity for them.  The other thing on the cafeteria issue I wanted to bring to your attention, in Michigan we are, you talk about your license as BEP Operator, within Michigan, as a, as a person certified to bid on facilities, you then get licensed to a facility.  If you do not have a facility you are not considered a licensed operator.  So, you, you have to have a facility in order to be considered a licensed operator.  So when you're talking about the cafeteria certification and it says in the rules it begins at the time you're licensed to the facility, then if you go to another facility you then become licensed to that facility.  So, starting the clock at one and keeping it going I don't think follows the rules as promulgated rules.  So that's just a comment of mine, but I would think it's a little bit of a, um, detail that you might not have.  And another thing quickly, is the loophole or idea of dealing with accommodation and reasonable accommodation, accessibility of communications and other materials in a format that you're allowed, that should be under the, uh, ADA, well the Agency always claims that they comply with the ADA, and lots of times I think they try to do that, often times they fail but even many parts of the State Government, including the Michigan Administrative Hearings System is in violation of the ADA.  

 

Ms. Mary Wurtzel:  I'm not disagreeing with you because you know a lot more about public comment than I do.  Um also it's about 60 years since I ran a BEP location, so I really don't know what's going on today.  Besides which I was told that things have gotten so hard since I ran a BEP location that there's no way that I would qualify to do it anymore.  But, I do want to mention, just in passing that I walked in and my location was private and I walked into that location because I wanted to find a job and I hadn't found one in a year and I didn't want to stay on SSI.  And, when I walked into my location, at that time 60 years ago, I was told that, that I would be permanently on SSI and that this location could not ever support me.  And I do want to mention Kevan Worley, who's the past president of the NFB Merchants, he talks about the location that's down in the basement, around the corner, down the hall and under the drain pipe. That's where mine was, by the way.  And I want to report to you that I made a very good living for a single person at that time and, uh, so I'm not saying Dave that you're wrong but I am, I do have to say that a lot happens, that I saw does depend on the great personality of the people who are running the BEP location and, um, we didn't have all the rules back then and, in fact, I'd still be in the program if we'd had a maternity leave program.  Now wouldn't you just love that?  But anyway, I just, uh, want to say that BEP from my time and Larry Posont and I were the first ones to be elected to the very first Operator Elected Committee and, uh, oh boy, unfortunately, BEP never totally changes.  I mean it's a wonderful program because it employs blind people but it has to be one of the most problematic programs to administer in the United States rehabilitation system. I'm just giving my hat off to my husband who did it for 20 years.  Thank you.

 

Mr. Fred Wurtzel:  Hi, this is Fred Wurtzel again, I want to start by, um, owning up to an error I made, no one will believe I really did this, but I did.  Mary wouldn't believe I'd make a mistake.  I wrote a, uh, a, in fact it was read here a little while ago as Board correspondence, a letter about the point system, or a, the a, financial form on the college policy.  I erroneously said that Donna Posont who wrote that, uh, little piece that was in that little blurb between her and King Nelson, um I erroneously said that she was receiving services because I heard that she was going to school and I did not confirm that with her so, um, for the reporters in the audience I did not follow up and confirm my sources and so that was bad reporting on my part.  Uh, she still as of last Friday, she met with her counselor again and still has not received, even though, the, uh, college has sent out that form on June 13, the Commission received it on June 29 as, one day ahead, she didn't control when the college sent it out because it was done as a batch, um, she had it in on time.  The fact that it couldn't be read by the Commission for the Blind has nothing to do with her.  She didn't format it, she didn't write it, she didn't compose it.  She didn't create the computer program that produced it, she had no involvement in it whatsoever, yet today, and she had until the 20th to withdraw from classes if they're not paid for, um, uh, she still hasn't gotten an authorization to go to school.  Um, so I want to correct that mistake that I made and, uh, I wish I could correct it in a better way by saying that everything is great and the person's very happy.  Um, not the case. Um, I could go on because I got a call last night about this, um, and there's even more to it.  It's really a sad thing the way the policies are being used to, um, to mistreat people, I guess you'd say.  Um, I think that, so that's on your agenda this afternoon.  I sure hope you get rid of that darn thing. Um, I just want to say for 25 million dollars, um, we should be able to do better.  That's all.  Thank you.  

 

Mr. Joe Sibley (via email):  Hello commissioners and colleagues, I regret not attending this meeting in person, but a project came up with our business that had to be taken care of today, which is good for us, but bad timing. I am writing this about 9:30 am and the streaming is not working very well so I am trying to catch what I can before I leave and will try to listen in as much as I can today.


As I have not been able to listen to all of the discussion this morning I don't know what the tone of the meeting has been so far. I am still concerned as I have expressed in the past that many in our community feel that the best way to address problems in this agency is a continuous stream of personal attacks against individuals and the agency itself. I don't always disagree with the issues raised by these people, but I have a serious problem with their tactics. The Michigan Commission for the Blind has too many outstanding people to be constantly publicly berated by the blind community. Are there problems? Of course, and we should speak out when there is an issue and work together as a community instead of adversaries to address those problems. I am concerned that the constant attacks and continuous FOIA requests, which is your legal right but cost many hours of staff time, will make it much more appealing to our state's administrators to change the agency's structure, or merge it with the general rehab agency and we all agree we don't want that. These attacks also cost us a wonderful dedicated board member, Jo Ann Pilarski, who served with dedication for many years giving her whole heart to the blind community. I'm sure that many in this audience may disagree with me, but I hope you will at least contemplate these thoughts.


Finally, changing gears here, I want to include a shameless plug for the 2011 MCBVI convention October 6-9 right there in Lansing. Highlights include a presentation on Apple products, a public party for everyone aboard the Michigan Princess, an opportunity for social workers to earn continuing education units, and our special guest, Mitch Pomerantz, president of the American Council of the Blind. Our convention welcomes everyone, call Casey or Sharon at 877-254-6393 for information. By the way you don't have to attend the convention to join us on the riverboat.


I wish all of you a productive day. Let's all work together to make Michigan a great place to be if you are blind or visually impaired!


Joe Sibley

President

Michigan Council of the Blind and Visually Impaired (MCBVI)

 

Ms. Deb Wilde (via email):  Hello,


I normally do not get a chance to listen to the Commission board meetings due to my work schedule. I had a chance today, however. 

 

I am listening on my computer to today's morning session. I can tell microphones are being used, but everyone sounds so far away and faint. My speakers are at 100%, yet, even holding a speaker to my ear, I cannot pick up all that is being said. Could someone closely monitor the audiostreaming using headphones? I feel this might be an excellent solution.

Consumer in Grand Rapids, MI         

 

Ms. Deb Wilde (via email):  It is about 10:40 a.m. Thank you for the improvements you have made. I can hear better on my computer. My speaker volume is still up all the way though.  Can more volume be added? Or will that distort things?

Consumer from Grand Rapids, MI

 

Ms. Deb Wilde (via email):  Hello,


As of shortly after noon, I am very pleased to report that the audiostreaming quality has remained consistently good for some time. Thank you very much. 

Consumer in Grand Rapids, MI

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked that, per discussion yesterday, public comment be included in the minutes verbatim.

 

Ms. Kathleen Armstrong (via phone):  My name is Kathleen Armstrong and, um, my husband has facility #39 and, um, uh, I wanted to make it clear, the Commissioners had a question earlier, the current operator Mike Goodison knew of the fact that, um, he, uh, the location was under dispute.  Mike Goodison 100% knew that #39 was under dispute.  My husband told him several weeks before it even got to any hearing and, um, talked to him personally and he said that he didn't care when he heard that it was under dispute.  That's my public comment.

 

Repeated public comment due to poor audio quality:  My name is Kathleen Armstrong and my husband did have facility #39.  What I wanted to make clear to the Commissioners is that the current operator Mike Goodison, he did know before he inventoried in to facility #39, he knew 100% full well that there was a dispute, he knew before it got to any hearing it was under dispute.  And when my husband told him personally that it was under dispute he said he didn't care.  That's my public comment.

 

Ms. Sheila Stelmach (via phone):  When I filed my bid for facility #39, the current operator that was awarded that facility knew that there was (inaudible) and I offered a temp operator for Grayling facility and (inaudible).  I think that what happened to me is injust and I intend to take it as far as I can take it because I was unlawfully forced out of upward mobility, I have been sitting here waiting to inventory somewhere and I'm still making no money and I was told yesterday by Chris Elliott that if I was to call the Agency, the BEP, uh, Agency and tell them that I was to agree to stay in Alpena until the end of January that they would probably inventory me in immediately.  Now that to me states the fact of what I said before, they're trying to hold me back, they're strong arming me in Alpena.  And that's the end of my public comment.

 

Commissioner Schuck:  I missed that, you said that if you would stay in Alpena until January, then what?

 

Sheila Stelmach:  I said that I would stay in Alpena until January, that's what Chris Elliott told me, that if I was to call the agency and tell them that I would agree to stay in Alpena and add Alpena as a satellite to the Cadillac facility until the end of January, that they would probably inventory me in to the Cadillac facility immediately.  Once again,  they were strong arming me to stay in the Alpena facility because there was no other operator that wants that facility, because it's not making any money and I, as a blind operator, do not want to give up a facility because it's hard enough as a blind operator to obtain a facility and keep them.  And to be, for me to say I want to (inaudible), I can't, there's no money there.  If they would have given me Grayling facility which is what I bid on recently I would have been more than happy.  Grayling is about (inaudible).  Cadillace(inaudible).  I would have been more then happy to keep Alpena as a satellite to Grayling.  #39.  The Agency has done nothing for me.  When I had payroll that I had to meet of $27,000 the Agency told me that's the cost of doing business because I had a 30 day lag in pay.  Thank you very much and I appreciate you letting me do public comment.  Please take this into consideration.  

 

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES REPORT

 

Consumer Services Report

 

          Mr. Leamon Jones, Consumer Services Director shared updates on things that have happened since the MCB report was written.  MCB had its first client successfully complete the Project Search program, a one year training program for clients with multiple disabilities who have completed high school.  He also reported on the Client Internship Program, which had 37 individuals participating, all gaining valuable work experience throughout the State.  He added that ten of those individuals were hired to permanent jobs, in addition to many of the on-the-job training participants who were gainfully employed.  Mr. Jones also shared that Penske Automotive marketing, DTE and Henry Ford Group have expressed interest in employing clients.  

 

          Mr. Jones reported on the summer transition programs which had 110 participants throughout the state.  He highlighted the college prep program, one of the largest with 15 clients and the Summer Work Opportunity Program (SWOP), which provides the opportunity for clients to work up to 30 hours per week with a Business Enterprise Program operator.  He added there has been discussion with BEP staff to extend the SWOP program to a year round opportunity for clients.  

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked where funds come from to pay the clients wages.  Mr. Jones provided a breakdown of where the funds come from, explaining that the Agency provides a significant portion of the wages from its budget and the operator pays the remainder.  He added that some of the details were still to be worked out about transportation during the school year for school age participants if the program was expanded.

 

Alternative Formats for Clients

 

          Mr. Jones also spoke about how staff communicates with the clients served and how staff identifies a clients preferred format, which is a question on the application.

 

Transition Coordination for Youth

 

          Another question Mr. Jones answered was how was transition coordinated throughout the State?  He replied, this is done with school transition specialists throughout the State and the Youth Transition Program was a catalyst for forming relationships with specialists and school districts.  Commissioner Schuck asked what the policy was for counselors attending IEP meetings.  Mr. Jones stated that staff is encouraged to attend as many IEP's as possible for transition aged youth, particularly for the the exit IEP.  He discussed other scenarios including the need to have more advance notice of IEP meetings and parents nights being held in school districts for staff and parents to meet.

 

State Plan

 

          Mr. Jones reported that the State Plan has been approved by RSA for 2012 and amendments for 2013 will begin and staff will be looking to Commissioners for input.  

 

          Commissioner Posont asked for a report on all transition programs that have been held, how many participants there were, where they were held, what the cost was and detail on all the transition programs.  

 

          Mr. Jones gave an accounting of how many participants there were for each summer program:

 

          College Prep:                         15

          Camp Daggett:                      14

Summer in the City:              22

Career Club:                          5

SEE program:                        12

Detroit Summer Program:    20

Macomb Program (2):           8 and 7

Blindness without Barriers:  3

 

          Director Cannon stated that all the information being asked for was available, had been sent out in press releases and could be gathered in a report.  He also added that there is a value for providing diversity and choices for clients. 

 

College Policy

  

          Mr. Jones reported that the college policy, which was approved in August 2010 was to be reviewed after one year of its full implementation.  He went on to add that because of the approval so late in the year, the policy was not able to be fully implemented until January 2011.  Discussion included difficulties with the needs assessment form, SSI and SSDI benefits, MCB staff working directly with the school on the form, leaving the students to deal with day to day issues of attending college, holding the student harmless from filling out the form and eliminating the form.

 

schuck Moved to amend the college policy so that staff is responsible for obtaining any information needed beyond what is in the college student worksheet, case file and the FASFA form, to be reviewed in a year and the student will be held harmless; scott seconded

 

Discussion:  There was no discussion.

 

THE MOTION PASSED WITH SCHUCK AND SCOTT VOTING AYE AND POSONT VOTING NAY.

 

          Commissioner Posont asked Mr. Jones if a policy existed for when a staff person leaves for any length of time.  Mr. Jones responded that the normal practice is that the staff person and their manager would notify the caseload by email or regular U.S. mail what the circumstances are and who the staff contact person will be during the staff absence.  Director Cannon added that there is a staff procedure, this is a management issue and a common courtesy that is expected to be followed by all staff.  Commissioner Scott asserted that since this is evidently a management issue, the adoption of a policy was not needed to address it.

 

Training Center Report

 

Training Center Renovation Update

 

          Ms. Christine Boone, Training Center Director updated attendees on the renovation taking place at the Training Center. She reminded everyone that there was an extensive assessment done in early 2009 that assisted in identifying construction needs including a new HVAC system and generator, each dorm room having private bathrooms, both apartments being located in the dormitory area, all water and sewer lines being replaced and kitchen renovations.  She added that new furniture is being added to some existing equipment and furniture.  Ms. Boone reported that occupancy is expected to take place in mid to late December and carpeting and modular furniture will be installed before that time.

          Commissioners asked what the projected construction costs for this project are.  Ms. Boone replied $4.5 million dollars made up of grant money, matching funds and ARRA money.  Commissioner Posont asked if the whole center is being carpeted and Ms. Boone stated that there are limited areas being carpeted.  

 

Technology Center

 

          Ms. Boone introduced Dave Bowden, who is a teacher at the Training Center and heavily involved with Shig Toda in the technology area.  She and Mr. Bowden reported that there have been Apple products received, computers, Braille displays and Braille embossers for the new Technology Center.  She added that $220,000 in audio visual equipment has been ordered also including creating videos for students to take home of themselves.  All equipment will be fully accessible. 

 

          Ms. Boone reported on an upcoming student outing including a zoo visit which will allow the students to handle animals.

 

          Commissioner Schuck asked Ms. Boone to speak with staff about innovative programming options which would make the Training Center unique and build self esteem for blind people and report in December about this topic.  Specifically, Commissioner Schuck asked Ms. Boone to discuss bringing the marksmanship class back to the Training Center.  Commissioner Posont supported this request and stating that it is important for the Training Center to foster confidence building and find a niche.  Director Cannon stated that he and Christine have had a conversation in regards to reinstating the marksmanship class and during that conversation Ms. Boone ensured Director Cannon that neither she nor staff was planning on pursuing reinstating the marksmanship class.  He reiterated that the agency administration and LARA administration does not and would not support reinstatement of the class.  Director Cannon also noted that he and Ms. Boone have had conversations about all the things the Center does that provide a confidence boost to students.  Ms. Boone said that she does not have any plans to reinstate the Marksmanship class and staff does not either.  Ms. Boone stated she will talk to staff and discuss program ideas that could be considered for confidence building.  

 

          Ms. Luzenski reported that financial coverage has been secured for the BEP operators' trip to the BLAST conference.  She expressed thanks to Valerie Barnum-Yarger of the Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC) for providing financial means and to Al Pohl for considering this option and approving it.  

 

Administrative Services Report

 

          Ms. Elsie Duell, Administrative Services Manager asked Commissioners if they had any questions about the written report they received in the Board packet.  

 

          Questions and discussion centered on the budget process, an explanation of how money is encumbered and spent, grant money spending and carrying money forward into the next fiscal year.  Mr. Jones provided an explanation of how college tuition is paid for.  Commissioner Posont expressed concern about the amount of money being carried forward year to year and case service dollars are not being spent.  

 

Director's Report

 

          Mr. Pat Cannon, Director referred Commissioners to the written report and highlighted the NCSAB conference being held in Chandler Arizona in October which will include RSA Commissioner Lynnae Ruttledge speaking about the Workforce Incentive Act (WIA) Reauthorization which includes the reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act.  This conference will also include discussions on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) money, which helped to fund one of MCB's most successful programs, the Client Internship Program.  The Client Internship Program had 37 participants and either 9 or 11 of those clients have secured permanent employment.  He added that a side benefit of the Client Internship Program is that it has allowed employers to see first hand that blind people are productive in the workplace and can work side by side with their sighted counterparts.  

 

          Director Cannon also highlighted the two consumer conventions coming up in October and November, MCBVI in Lansing and NFB in Kalamazoo.  He also briefly reported about the Federal Communications Commission reinstating the order for the primetime TV networks to provide a certain percentage of scheduled programming to be audio described.  

 

Lastly, Director Cannon noted the latest mini adjustment program that was just held was the largest class, with 59 participants. 

 

          Commissioner Posont asked about FTE's that are currently open.  Director Cannon replied that there are several open FTE's spread amongst counselors, support staff and the Training Center.  Commissioner Schuck asked if most of the student interns were working for the State.  Director Cannon stated there were a number working directly for the Commission then detailed to other entities within State Government as well as some that were placed outside of State Government.  He added that the internship program participant opportunity will end on September 30. 

 

Vice Chair 

 

          Commissioner Schuck informed attendees that during the previous days meeting there was a change to the Bylaws that stated in the absence of a Chair the Vice-Chair assumes the powers that are assigned to the Chair.  

 

SCHUCK MOVED TO APPOINT LARRY POSONT TO BE VICE CHAIR; SCOTT SECONDED

 

Discussion:  Commissioners asked Commissioner Posont if he would accept this.  

 

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

          Commissioner Posont thanked Commissioners.

          

New Business

 

          Commissioner Schuck stated Newsline, which was in the MCB budget the previous year under Innovative Programs, has been approved by the RSA Commissioner to be funded with rehab dollars.

 

SCHUCK MOVED THAT THE COMMISSION FUND NEWSLINE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS AND IT BE REASSESSED AT THAT TIME AND THE FUNDING GO DIRECTLY TO THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND; SCOTT SECONDED.

 

Discussion:  Commissioner Posont commented on the motion and noted that he would be abstaining from the vote in order to emphasize there is no conflict of interest with the Commission's funding support of NFB Newsline, even though he is the State President of NFB of Michigan.  He added that he declared his NFB affiliation when he sought appointment to the Commission and everyone knew it.  In order to ensure that no conflict exists, MCB funding should go to the NFB national office in Baltimore, not to the Michigan address.

 

Commissioner Posont said that if MCB staff used the Newsline program related to jobs, clients can go on newsline, get the information, work with their counselors to get the proper documentation into the computer system.  It's potentially there to make many jobs available.  He stated that he hasn't personally done it, but knows of people who have gone onto Newsline and found 200 jobs within 30 miles of Lansing.  He urged attendees to get out there and try it as the potential is great and it's up to each person who wants the job. 

 

Commissioner Posont again stated that he wants the appearance of conflict of interest cleared away that is why he didn't second the motion.  He doesn't want a conflict, he doesn't want the agency to have a conflict and he stated he needs Newsline because blind people need it.  He shared that Newsline will help give the Agency the best service to blind citizens of Michigan and because of all of the Newsline users in the room there could almost be an accusation that all attendees would be in a situation of conflict of interest.  Commissioner Posont expressed his amazement about some of the features of Newsline and all the cool things it can do.  

 

Commissioner Posont finished by asking that if anyone has a question about conflict to please bring it to him and he will meet it head on, because he doesn't want a conflict he wants this service for blind people because it is very important.

 

Director Cannon stated that he is a fan of Newsline and a user and the Commission was pleased to provide the $20,000 to fund Newsline one year ago.  He clarified when MCB has provided funding for Newsline payments were sent to NFB of Michigan.  He also said the Department will consider this a grant as it did with MCB's initial support in 1999.  Commissioner Posont stated that no one is currently paying for Newsline and they are trying to keep it on right now, but it will eventually go off.  Director Cannon sought approval from the Director's office to provide another $20,000 a couple months ago towards Newsline and it was denied.  He said once the motion is passed he would forward it to the Department.  He also added that perception of conflict had been raised and will most likely be raised again.  Commissioner Posont again stated that he is trying to remove the perception of conflict of interest.  Commissioner Schuck asked the Director to make it clear the monies are being paid to the National organization and not to the State chapter.  Director Cannon indicated he would.

 

THE MOTION PASSED WITH SCOTT AND SCHUCK VOTING AYE; POSONT ABSTAINED.

 

Adjournment

 

                   POSONT MOVED TO ADJOURN; SCOTT SECONDED.

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

The meeting adjourned at 4:04.

 

_____________________________       ______________________

­­­­­­­­­­­­­                                                                   Date:



 

Attachments:

 

June 21, 2011

 

To MCB Commission Board:

 

I feel I need to reply to the statements that were made by Mr. Larry Posant. I began receiving services through the services for the Blind which is now Michigan Commission for the Blind in 1973.  The services provided me with training and an education as it has done for many of the people who are now serving on the Commission Board and attending the commission meetings.  I have worked for the Michigan Commission for the Blind for 11 years as a Rehabilitation counselor, during my time as an employee at the MCB I have seen consumers become independent in their skills and leave the Center to attend college, return to work, return to their homes and totally care for themselves.  We realize we are public servants and our job is to enable our clients to be independent and responsible people.  I did not realize that anything had changed in the past 18 months. I would like Mr. Posant to clarify his statement and I would like to know when he has visited the Center within the last 18 months.  

 

I think the Commission Board should be made up of both consumer groups and consumers of the State of Michigan.  It appears that the Board consists of complainers that have retired and having nothing better to do but cause havoc and confusion.  If the Board can not change for the good, then just disburse the board altogether.  At this time it is not benefiting anyone, it is just causing hard feelings and division. 

  I have noticed some of the people attending the meetings have in the past received quality training and education provided to them by MCB funded with state and federal dollars.  These people although they have been provided with training and college education have decided not to work and give back to the state some dollars, but are continually taking tax dollars, living on SSI and SSDI.  It seems they do not have anything good to say, but are always negative and demanding.  To those persons, I say it is about time you decided to get out and become employed and pay back some tax dollars instead of complaining and finding ways to needlessly complain and spend more tax dollars.

 

All blind people have a voice that should be heard not just from one group of people.  I think that Mr. Posant and all those that have criticized Mr. Pat Cannon, MCB and MCBTC staff should apologize to us and think about the feelings of others and not think they are the brains and voice for all blind persons.  Please stop the slander of the MCB director and staff.  Why has the Commission Board meetings become a battle ground instead of an advisory board?  I feel at this time there are too many negative people serving on the Commission Board and that needs to change. 

 

 

 

 

I would like to know how it is that people who have not visited the Training Center can make a statement that there has been no training taking place at the Center. The staff are very capable people who have the experience and intelligence to work towards successfully training the consumer to be totally independent.  With the excellent leadership of Sherri Heibeck as Director and Bruce Schultz as the Assistant Director, the MCBTC staff was quite capable of continuing to provide an excellent service to our consumers.  

 

I feel that the slanderous statements that are being telecast is a slap in the face to Director Pat Cannon, MCB staff, MCBTC staff and also to the citizens of the State of Michigan who may feel that their tax dollars are being wasted on the blind population.  At this time, the Commission Board is making unprofessional statements and they appear to be totally ignorant to the training that is taking place at MCBTC.  If there is concern about Training going on at MCBTC, please take the time to visit.

 

Thank you,

 

 

 

Faith Meadows

269-337-3855 (work)

269-353-3569 (home)

 



Fred J. Wurtzel

1212 N. Foster Avenue

Lansing, MI  48912

 

September 10, 2011

 

Dear Commissioners:

I just read, with interest, the agenda for the upcoming Commission meeting.  I was happy to see the college policy on there.  As you may know, the Commissioners passed the college policy last year and promised to review it in a year.  Well, a year has passed.  The board is being responsible and keeping its promise.  I commend you.

 

I cannot comment on all aspects of whether the policy is working as well as hoped.  I can say, without a doubt, the supplemental financial form portion of the policy is not working.  I have 2 nearly identical examples of the extreme and mindless enforcement of this superfluous and unnecessary policy in my possession.  I am only at liberty to share 1 example, but, this is more than sufficient to demonstrate the point.  I wish I could say that both examples were limited to 1 counselor or regional office.  Each was from a different regional office.  I have also heard a verbal report of yet another similar case in yet another regional office, though, unlike the other 2, I do not have written documentation... If these individuals have had the courage to risk reprisals from -MCB and report these problems, I can only conjecture there are others who are too intimidated to speak up.  The intimidation is real, palpable and demonstrated below.

 

As a member of the Consumer Involvement Council, I brought this up in our meeting this past week.  Leamon Jones came into the meeting to discuss the issue.  I suggested that the form is not necessary for eligibility or to determine whether Commission support of a student is otherwise legal.  Mr. Jones did not disagree with this.  I said that if the Commission wanted such a form, it is fine; just take the student out of the loop.  The student is not needed to accomplish the goal of collecting information from the college.  Also, the student has no control over whether the college completes the form, accurately completes the form or returns the form in a format that the Commission deems acceptable, yet as the example below demonstrates, the student is held responsible for the performance of the college with possible jeopardy to their ability to make progress toward their academic goal.

 

Mr. Jones said it is good for students to be responsible for their relationship with MCB and asked me whether I thought students have a responsibility in their college endeavors.  I told him that, yes, they do.  I reiterated that this form is unnecessary and thus is not a reasonable cause to keep a student from attending college. He opined that it is "good for a student" to be responsible and do things for themselves.  I replied that this is paternalistic nonsense."

 

If the Commission is going to paternalistically require students to do things that are "good for them," just because they are good for them, then students ought to be required to get to bed early, study for exams, turn in all homework on time, not drink alcohol or at least not in excess, not smoke, eat a healthy diet, get lots of exercise and so on.  Except for whether the form is returned on time, this form will not change whether MCB provides service or not. Further, it asks about Social Security benefits.  I remind you that MCB may not use Social Security benefits to pay for rehabilitation services, so it is unclear why such information is included.  Furthermore, this information is provided in the intake process, since SSI and SSDI clients are automatically eligible for rehabilitation services.

  The FASFA form also provides similar information

 

Here is a small portion of the interchange between the student and her counselor.  The entire chain of emails is very long and includes the allegedly incomplete document from the University of Michigan in Dearborn.  I will happily supply the entire document upon request.  It has been published on the MCB 2020 list and the NFB of Michigan list.  An excerpt is printed below:

 

". . .>> Hello Mr. Jones, It remains confusing to me that your agency is even 

>> called the Michigan Commission for the Blind. I have met with 

>> Continual resistance from Mr. Nelson since he has become my counselor 

>> In the spring of 2010.

>> This

>> is the third time that he has told me that I may not attend my next 

>> Semester at the University of Michigan Dearborn. I have continually 

>> asked him if we could work on the same team to obtain my educational 

>> success so that I may become gainfully employed. I am not able to 

>> attend school full-time because of family responsibilities. If he 

>> were to become interested in my education he would find out that I am 

>> scheduled to take Environmental Education this fall. This class is 

>> required for my Environmental studies degree. It will not be offered 

>> Again for two years. I was on track to graduate in the spring of 2013.

>> However, it will now take another year because once a student is a 

>> Senior as I am required classes are not offered each semester and in 

>> my school of study some are offered every two years. I will comply 

>> with his order for me to not attend school this fall. However, I 

>> believe it is not sound financial planning or a good use of Michigan 

>> resources. In conclusion I believe that it would be more accurate to 

>> say that I am a client of the Michigan Commission Against the Blind. 

 

 

> 

>>> Hi Donna,

>>> I nor my secretary cannot open this email to access the information 

>>> I need which is the financial letter )award or denial letter) for 

>>> fall 2011. I must have access to print copy today. Email me copy of 

>>> a printed letter in "word" attached so that I can print it out by 

>>> today. If I do not have it  by 5 p. m. today, I cannot support you 

>>> for the fall 2011 and you Will have to have your letter to me by 

>>> november 1, 2011 for the winter.  I have informed Mr. Leamon Jones 

>>> about this and he is aware of this.  Thank you.

>>. . ."

 

As can be observed, above, the client is very frustrated.  You can also observe that the Commission was in possession of the financial information from the college.  You can also tell that Leamon Jones was aware of the plight of the student.  To me it is inexcusable to put a student through this for no gain.  Fortunately this student publicized this mistreatment and through intervention she was, to my knowledge, eventually provided service.

 

I say there is no gain in requiring any student to jump through a hoop of submitting a form to a college and hoping the college will return the form on time and, apparently, in a required format for the Commission to show that the student was being "responsible."  Again, I want to be clear, if MCB feels this form is beneficial in some way, and they wish to use precious staff time collecting and processing the information, instead of returning client's phone calls,  then, have at it.  I call upon you, the Commission Board, the entity that adopted the policy, to fix this unjust and abusive portion of the policy and allow students to be responsible for the important work of getting good grades, graduating and getting a job.

 

In conclusion, aside from eliminating the requirement for the form from the college policy, I, again, strongly suggest that you, as a board, stop using your limited meeting time receiving meaningless and self-promoting verbal reports from the staff.  Such reports may be made in writing.  Instead, I respectfully suggest you use your time to meet with consumers, staff and MCB administration to constructively determine how to reform the MCB to eliminate such paternalistic, bullying and intimidating policies and practices and to provide staff training that puts customers ahead of bureaucracy, oh and by the way get jobs for blind people.  

 

An example of the impotent nature of the administration was reflected in comments from Bob Robertson.  He said in a discussion of the lack of return phone calls from agency staff that this has been an identified complaint from consumers for years.  He said no one knows how to get counselors or others to call customers back within 48 hours.  There is 1 term that will address this - data-driven, humane expectations of accountability from top management to include all staff.  This begins with the Commission Board holding the Director accountable for these issues.  

 

Blind people are citizens, not subjects.  Blind people shall not be bullied and kept in a submissive and dependent role.  To me, it is clear from the example above; the MCB has no means beyond bullying and intimidation to guide its training or administration of programs for blind people.  I truly hope you can use whatever time you can to develop a clear vision and philosophy for MCB and implement a serious training program to accomplish these goals.

 

 

From: Elizabeth [lizmohnke at hotmail.com]

Sent: Monday, September 12, 2011 9:25 PM

To: larry Posont; JOHN SCOTT; laschuck at juno.com

Cc: Luzenski, Sue (LARA)

Subject: Board Correspondence college policy 

 

Attachments: College Student Worksheet (2).doc

 

Dear Commission Board,

 

They say that the only thing constant in life is change, but in most cases, it is not uncommon for us to resist change. Therefore, I greatly appreciate the work you are doing to forge a path of change within an agency that seems to be resistant to change. Specifically, I greatly appreciate the fact that you are willing to uphold a decision made by the previous Commission Board by taking the time to review the college policy after a year of its adoption. I commend you for keeping this promise to ensure students receive the best possible services from the Michigan Commission for the blind.

 

Since staff administrators took a considerable amount of time to receive input from students and consumers, we had high hopes that the agency would keep the promises it made during the formation process. However, we feel let down by the agency, as it does not appear as though they have kept these promises. We are particularly disappointed with the misuse of the new financial needs form. I have attached a copy of this form for your convenience.

 

Throughout the formulation process, students and consumers were promised that the new financial needs form would not create a means test for college students. We were also promised that the parent's assets would not be used to determine how much a student could contribute to the cost of the student's education. And finally, we were promised that students would not be asked to financially participate in the cost of receiving services from the Michigan Commission for the Blind if they received Social Security benefits including Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). However, it seems as though the new financial needs form they have chosen to use breaks all of these promises.

 

First, it asks the college to list all financial resources available to the student. These resources include the Expected Family Contribution, Pell grants, other grants and scholarships, need based loans, and work study programs. In most cases, the Expected Family Contribution is based on the financial resources of the parents along with the financial resources of the student. Since most blind students cannot afford to pay the Expected Family Contribution on their own, they most likely will need to turn to their parents to provide them with this financial resource that the Michigan Commission for the Blind will not provide.

 

The form then asks the college to add all of these financial resources together, and then subtract the amount it will cost for the student to attend the college or university. The form calls this figure the student's unmet need. It appears as though this figure is used by the Michigan Commission for the Blind to determine how much financial assistance they will give to a student.

 

If room and board is provided by the college or university, the form states that it is important for this to be indicated on the form as it helps the Michigan Commission for the Blind to "properly plan" services with students who receive Social Security benefits. Although it does not directly state this on the form, it would appear as though the Michigan Commission for the Blind is looking to use the student's Social Security benefits to help pay for room and board. Asking students to use their Social Security benefits to pay for rehabilitation services is in violation of the Rehabilitation Act.

 

I understand this may sound rather confusing, but in the end, it seems as though the use of this new form only hurts the student. If you notice, the agency is asking the college to provide them with this information, and not the student. If the college or university fails to submit this form by a specific deadline, the student will not receive any financial assistance from the Michigan Commission for the Blind. This means that the student is punished by actions that are no longer within their control. I do not believe this practice serves the best interest of the student, and I call upon you to continue to uphold the promise you have made to blind students by eliminating the use of this new financial needs form.

 

Sincerely,

Elizabeth Mohnke

President, Michigan Association of Blind Students

 

 

 

 

I understand all of this may sound confusing, but there is a rather simple solution to this problem. As the Commission Board, you can continue to uphold your promise to college students by eliminating this unnecessary form from the college policy. In the end, it seems as though this form only hurts the student as it is the responsibility of the college or university to fill out this form. If the college or university fails to return the form to the Michigan Commission for the Blind by a specific deadline, the student will not receive any financial assistance for that particular semester. In short, the student is punished for not doing something that is beyond their control. I do not believe this serves the best interests of college students, and I ask you to




Fred J. Wurtzel

1212 N. Foster Avenue

Lansing, MI  48912

 

September 8, 2011

 

Dear Commissioners:

 

I have been asked by Consumer involvement Chair Phyllis Magbanua to write to you to report to you on a motion passed by the CIC during its September 15, 2010 meeting and ask for your support of this request from the CIC.  The CIC is a means of gathering information about relevant concerns of blind consumers of MCB along with other blind citizens of Michigan.    The motion relates to the CIC position that MCB fund Newsline for a 5 year period while permanent funding can be identified and put in place.  

 

As you are aware, Newsline provides a fully searchable array of more than 300 newspapers and periodicals, job listings and TV listings 24 hours per day, 7 days per week on demand.   Newsline serves more than 3,000 qualified blind people in Michigan via an ordinary telephone as a free service.  The service costs approximately $80,000 per year. This amount includes the cost of telecommunications to allow toll-free access to subscribers. Newsline currently provides 6 Michigan papers: The Detroit Free press, Detroit News, Flint Journal, Lansing State Journal, Grand Rapids Press and the Marquette Mining Journal.  It is desired to eventually provide the Traverse City Record-Eagle and the Kalamazoo Gazette to fully cover the various regions of Michigan.  Each additional paper costs $5,000 per year with a $10,000 initial set-up fee.

 

The Commissioner of Rehabilitation has sent a letter to all state vocational rehabilitation agencies approving expenditures of federal funds to provide Newsline services.  The MCB has provided $20,000 to partially fund Newsline for 2011.  This funding has expired and Newsline will be discontinued at any moment.

 

I would like to emphasize 1 major point.  Newsline now has job listings.    I just searched for all jobs within 30 miles of Lansing and Newsline returned 977 results.  (It is possible to limit searches to certain kinds of jobs.)  The first listing was for a professional manager with starting wages at $50,000.    It seems sensible for Michigan to provide this service just for the job listings.  In addition, the business sections of the papers offer priceless information about local developments which affect job-finding prospects for MCB customers.  The cost works out to less than $30 per subscriber per year.  This is less than the average cost of a local subscription to 1 hometown paper.  

 

Another useful service to MCB is the "Local Channel.  MCB regularly uses this service to publicize events and provide useful information to blind consumers.  This is particularly useful for those individuals who do not use computers for whatever reason, since it is simply accessed via their telephone.  The local channel is 1 more way to help meet Governor Snyder's goal of open and transparent government.

 

Now that the Braille and talking Book Library is housed in MCB, Newsline seems like a natural service addition and is consistent with the mission of the library to provide accessible information to blind and other persons with disabilities.

 

Thank you, Commissioners, for considering this vital and relevant request from the Consumer Involvement Council.  Your affirmative action on this request will significantly strengthen MCB's ability to carry out its mission of getting quality jobs for blind Michiganders.  This letter has not addressed the many benefits to older blind and other independent living customers of MCB who would also benefit greatly from this service.

 

Warmest Regards,

 

Fred Wurtzel

 

 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MCB 9 15 16 11 minutes.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 251392 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20111213/6e17148f/attachment.doc>