[Vendorsmi] Fw: EOC Ad Hoc

Wed Jun 2 08:31:44 UTC 2010

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bill Lozier 
To: resolutioncomm at sbcglobal.net ; jrvending87 at yahoo.com ; heibeckc at michigan.gov ; garsvend at aol.com ; keathleygreg at yahoo.com ; hullj at michigan.gov ; pilarskij at charter.net ; pellej at michigan.gov ; suncat0 at gmail.com ; brlbumps at sbcglobal.net ; mjcbiz at charter.net ; rutherford_beard at yahoo.com ; sjx3 at sbcglobal.net ; mcenteej at michigan.gov ; wallacej1 at michigan.gov ; jendoroh at gmail.com ; drea7139 at yahoo.com ; rob.essennberg at yahoo.com ; terrydeagle at yahoo.com ; president.nfb.mi at gmail.com ; cannonp at michigan.gov ; samtocco at wowway.com ; casey354 at comcast.net ; geri.taeckens at isahealthfund.org ; zangerc at michigan.gov 
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 8:03 PM
Subject: RE: EOC Ad Hoc

To form an ad-hoc committee consisting of major stake holders in the Business Enterprise Program.  The stated purpose of the ad-hoc committees would be:  To bring interested parties together to help identify problems, discuss solutions to those problem, and then provide positive forward looking suggestions to the State licensing agency, The Elected Operators Committee and The Commission Board.  The standing make up of the committee would be as follows:

EOC appointed chairperson   
EOC chair                 
third EOC rep               
two Commission Board members    
BEP program manager          
assistant BEP program manger 
representative of blind consumer group       
representative of blind consumer group      
two at-large positions appointed by the chairperson

Good Evening Folks,

   This is the Motion that was passed by the EOC.   It states very clearly the purpose and the make-up of this committee.  I made this motion exactly this way because I foresaw exactly this problem.  To this date NOT ONE person other then EOC members has contacted me personally about this committee.   This is  the motion, if we do not like it then it should be changed, but until then it is what we have to work with.  So I am going on the assumption that this is a legal motion ant that I am the legally appointed chairperson, and I believe the motion clearly gives me, as the chair, the right to make the final dissision.  As I have stated in previous e-mails the EOC is in complete support of this committee make-up.  If we cut the legs out from under the EOC once again then this AD-hoc will never work.  This committee was formed as a mechanism of the EOC, therefore we feel we have the right to pick the at large members of this ad-hoc, as the motion clearly states  If this make up dose not work we are more then willing to change it, but we have to start somewhere.  

     Commissioner Pilarski hit the nail on the head, this is supposed to be a consensuses building tool not a "pick sides" game.  If we can not act like adults and move this forward in a postative way I will for one not continue to give my valuable time to this effort.  The only side that I am on, is the BEP side, I have no axes to grind or personal fights involved in this committee, I just want a strong effective BEP in Michigan.  I have never attacked or disparaged anyone personally, I have only spoken out for a better BEP.  So if anyone has questions about my personal motives in the formation or make up of this ad-hoc, please ask, and give me a chance to show my intent as chair, before you question my motives, or not, like I said no one is contacting me with their concerns.

  Please everyone read commissioner Pilarski comments again, she is 100% correct this is the time to come togather and move this program forward in a friendly positive way.  This will not be an easy task but I also believe we can succeed 

Thank you all very much for your time,

Bill Lozier

> From: pilarskij at charter.net
> To: Pat.Cannon at Comcast.Net; cannonp at michigan.gov
> CC: brlbumps at sbcglobal.net; flingem at hotmail.com; resolutioncomm at sbcglobal.net; geri.TAECKENS at ISAHEALTHFUND.ORG
> Subject: EOC Ad Hoc
> Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2010 21:23:29 -0400
> 
> Hello Pat and all,
> 
> First, Geri, will you please forward this to John 
> Scott?
> 
> I need to try to express some thoughts here as 
> honestly as I know how in the midst of a bit of 
> turmoil over the EOC ad hoc committee. I am 
> feeling pressure from various people to behave in 
> one way or the other regarding the ad hoc 
> committee. The ideas and concerns coming to me 
> are contradictory to one another. If I just sat 
> on one side or the other, I could agree with that 
> side or the other. We have to look beyond what we 
> personally want, however, and be able to give for 
> the good of all.
> 
> Let me begin by saying that I am not feeling 
> adversarial at all in the formation of this 
> committee. It was suggested by our Board, and 
> apparently long before our Board suggested it by 
> the EOC, as a means of helping us all work 
> together to proactively improve our program. I 
> love the idea. some are suggesting that it is 
> necessarily terribly complicated. Does it have to 
> be? some believe we need facilitators; while I 
> think an outside party might be a neat way to go, 
> Bill has asked to try, and if need be he can 
> suggest a facilitator.
> 
> My understanding, as I look back, is that the EOC 
> had a major role in the formation of this 
> Committee. I recollect that they wanted Constance 
> and James to be active participants, as well as a 
> Board member, which is me at this time.
> 
> While the Board can oversee and move for support 
> in resources for this group, I am in favor of 
> letting this group get together as is and do some 
> self-determination. Bill has promised to 
> "uninvite" people who do not prove themselves to 
> be behaving in a positive manner with the good of 
> the larger community in and at all times. He has 
> stated that we will set ground rules for dialog. 
> I trust him at his word.
> 
> My hope is that we can all grow into a risk free 
> environment. We are a bunch of blind folks who 
> need to hold each other up. We need to come 
> together as that community we are. The world at 
> large is not really interested in us as a group, 
> so we need to take care of ourselves. We need to 
> get to know each other and build some 
> relationship, no? We need to understand that we 
> may not be adept at this ad hoc stuff, that we 
> will make mistakes, that we all probably have 
> different perceptions and perhaps a different 
> agenda which we are or are not sharing at this 
> time.
> 
> There is most assuredly history among many folks, 
> and some of it is not good. Could it possibly be 
> time for forgiveness to happen? I'll be the first 
> to ask for it if I've let you down. I'll be the 
> first to give it to those who might not wish me 
> well, and ya don't even have to ask for it, 
> because it's already there.
> 
> That risk free environment I alluded to involves 
> forgiveness, ahead of time, for past mistakes and 
> for those we will make. It allows people to say 
> what they are thinking, in terms of 
> problem-resolution. It allows for people to 
> disagree. It allows for all ideas regarding 
> resolution to be heard. It allows for respect 
> for one another, for equal opportunity to speak to 
> issues. It doesn't dwell on the past, and looks 
> forward. It involves really listening to one 
> another. It does not delight in "winning" or 
> getting something over on another person, and it 
> doesn't have "sides". It does not try to control 
> or manipulate. This is a pretty tall order, isn't 
> it. It will take some time, but I have the faith 
> that it can work if we are sincere in our efforts.
> 
> I have heard Bill say repeatedly that he and James 
> wanted to invite members of each consumer group 
> who have served in the program a chance to 
> participate. I understood that they wanted 2 
> at-large members. I am remembering that the EOC 
> Chair and the
> Ad Hoc Chair were inviting the bulk of the 
> representatives.
> 
> I am going on record in favor of letting this 
> committee commence, move forward, make mistakes, 
> step back and start again.
> 
> sorry for this long letter. you can feel free to 
> send it to anyone you'd like. None of this is 
> confidential. I just decided to speak because I 
> was getting, from many angles, what I should be 
> doing
> 
> Peace & blesings,
> 
> Jo ann 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20100602/918a1e3a/attachment.html>