[nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar

Thu Dec 27 18:44:19 UTC 2012

Hello J.J and List,,

I am not suggesting we change anything for this year. I believe the motion 
that was made during state convention should be honored as it was voted on 
by the convention.

However, I disagree with you that having the state affiliate paying for the 
room is the fairest way to go. When the room is full, this option seems to 
work well, but when it is not full, then there always seems to be a problem. 
I heard my sister encountered a problem with this last year, and I 
encountered a problem with it the year before. And now there seems to be a 
problem with the specific days of the room for this year.

I was just proposing an option that might work best for all even when there 
is not a full room. I am honestly tired of seeing the same problem come up 
year after year. I think it discourages people from going when arrangements 
are made at the last minute and are out of the control of the individuals 
who are going.

I have heard of other states allocating money to individuals rather than 
rooms, so I thought perhaps maybe we could think about doing this in the 
future as a means of preventing all the problems that seem to keep coming up 
year after year. However, if anyone else has a better way of avoiding these 
problems in the future, I would be more than happy to hear them.

Warm regards,
Elizabeth

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jason Meddaugh" <jj at bestmidi.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 1:14 PM
To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar

> That's a possibility for the future, but this wouldn't be very fair to 
> Terri at this point. She would be penalized because she is the only female 
> who has chosen to go and required to find 3 roommates to make things work 
> out.
> I guess the option at this point would be to vote to nullify the motion 
> that the members passed at convention, though this sets a dangerous 
> precedent. We could also post on the various lists to see if there is 
> another state who has an extra room or a person needing one, which could 
> help us cut the cost of the second room down.
> Personally, I feel that the affiliate paying for the room or a portion 
> thereof is the fairest way to do things and also easiest for the national 
> office.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Elizabeth Mohnke" <lizmohnke at hotmail.com>
> To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 11:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar
>
>
>> Hello Dave and List,
>>
>> I agree with what J.J. said in his last message. Although, it seems as 
>> though we have had some kind of issue regarding the room arrangements for 
>> the past three years. This is why I have suggested allocating a set 
>> amount of money to be given individually in the future.
>>
>> Since this year's motion was to provide two rooms for three nights, we 
>> could calculate how much it would cost each person to stay in a room with 
>> four people for three nights. We could then provide each individual with 
>> this amount of money so they could make their own room arrangements. If 
>> they found a room with three additional people for three nights, there 
>> would be no additional cost for them to stay in the room. However, if 
>> they wanted their own room, a room with only one or two additional 
>> people, or wanted to stay more nights, then it would be up to the 
>> individual to pay for the remaining cost of the room.
>>
>> I am not suggesting we implement such a change this year because I know 
>> that people have most likely already made their plans based on the motion 
>> that was made at state convention, but perhaps it might be worth trying 
>> next year. Again, it seems to me that we have had some kind of problem 
>> regarding the room arrangements for the past three years, and I am simply 
>> proposing and alternative solution that might prevent this from becoming 
>> an issue in the future.
>>
>> Warm regards,
>> Elizabeth
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Jason Meddaugh" <jj at bestmidi.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:50 AM
>> To: "NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar
>>
>>> Dave,
>>> That may make sense in the future, but the motion was made and people 
>>> have likely already made travel plans based on it.
>>> I would say though that the legislative info meeting on Monday is at 
>>> least one worth attending.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Jason Meddaugh
>>> A T Guys
>>> Your Assistive Technology Experts
>>> (269) 216-4798
>>> http://www.ATGuys.com
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "David Robinson" <drob1946 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List'" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 8:23 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar
>>>
>>>
>>>> J. J.
>>>>
>>>>   The intent of the motion was to sponsor a room for men and one for 
>>>> women
>>>> for the Washington Seminar.  How we get it done and on what days seems 
>>>> to be
>>>> an issue, but I am sure that will be resolved based on when we can get
>>>> appointments.  My request was based on the fact that if some were going
>>>> early to attend seminars of any kind, that it would be helpful to be 
>>>> sure to
>>>> have one of our representatives cover the Merchants meeting.  My 
>>>> current
>>>> responsibilities prevent me from attending, but I have walked those 
>>>> halls
>>>> many times and will do so in the future.  Perhaps, if we can get all of 
>>>> our
>>>> appointments in on two days then it might be prudent of us to only 
>>>> sponsore
>>>> two nights at the hotel.
>>>>
>>>> Dave Robinson
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfbmi-talk [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
>>>> Jason
>>>> Meddaugh
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:38 PM
>>>> To: NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar
>>>>
>>>> Dave,
>>>> As for your comment on the merchants committee, perhaps you should 
>>>> attend
>>>> Washington Seminar so you could attend the merchants committee meeting?
>>>> The reason we haven't traditionally paid for a room on Wednesday night 
>>>> is
>>>> that our appointments are completed by the afternoon on Wednesday. 
>>>> Michigan
>>>> had 17 (now 16) appointments to attend, and by splitting up into two or 
>>>> more
>>>>
>>>> groups, we are able to do these in a day and a half.
>>>> If there were any discussion, it would be whether to pay for 2 nights 
>>>> or
>>>> three. But I do believe the motion at state convention was for three 
>>>> nights,
>>>>
>>>> and Sunday through Tuesday would make the most sense given our 
>>>> affiliate and
>>>>
>>>> how we usually tackle the appointments and other events at Washington
>>>> Seminar.
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: "Elizabeth" <lizmohnke at hotmail.com>
>>>> To: "NFB Michigan" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 6:25 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] Washington Seminar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Dave,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your response. I can understand your concerns. However,
>>>>> since the minutes from state convention have yet to be released, it 
>>>>> can be
>>>>
>>>>> difficult to recall the specific language that was used in the motion.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the motion from state convention specified that the state affiliate
>>>>> 