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

[joe harcz Comcast]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: "Worden, Jeanine (CRT)" <Jeanine.Worden at usdoj.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 2:39 PM
Subject: Re: systemic ada t22 complaint accessable meetings program access 
and effective communications


> Thank you. You can seethere are decades old and systemic violations of the 
> ADA, including program access issues in black and white documented here.
>
> I'm sorry to hear you are leaving the Department, but I sure in the heck 
> wish DOJ would once and for all intervene against the State of Michigan 
> which has systemically violated my rights as a blind man both in the 
> physical realm and in access to documents in alternate format even after 
> numerous and documented requests.
>
> It is long since time that the ADA was actually enforced on a State actor.
>
> Oh, yes note none of the identified barriers including those required by 
> ADAAG 4.30.1, 4, 5, and 6 have been removed. Those are the requirements 
> for raised character and Braille signage on every permanent room.
>
> Sincerely and Good Luck,
>
> (P.S. Please pass this on as well...
>
> Paul "Joe" Harcz, Jr.
>
> cell: 810-516-5262
> land: 810-686-2673
>
> e-mail:
>
> joeharcz at comcast.net
>
> (And note as a blind person I request the Dept. follow 504 on this 
> complaint and communicate simply as you've just done by simple e=-mail. No 
> print will be accepted and will be considerred a violation by the DOJ 
> itself.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Worden, Jeanine (CRT)" <Jeanine.Worden at usdoj.gov>
> To: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 2:31 PM
> Subject: RE: systemic ada t22 complaint accessable meetings program access 
> and effective communications
>
>
> Mr. Harcz,
>
> I am leaving the Department of Justice effective August 1.  In the mean
> time, I will be on leave.  I have forwarded your complaint to Allison
> Nichol, who is now the Chief of the Disability Rights Section.  I have
> also sent it to ada.complaint at usdoj.gov, which is the Section's mailbox
> for administrative complaints.
>
> Jeanine Worden
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: joe harcz Comcast [mailto:joeharcz at comcast.net]
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 1:47 PM
> To: Conway, Sally (CRT)
> 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.; Worden, Jeanine (CRT); 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
> 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.
>