[nfbmi-talk] Fw: systemic ada t22 complaint accessable meetings program access and effective communications

Fri Jul 1 17:47:28 UTC 2011

----- Original Message ----- 
From: joe harcz Comcast 
To: Sally Conway USDOJ 
Cc: Steve Arwood LARA Dep ; Elmer Cerano MPAS ; TOM MASSEAU MPAS ; Jeanette Brown MI CAP ; Jo Anne Pilarski MCB, Chair ; Larry Posont MCB Comm. ; John Scott MCB Comm. ; lydia Schuck MCB Comm. ; Joe Sibley MCBVI Pres. ; Patrick Cannon MCB Dir. ; Jeanine Worden US DOJ ; Robin Jones ; Peter Berg ; Cecily Cagle MRC Chair ; Marlene Malloy MRC Dir ; Luke Zelley TDN ; Susan Fitzmaurice ; Farmer, Mel (DELEG) ; nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org 
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 1:46 PM
Subject: systemic ada t22 complaint accessable meetings program access and effective communications

This is again a part of a systemic complaint against the following state of Michigan entities:

-The Michigan Department of Technology Management and Budget

-The Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

-The Michigan Rehabilitation Services and Michigan Rehabilitation Council

-The Michigan Commission for the Blind

Note to all I am blind and require accessible digital information related to this complaint and all others in accordance with DOJ policies under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Any print correspondences to this or other complaints will be considered a violation. As for the State actors involved I also invoke the ADA, Title II, subpart e in these regards. I request that  any information is sent via simple e-mail as either conventional Word attachments or plain text enclosures. My goodness just what would happen if I asked for Braille?)

July 1, 2011

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI  48458

joeharcz at comcast.net

Cell: 810-516-5262

Re: accessible meetings in Michigan

To: United States Department of Justice, Civil rights Division, Disabilities Rights Section

(This stands as a complaint and partial documentation of a complaint under title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act)

All 

The attached procedure (after my signature line) was downloaded today, July 1, 2001 from the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs accessible meeting policy web site at:

http://www.michigan.gov/lara/0,1607,7-154-10573_35828_36119---,00.html

None of this and more have  been done and in fact at the last two and more meetings of the Michigan Commission for the Blind there were even substantial physical barriers denying people with disabilities “program access”. That was in the  Ottawa Building and the last at Constitution  Hall.

Aside from existing barriers identified in a Michigan Department of Technology Management and Budget survey  conducted  belatedly  in 2008 (of which I’ve forwarded to the DOJ and Great Lakes Technical Assistance Center among others) neither of these buildings have raised character and Braille signage in accordence with ADAAG 4.30.1 through 4.30.6. And Constitution Hall was built at least ten years after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

But, regardless even the rooms where the Michigan Commission for the Blind meetings took place had only flat signs with no raised character or Braille.

In fact a fully compliant  meeting cannot take place in this state except, perhaps in some University Buildings.

Moreover, effective communications of all materials (i.e. all information at the meetings) are not provided and indeed I have to try to get them  even draft minutes on a case by case and ad hoc basis which, by the way violates the affirmative obligations in Tyler v. Manhattan.

When will this state come into full compliance with the ADA, Title II and that includes the Michigan Commission for the Blind and the Michigan Rehabilitation Services and all entities holding ppublic meetings for people with disabilities including those of us who are blind?

Moreover, the attachment goes to the issue of Melvin Farmer related to the video recording of the June 17, 2011 Michigan Commission for the Blind which documents this and more and in which he as a State Actor didn’t even follow this but, rather wished to claim “undue hardship”. (Sent to Ms. Conway yesterday along with other violations of him and LARA, and MCB).

Regardless, all of this goes to show more than deliberate indifference to known laws and even internal guidance by this scofflaw state and I wish that the United States Department of Justice would enforce the long standing civil rights of this state’s persons with disabilities including those of us who are blind such as myself.

Sincerely,

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

Cc: Sally Conway, USDOJ

Cc: Steve Arwood, Deputy Director LARA

Cc: Patrick D. Cannon, Michigan Commission for the Blind

Cc: “Great Lakes TAC”

Cc: National Federation of the Blind of Michigan

Cc: Michigan Council of the Blind and Visually Impaired

Cc: Jaye Porter, MRS

Cc: Marlene Mally, MRC

Cc: MRC Members

Cc: Members Michigan Commission for the Blind Board

Enclosure:

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & ECONOMIC GROWTH 

ACCESSIBLE VIDEO PRODUCTION POLICY 

Effective date: 12/1/04 

 Background: 

 The Department of Labor and Economic Growth uses videos in communicating to internal 

and external audiences about its mission, programs, products and services. In keeping with 

Federal and State disabilities rights laws and the value of inclusion, it is the intent of this 

policy to standardize an approach to the production of video media. 

 POLICY: 

 VIDEO CAPTIONING AND AUDIO DESCRIPTION 

 1. All training and informational video recorded productions which support the 

agency’s mission*, regardless of format that contain speech or other audio 

information necessary for the comprehension of the content, shall be open or closed 

captioned. 

2. All training and informational video recordings which support the agency’s 

mission*, regardless of format, that contain visual information necessary for the 

comprehension of the content, shall be audio described. 

3. Display of presentation of alternate text presentation or audio descriptions shall be 

user-selectable unless permanent. 

4. The Office of Media Technology (OMT) is responsible for implementing this 

policy and will maintain procedures for producing, commissioning or otherwise 

procuring video media. Questions on this policy may be directed to Dave Callanan 

at (313) 456-2929. 

     * Note: Video recordings intended for internal investigative processes and/or 

documentation such as depositions, video recorded inspections, etc. are not 

included in the scope of this policy. 

  Approved: Line comment dinataleg

11/18/2004 12:58:51 PM

blank

 Dated:Line comment dinataleg

11/18/2004 12:59:00 PM

blank

             DLEG Procedures for procuring Accessible Videos 

 These procedures implement the Accessible Video Production Policy effective December 

1, 2004. Videos produced by the Department of Labor and Economic Growth will meet the 

policy. These procedures guide the use of pre-existing videos. These procedures will be 

revised and updated to reflect advancements in technology, experience and the state of the 

art. The following procedures for in-house produced closed captioning, audio description 

and pre-existing videos are as follow. 

  ?? Captioning 

  The customer/client provides a written script. 

  Captioning will follow industry norms. 

 In the event that the customer cannot provide a written script, the Office of Media 

Technology (OMT) will assist in working with the client to get a transcript. 

 Upon receiving the script from the customer the OMT will review the material for 

clarity and language. 

 Closed captioning will be provided using these materials. 

 A description of the availability of closed captioning, open captioning or audio 

description will be listed on the DVD or video. 

 Lack of equipment, or faulty equipment is not a reason to show inaccessible videos 

or DVD’s 

 The actual cost of captioning will be invoiced to the customer. 

  ?? Audio Description 

 Audio description (AD) should describe any visuals that significantly add to or 

enhance the message of the video. The OMT follows Audio Description 

International (ADI) standards and definitions, which state, in pertinent part: 

“Audio description is a means for providing access for people who are blind or 

have impaired vision. The purpose of audio description is to give people who are 

blind or have impaired vision a more complete picture of what is being shown, 

enabling them to appreciate and to share in the presentation as fully as a sighted 

person”. 

 The OMT will review and provide AD voice-overs to videos when necessary. AD 

voice-overs should only be present when there is no other audio narration on the 

video. Ideally, the AD voice-over should be performed by someone other than the 

person doing the regular narration on the video. 

 Audio description should be available on the Second Audio Program (SAP) 

channel. 

  ?? Audio Description 

 If audio description cannot be provided on the SAP channel, the audio description 

on the video should be “open”, or there should be an alternate video available with 

open audio description. 

 A description of the availability of closed captioning, open captioning or audio 

description will be listed on the DVD or video. 

 Lack of equipment, or faulty equipment is not a reason to show inaccessible videos 

or DVD’s 

  ?? Vendor Usage/ Pre-existing Videos 

 In the event a video is requested to be purchased, procured, rented or obtained 

through a contract facilitator for training purposes, job enhancement, guidelines 

and/or knowledge of duties, approval to obtain this video must come through the 

OMT. 

 The OMT will review the video with the client and make recommendations on the 

process needed for the video to comply with the current policy. 

 Example: If a client requests to use a video for an enhancement group 

or training session, they would first request approval from 

the OMT to use the video. If the OMT finds the video to be 

accessible it can be used. 

 If the video is not accessible OMT would review the video 

with the client and suggest changes needed. The OMT will 

contact the producers of the video to request the alterations 

for accessibility. 

 If the producer wants to make the alterations, the time frames 

for the completion of the project are decided. If accessibility 

cannot be achieved in the time frames desired by the client, 

then OMT will offer to make the changes. 

  If the producer refuses to make the changes and refuses to 

allow OMT to make the video accessible, then OMT will: 

 1. Advise the producer of the ADA and DLEG 

policy; 

2. 

Advise the client not to use the inaccessible 

video;

3. Advise the client of alternative means to 

present equivalent information in an 

accessible format and 

4. 

Inform the DLEG ADA coordinator of the 

actions. 

    ?? Vendor Usage/ Pre-existing Videos 

 If the client states that a small group of customers will view 

the video and no one requires accommodation for 

accessibility then a written request for approval must go to 

the DLEG ADA coordinator. 

 If the client refuses to comply with this policy a report will 

be made to the ADA Coordinator.