[nfbmi-talk] Fw: no response

[joe harcz Comcast]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: joe harcz Comcast 
To: BRIAN SABOURIN 
Cc: CHARLIE ROSE cap mpas ; Elmer Cerano MPAS ; MARK CODY mpas pair ; MARK MCWILLIAMS MPAS ; Christyne.Cavataio at ed.gov ; Sarah Gravetti silc mcrs mcil 
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 4:35 PM
Subject: no response


This was a direct written request for information about due process and our rights under the Client Assistance program. It demands a written response.

Joe Harcz
October 17 2014 BSBP CAP MPAS Due Process and Other Important Issues

     

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI 48458

810-516-5262

joeharcz at comcast.net

 

 

 

Michigan Protection & Advocacy Service, Inc.

4095 Legacy Pkwy Ste 500

Lansing, MI 48911-4264

 

Elmer Cerano, Executive Director

Mark Cody, Esq.

Mark McWilliams, Esq. MPAS, I and R

 Brian Sabourin, Employment Team and SRC Executive Committee

Charley Rose, CAP

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

 

I point your attention to the following segment of the MPAS Board Meeting minutes of May 20, 2014:

 

“Employment Team

Brian XXX reported for the Employment Team. Mr. XXX introduced new advocate, Charlie XXXX.

 

The team has been dealing with the Bureau of Services for Blind Persons (BSBP). BSBP wants our clients to have their Release of Information form from MPAS notarized. “

 

 

First of all I’ve informed you and sent you case law that meeting minutes of a predominately publicly funded agency such as MPAS must make board meeting minutes available to the public within eight (8) working days and not after months. Moreover MPAS is predominately federally funded and must make all of its meeting information available affirmatively and in a timely manner, in accessible form under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, including all information that board members have and when they have it. Those regulatory citations have been sent to you and thus you’ve been informed of these obligations, and certainly an agency that receives copious funding through the Rehab Act as you do with the Title I, 122 funds and the Section 509 PAIR funds should know of your obligations. In fact part of your responsibilities is to enforce civil rights laws such as 504 and the ADA, so you should certainly be intimate with them and surely should practice them as well. Moreover, it is quite disturbing to see you redact the names of staff in the minutes. There is no confidentiality for staff of such a federally funded entity as MPAS, confidentiality goes to clients. Besides it is just plain silly as folks know the names of staff and certainly should especially those say filing complaints.

 

Now this also goes to the utter garbage referenced in the above quote. BSBP under Rodgers has denied blind customers due process all along including years prior with his stint in the Michigan Administrative Hearing System with inaccessible hearings. He has violated in documented fashion persons who are blind from getting timely and accessible information including timely delivery of their own records. LARA in the very State Plan and through Executive Order 2012-10 has made the DSA illegally the final agency “judge and jury”  on all VR, BEP, RS, and PA 260 appeals from the rigged, and conflicted Administrative Hearing system which is the most perverted, Orwellian and brazen violation of due process and simply a Kangaroo Court. Now, Rodgers wishes to have another layer of bogus, onerous provisions against customers even filing a CAP complaint. He isn’t protecting the rights of blind people. He is obscuring his obligations. This crooked lawyer, Rodgers should have his license yanked!

 

Now I’m writing you, including Mr. Sobourin and Mr. Rose to request any and all correspondences between MPAS’ employment team and BSBP in this regards. And of course, as a blind person I request this information in accessible format pursuant to Section 504 and Title III of the ADA which applies to MPAS.

 

In addition I am requesting immediate action against BSBP for it’s chronic, pervasive, malicious violations of Section 504, and   other documented violations of the Rehabilitation Act and for the persistent violations of due process rights of blind persons who have none in the Rehabilitation process here in Michigan.

 

Sincerely,

 

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

 

cc: NFB MI

cc: RSA

cc: MCRS

cc: BSBP Commission

cc: several