[Vendorsmi] the messed up transcript
joe harcz Comcast
joeharcz at comcast.net
Wed Jun 27 01:46:24 UTC 2012
STATE OF MICHIGAN
STATE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND RULES
DEPARTMENT OF labor, energy & economic growth
RISA PATRICK-LANGTRY,
PETITIONER
V Case No.:2009-1705
MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND,
RESPONDENT
/
AUDIOTAPED HEARING
BEFORE Administrative Law Judge ROBERT J. MEADE
LANSING, Michigan - monday, November 29, 2010
APPEARANCES:
For the PETITIONER
TERRY EAGLE
For the RESPONDENT
MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND
james hull
201 n. washington square, 2nd floor
lansing, mi 48909
(517) 373-2063
TRANSCRIBED BY:
REGENCY COURT REPORTING
3133 Union Lake Road
Commerce Township, MI 48382
(248) 360-2145
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
WITNESS: PETITIONER
FRED WURTZEL
Direct Examination by Mr. Eagle 07
Cross-Examination by Mr. Hull 17
RISA PATRICK-LANGTRY
Direct Examination by Mr. Eagle 18
Cross-Examination by Mr. Hull 31
Redirect Examination by Mr. Eagle 34
WITNESSES: RESPONDENT
NONE
EXHIBITS:
IDENTIFIED
RECEIVED
PX1
NEWSPAPER ARTICLE
26
26
PX2
E-MAILS
30
31
Lansing, Michigan
Monday, November 29, 2010 - 9:00 a.m.
* * * * *
P R O C E E D I N G S
ALJ MEADE: And we’ll go on the record in the matter of Risa Patrick-Langtry, Petitioner, versus Michigan Commission for the Blind, Respondent. It’s Docket Number 2009-1705. It’s November 29th, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. This hearing is being held at the State Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules. We’re on the Second Floor of the Ottawa Building in Lansing, Michigan. And I’m Robert Meade, the administrative law judge assigned to hear this matter. And Mr. Eagle is here on behalf of the Petitioner. Mr. Hull is here on behalf of the Respondent.
The hearing is being recorded, so please try to keep your voice up. And it looks like this matter concerns Petitioner’s complaint with regard to a reorganization of a vending route in a manner that the Petitioner deemed discriminatory under Act 260 and the corresponding administrative rules. The Petitioner filed a formal request for an administrative hearing back on November 12th, 2009. On December 4th, 2009, this office received a request for hearing from the Michigan Commission for the Blind, and on December 10th, 2009, a notice of hearing was issued, setting a hearing for January 28th, 2010. We had a number of adjournments, and also a few telephone pre-hearing conferences since that time, and then ultimately, that matter was rescheduled for today’s date and time.
And are there any preliminary matters we need to address, Mr. Eagle?
MR. EAGLE: No.
ALJ MEADE: And Mr. Hull?
MR. HULL: No.
ALJ MEADE: All right. The guidelines for the hearing will be as follows. The hearing will be conducted in accordance with Public Act 260, the administrative rules, and the Michigan Administrative Procedures Act. Evidence of a type commonly relied upon by reasonably prudent persons may be admitted for consideration. Evidence may be oral or written. Irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence may be excluded. Objections to offers of evidence may be made and will be noted for the record. As will any determination to exclude evidence. Each side will be given an equal opportunity to present their respective positions, and at the close of the record what I’ll do is issue a recommended decision that will go to the full commission for a final decision at the administrative level.
Now, in this case, the Petitioner will have the burden of proof, so Mr. Eagle, I’ll let you present your evidence first.
Did you wish to make an opening statement?
MR. EAGLE: I think the -- your -- your summary of the claim is exactly what I would use as an opening statement; that the action by the state licensing agency was done in a manner that was discriminatory to Ms. Patrick-Langtry, and we would seek some kind of redress. But I -- we’ve already spoken on a teleconference of a -- of proposed remedy, but that hasn’t -- has gone nowhere.
ALJ MEADE: Thank you. And Mr. Hull, anything you wanted to say in opening at this time?
MR. HULL: The Commission for the Blind in its execution of Public Act 260 and the promulgated rules and working with the elected committee, followed the wishes prescribed by the committee in our previous motion that all parties had agreed to. That motion was known to all parties at the time, and that we stand by our decision to comply with that motion, the original motion that was made, and not change our position and eliminate a possible job opportunity for a blind person.
ALJ MEADE: All right, thank you. And I see we have a number of people in the courtroom. Would anyone like the witnesses sequestered this morning? Is it necessary or -- or not?
MR. EAGLE: I don't see any reason. Their testimony stands separate and alone from each other --
ALJ MEADE: Okay.
MR. EAGLE: -- as far as I’m concerned.
ALJ MEADE: Okay. Mr. Hull, any objection to everyone remaining?
MR. HULL: No objection, Your Honor.
ALJ MEADE: Okay. And who will your first witness be, Mr. Eagle?
MR. EAGLE: Mr. Fred Wurtzel.
ALJ MEADE: All right. Mr. Wurtzel, if you could come up to the witness stand here? If you go to your left actually; there’s a bench here and then a chair right there.
MR. WURTZEL: Okay.
ALJ MEADE: And have a seat right in there. And once you’re seated, if you could state and spell your full name for the record, please?
MR. WURTZEL: It’s Fred Wurtzel; W-u-r-t-z-e-l.
ALJ MEADE: And Mr. Wurtzel, please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
MR. WURTZEL: Yes, sir.
ALJ MEADE: Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Eagle.
FRED WURTZEL
DULY SWORN BY THE JUDGE, TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Good morning, Fred.
A Good morning.
Q What -- in the past, have you had a position with the Commission for the Blind?
A Yes, sir.
Q And what was that position?
A I was the program administrator.
Q And how long were you administrator of the program?
A Roughly ten years. I don't remember the exact --
Q Do you -- do you recall the dates from the time you started until the time you retired?
A Well, I started working for the business enterprise program as assistant to the program administrator in 1985, and I retired in 2006. Around ’96, I think, is when I actually became the program administrator.
Q And do you recall the date in 2006 that you retired?
A I’m old, you know. I think it was -- it was around June 6th, or something like that. I can’t remember exactly.
Q Okay. So it was mid -- mid-2006?
A Yeah.
Q Okay.
A It was definitely June of 2006.
Q To -- to the best of your knowledge, does the business enterprise program have a vending -- roadside vending program?
A Yes.
Q And what’s -- what’s the purpose of that roadside vending program?
A Well Senator Barbara Kinelly (ph) introduced legislation at the federal level to allow blind people to operate vending facilities on interstate highway and U.S. highway right -- rights of way, and beginning in 1986, with the opening of the Mackie rest area in Clare, Michigan came into -- into the highway vending program, and the ultimate goal of it is, of course, to provide employment to blind people, and to provide snacks and refreshments to the traveling public.
Q Is -- is the -- is one of the purposes to provide a -- a living income to blind persons?
A Yes.
Q And to the best of your recollection, by the time you had retired, had -- had the commission established locations in virtually all viable locations on the highways in Michigan?
A Yeah. I -- I think -- I think given the give and take with MDOT and all that, I think it was -- like you say virtually, I guess, all -- all viable places. There may be some places that still could support something, but I think we had it pretty well covered.
Q What -- what would be considered a viable location?
A Well, we have a -- we had a policy when I left -- I don't know what’s still there -- but when I left there was a satellite policy that said that a vending facility -- highway vending facility would be $150,000.00 minimum sales, with a goal of $200,000.00.
Q And --
A Sales.
Q Were -- during your tenure were -- were -- was that goal met in any or all of the locations?
A I -- I couldn’t say for certain that it was met in every last one of them, but it was certainly our -- our goal to try to meet that goal.
Q And were -- were -- during your tenure as the program manager, were -- were there times when you would change or make modifications to vending facilities and their satellite sites to try to achieve that goal?
A Yeah, absolutely. When -- and in accordance again with the satellite policy, those things are to be reviewed each time a -- a vending site comes up for bid.
Q Okay. Now, turning -- turning to the location that’s in question here, and our proposal to deal with inequities in or -- or try to meet the area income or sales to the locations, do you -- do you have any recollection of discussions having to do with the Howell/Novi rest area?
A Well, yeah. I mean I -- a few years back there. But the Novi -- Novi rest area was a pretty good facility. Unfortunately, they closed that and tore it down with the -- with the revamping of the interchange of I-275 and 96 and 696 there, which just left Howell and -- and Brighton. One’s eastbound, one’s westbound. I think Brighton is eastbound and -- and Howell is westbound. And those were the two that were left together there.
Q And was there any plans during your tenure for the -- to make modifications to either of the other -- the remaining locations, either Howell or the Brighton?
A Well, as I recall, the -- the Howell rest area or the -- no, the Brighton one -- the eastbound one was remodeled -- a new building was -- was built and brought that indoors. My understanding is that the Howell rest area, the westbound one, is to be demolished and a new interchange was going to be put there --
MR. HULL: Objection --
THE WITNESS: -- which would eliminate that -- eliminate that rest area.
ALJ MEADE: Go ahead, Mr. Hull.
MR. HULL: Your Honor, the witness is speculating.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection, but I’ll allow the testimony.
Go ahead, Mr. Eagle.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q So -- so you -- you had knowledge that there were plans to -- to demolish the Howell location and put an interchange in there?
A That’s my understanding, yes.
Q Okay. Did -- more recently, have you had any conversations with anybody at the Department of Transportation?
A Yeah, I talked with Scott Wheeler about six, eight weeks ago.
Q And what -- what is Scott Wheeler’s position?
A You know, I can’t tell you his -- his exact job title. But he’s the person that oversees the rest areas for the Michigan Department of Transportation.
Q And what was the purpose of that conversation?
A Risa and I were in a conversation, and she said that she had heard that they were going to do that, and -- but was uncertain about what the plans were, and I said, “Well, I know Scott; I’ll just give him a call.” So I called him up and asked him, and he -- he called me back and we had a conversation. Probably a five, ten minute conversation about that.
Q What -- what was your understanding from that conversation of the -- the plans for that location?
A What he told me was that the state did not have -- didn’t presently have the funding to do -- do the job -- complete the project. But the county -- Livingston county is working on getting the funding. But he said it could happen tomorrow or it could happen three years from now. He -- he wasn’t certain. But it -- it was pretty much up to Livingston county what happened next.
Q Okay. During your -- well, while you were there were -- as the administrator, were there any plans to -- based on your knowledge of the pending road project, were -- did -- were there any plans to deal with that location in any way?
A There was -- there was always a lot of conversation. I -- I don't recall, you know, any specific things at the moment. I do remember generally that there was always conversation about -- because it -- we never were able to get the -- after -- especially after Novi closed, it was, you know, below the $150,000.00 level, and so we was always trying -- looking -- we were always looking at ways of improving the sales there.
Q Were -- were there any attempts to add locations or satellites to that facility?
A Yeah. We -- we were looking at post office facilities -- it is my recollection is the post offices are pretty small. But we were looking at those as -- as adjuncts to that -- to build that route up a little bit.
Q And to the best of your knowledge, did any of that come to fruition?
A Not while I was there. I don't know what’s happened since.
Q Do you -- the commission contends that they acted on a policy recommendation by the elected operators committee about four years ago. Do you -- are you familiar with that?
A I don't know what policy you’re -- you’re referring to.
Q With regard to configuration of -- of vending facilities on the roadside that would deal with helping locations meet the $150,000.00 benchmark?
A I’m not sure I recall any -- the specific action you’re referring to.
Q Okay. Are -- do you recall any discussion having to do with a vending facility in the Flint area, having to do with combining locations?
MR. HULL: Objection, relevance.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection. I’m -- I’m not sure what the relevance is yet, so I’ll allow the witness to answer. Go ahead, sir.
THE WITNESS: I remember that there was -- in staff meetings there was -- there was significant conversation about what to do with the -- I’m trying to remember -- for lack -- lack of a better term, I would say Frankenmuth and Davis -- Davison -- whatever the one on the south side of Flint is that’s northbound, and combine those two north and south of Flint. At -- at one point, we had added Capac and Lapeer to the one on the south side of Flint, Davisburg, whatever that’s called, and John Macinty (ph), I think was advocating that we put the Capac and Lapeer ones with the Port Huron, and combine the Davisburg and Frankenmuth, or whatever that’s called, together. That’s the best I recall of that conversation.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Do you -- do you recall if that ever went before the elected operators committee?
A I don't -- I don't recall that going to the EOC.
Q Do you ever remember anything going to the commission board with respect to a policy on that location?
A No, I don't recall the -- that that ever happened. I --
MR. HULL: Your Honor, renew my objection based on relevance.
ALJ MEADE: All right.
MR. HULL: We’re here to talk about the Howell vending route, and now we’re talking about Frankenmuth.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll -- I’ll note your objection, but I don't know enough about the route, so I’ll allow him to answer the question.
MR. EAGLE: Okay. I -- I believe that’s all I have at this time.
ALJ MEADE: All right. And Mr. Hull, questions for the witness?
Cross-Examination
by MR. HULL:
Q Mr. Wurtzel, you had mentioned a policy of $150,000.00 for sales for highway vending routes. Do you know if that’s promulgated?
A To the best of my recollection, it’s not a promulgated rule. That’s a -- a policy that the elected operators committee and the commission board adopted though.
Q Thank you.
ALJ MEADE: Okay. Mr. Eagle, anything else?
MR. EAGLE: No.
ALJ MEADE: For the witness? All right. Thank you, sir. You’re excused. And your next witness, Mr. Eagle? Do you need to check if someone’s here, or --
MR. EAGLE: Well, I guess he hasn’t arrived. But we’ll move ahead with Ms. Langtry.
ALJ MEADE: All right. And Ms. Langtry, can you make it up to the witness stand, or do you want to -- does someone want to help her up to the witness stand, or you can -- you can stay there if Mr. Hull has no objection.
MR. HULL: I have no objection, Your Honor.
ALJ MEADE: No? Okay. Why don’t you stay right there then.
MS. PATRICK-LANGTRY: Okay.
ALJ MEADE: Go -- oh, let me swear in her; sorry. And ma’am, could you state and spell your full name for the record?
MS. PATRICK-LANGTRY: Yes. It’s Risa Patrick-Langtry; that’s R-i-s-a P-a-t-r-i-c-k hyphen L-a-n-g-t-r-y.
ALJ MEADE: And raise your right hand, please. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
MS. PATRICK-LANGTRY: I do.
ALJ MEADE: Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Eagle.
RISA PATRICK-LANGTRY
DULY SWORN BY THE JUDGE, TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Risa, when did you enter the BEP program?
A It was 2000.
Q Keep your voice up please.
A 2000 -- I'm sorry; it’s 2001.
Q And was -- was your first location a roadside vending facility?
A No, it was a snack bar.
Q And did you have any other locations prior to becoming a roadside vendor?
A I had -- I had two other -- I had three snack -- three snack bars in that period of time, and also with a temporary at the (inaudible) snack bar for about six months.
Q And when did you become a roadside vendor?
A Six years ago. It’s been about -- this coming -- this coming February, it’ll be -- about -- about -- well, six year, seven years.
Q And what was the location that you had at that time -- you took at that time?
A It was the east and west side location on I-96 in Howell -- Howell and Brighton.
Q Okay. So the -- the Novi location had already been closed?
A That was -- that had already been demolished --
Q And -- and there was no plans to re -- rebuild that --
A No.
Q -- correct?
A No.
Q And then what -- at that time, what -- do you recall what the annual sales were for those two locations?
A At the time it was like about 55/45. Fifty-five east side and 45 west side.
Q That’s in dollars?
A Yes. That was -- that was gross sales.
Q Okay. So about $100,000.00?
A About that, yes.
Q And --
A When I took -- when I took over the location, it was bid out at 86 gross sales.
Q Okay. And did -- at that time that -- the time that you took those -- that location, did -- were -- were there any plans to your knowledge to try to build that up?
A No.
Q And --
A The --
Q Go ahead.
A They were going to -- I looked -- I looked at the post offices there and -- because there was rumors that the -- they were going to start assigning satellites if the -- if your location was near a post office, that they would add that on as a satellite. But that did not -- that did not come about. And I checked into the post offices, and it wasn’t even worth bothering with. Because one -- one location -- the Howell post office only had about 20 or 30 people in -- in there -- in that location, and Brighton, there were probably like 40 -- 40 people -- 45 people, 50 people, something like that. And it wasn’t even worth bothering with. They had some private machine in there; like one or two machines. And it wasn’t -- wasn’t even worth messing with.
Q Okay. And was there a -- was there a point in time when the elected operators committee entertained a motion to reconfigure the locations having to do with highway vending, not only with respect to yours, but others nearby?
A We -- what do you mean, my location that -- I know -- I know as of last -- last year when the word had it that MDOT was going to demolish the west side location, that I had a administrative review and James Hull and Joe Pelle promised that they would be looking for sites for my location to compensate the west side. But nothing, nothing, nothing had been done about it. And --
Q So --
A -- they didn’t bother to -- to proceed with that.
Q So are you aware of whether in the last 13 months, any -- any attempts with respect to contacting potential locations --
A No. Last -- when -- when they were talking about -- when they were talking about tearing down -- as of last year, tearing down the location, the -- the professional -- professional assistant -- the PA recommended that -- that they would re -- re-do the route and give me east side, Okemos, and Holt Road location. But that did not -- that did not happen, and it was taken to the EOC, and they -- they voted on -- on the -- leaving a location and -- and it happened that Ms. Zanger -- Connie Zanger took the locations as -- as when the location was (inaudible) Okemos, Perry, and Dewitt. So she took -- she took Dewitt and gave it to another operator to -- and added that to Ithaca site, and then they took Holt or Okemos, Perry, and Hold Road, and -- and put it on a bid line and didn’t even consider my -- what my situation was. They -- they didn’t even bother with that. They didn’t even consider -- didn’t consider me on my location, though they were gonna tear down west side.
Q So would it be a fair statement to say that in -- in doing that with the Okemos location, that they -- that Ms. Zanger helped another operator with low sales, but did not help you?
A Absolutely --
MR. HULL: Objection; leading.
THE WITNESS: Absolutely.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll -- I’ll note your objection. I’ll allow the question.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q What was your answer?
A Pardon me?
Q What was your answer?
A I said absolutely. She did not consider -- did not consider my situation.
Q Okay. Did -- do you know -- do you have knowledge whether the staff was -- was in favor of making any change that would assist you?
A Not -- not to my knowledge. They did not -- they did not attempt any -- to do anything to assist me in any way.
Q Okay. Now, that -- more recently it’s been -- it’s been alleged by the commission that the westbound Howell location is not going to be demolished and replaced with an on-ramp to westbound I-96 at Howell. Is -- have you learned something different lately?
A Yes. My husband went online and -- and read -- read the article and then the (inaudible) newspaper that Livingston county does have the money and they are going to proceed into tearing down the west side location. What they’re doing now -- they got federal money and also state money and what they’re doing right now is getting bids -- working on getting bids and getting a situation where (inaudible) the -- the -- the schools, the -- all the big business people are -- they -- they were in on the -- on the decision to -- to tear down that location and -- and now they got -- they got the mon -- they got the pressure from the business to go ahead and they voted to tear it down, and -- and it can -- right now it could be done -- they’re saying -- they’re saying in beginning of ’12, but they’re also saying it could -- it could happen before that time, because now they’re -- they’re putting in a bridge before they put the ramp there at the -- on that intersection.
MR. HULL: Objection, Your Honor. That entire answer was hearsay.
ALJ MEADE: All right.
THE WITNESS: No --
ALJ MEADE: I’ll -- I’ll note your objection. I’ll --
MR. HULL: Thank you.
ALJ MEADE: -- I’ll accept it for what it’s worth.
MR. EAGLE: I’d like to introduce --
THE WITNESS: No. That’s not hearsay.
MR. EAGLE: I’d like to introduce a document. What are we, numbers or letters?
ALJ MEADE: Why don’t you use numbers?
MR. EAGLE: Okay.
THE WITNESS: Can I say something else, please?
ALJ MEADE: Hang on just a second, Ms. Langtry.
MR. EAGLE: This is -- this is a article that is -- it was published -- and speaks to the same testimony that Ms. Langtry just gave, having to do with securing the funding from the county road commission to move ahead with the project.
ALJ MEADE: All right. And Mr. Hull, any objection to proposed Exhibit Number One?
MR. HULL: One moment, Your Honor.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Now --
ALJ MEADE: Hang on just a second, Mr. Eagle. He’s still reviewing it.
MR. EAGLE: Oh, okay.
MR. HULL: Your Honor, the only objection that I would have to this is it’s from this past year, November 11th, and this matter was actually requested for hearing back in 2009. So I don't believe that this document is germane or relevant to the cause of this hearing today.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection. I’m going to accept that as Exhibit One.
MR. HULL: Thank you, Your Honor.
(WHEREUPON, PX1 was admitted at this time)
ALJ MEADE: Go ahead, Mr. Eagle.
MR. EAGLE: Okay.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Ms. -- Ms. Langtry --
A Yes.
Q -- did you have an occasion to run into a Department of Transportation employee at one of your locations recently?
A Yes, I did.
Q And do you know what his position is?
A He is Scott Wheeler’s right hand man. He is a maintenance -- he goes around to all the locations to make sure everything’s running correctly.
Q And did he -- did he indicate in a conversation with you any problems at the Howell westbound that might -- might increase or -- or bring about the closing of that location sooner?
A Yes. He indicated that they’re not going to put any more money -- monies into that location, anything major, because of the tearing down of the location, and right now the -- the water situation there is -- is that my coffee machine is down half the time the water is -- is off and if they’re not going to put anymore -- anymore money into that location, and he also stated -- I know that this is very relative to -- or important to this situation, because I will be taking the Okemos -- Okemos route. He also told me as of year -- ’11, that they’re tearing down -- also tearing down Holt Road’s location and the building.
Q Okay. Now --
A And I just found that out just -- just a few days ago.
Q Did -- with respect to the Howell east -- westbound, you -- does that -- the condition with your coffee machine, does that have a potential of creating a safety or health hazard to the publish?
A I would --
MR. HULL: Objection to relevance.
THE WITNESS: I would think so, sure.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection. You can answer, ma’am.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q What did you say? What -- what did you say?
A I would -- yes, I would say so. I’ve been getting -- I’ve been getting complaints about the taste of the coffee and -- and also -- and it really runs into my income of the machine being down three-fourths of the time.
Q Okay. Now, after -- after you learned from Mr. Hull that the -- the -- the Department of Transportation supposedly was going to keep the eastbound or westbound Howell open because of lack of funding, did you ask me to do some research and --
A Yes, I did.
Q -- either verify or -- or -- or make sure that that information was correct?
MR. HULL: Objection; leading.
THE WITNESS: Yes, I did.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection. I’ll allow the question.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q So your answer was yes?
A Yes.
Q And do you recall what -- what my research came up with?
A The -- you’re talking about the -- the newspaper article?
Q No. It would have to do with the Department of Transportation and Brighton.
A The -- the -- oh, you’re talking about the -- my mind’s a blank here. Repeat that question.
Q Did -- did I get information from the Department of Transportation in Brighton?
A Yes, you did.
Q And what was the essence -- do you know what the --
A They -- yeah, they -- they -- yes, they told -- they told -- they said that they -- they do have -- they do have the monies to proceed with the project, and -- and it would -- it would be -- it would be either -- either beginning of ’12 or the end, but they -- and possibly before that.
MR. HULL: Objection, Your Honor; hearsay. He’s asking the witness to testify as to information that he gathered from another source.
ALJ MEADE: All right.
MR. HULL: Without providing any documentation at this moment to validate that information.
ALJ MEADE: All right. Do you have some documentation --
MR. EAGLE: We’d like to introduce that.
ALJ MEADE: Okay. I thought that’s where you were going.
MR. EAGLE: This is our -- this is an e-mail that -- back and forth from myself to the project director at the Brighton center that is handling the Howell project, and his response as to the status of it.
ALJ MEADE: And Mr. Hull, any objection to proposed Exhibit Two?
MR. HULL: Only again that this isn’t germane to the -- the matter of the hearing today.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note that objection again and accept Exhibit Two.
(WHEREUPON, PX2 was admitted at this time)
ALJ MEADE: Go ahead, Mr. Eagle.
MR. EAGLE: Okay. I don't -- I don't have anything further for Ms. Langtry at this time, but I may have to recall her if our witness doesn’t appear.
ALJ MEADE: All right. And Mr. Hull, questions for Ms. Langtry.
MR. HULL: Well, first I’d like to object to Petitioner’s Exhibit Two again, based on the fact that it was never authenticated.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection.
Cross-Examination
by MR. HULL:
Q Risa, how are you doing this morning?
A I’m fine.
Q Today, is the Howell westbound rest area open?
A Today is it open?
Q Yes. Yes or no?
A Yes, it is.
Q And as of this date, have you been awarded another facility?
MR. EAGLE: Objection. The same as his. It’s not germane to the hearing here.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection. I’ll -- I’ll allow her to answer.
MR. EAGLE: Other than for settlement purposes.
ALJ MEADE: All right. You can answer, ma’am. Do you need him to repeat --
THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question?
by MR. HULL:
Q As of today, have you been awarded another facility?
A Yes, I have.
Q Okay. I’d like to call your attention to the -- the exhibits that were presented on your behalf. The first exhibit, Exhibit One, the -- the news story --
A The what?
Q The news article from the Livingston County Press, I believe it is.
A Mm-hmm.
Q You said that that article said that all the funding was in place?
A Yes, it is.
MR. HULL: Your Honor, if I could have an excerpt of that article read into the record.
ALJ MEADE: Okay, go ahead.
MS. ZANGER: “The project still depends on formal funding commitments from several other agencies and funding sources, including the Michigan Department of Transportation in Genoa Township, said road commission managing director, Mike Crane (ph).”
by MR. HULL:
Q So, you’re saying that this article said that all the funding was in place, but actually one of the passages in the article stating that funding was not yet secured from all sources; is that correct?
A We -- my understanding is the -- is the funding is there; federal and state has the funding to proceed to go on with the project.
Q Okay. Let me now go -- take you to Exhibit Two. You’re stating that this is an e-mail that stated that MDOT said that the project will move forward.
MR. HULL: If I could have an excerpt of that document read into the record?
ALJ MEADE: Okay.
MS. ZANGER: “There are still some funding issues that need to be resolved, and if they are, this project will likely go to light in the fall of 2011 or 2012/13 construction schedule.”
MR. HULL: Okay.
by MR. HULL:
Q So are you still maintaining that this document says that the project will move forward?
A At the -- at the -- at the time when this e-mail was sent to us, it did say that. But since then, things have happened for -- has gone forward with stating now they have -- they have the monies to go forward with the -- tearing down the location.
Q Okay, thank you.
MR. HULL: No more questions, Your Honor.
ALJ MEADE: All right. And Mr. Eagle, any other questions?
Redirect Examination
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Ms. -- Ms. Langtry, is it your understanding that -- that if this -- if this -- the details on the funding are not worked out, that there -- there will be a great loss of federal funds towards this project?
MR. HULL: Objection; speculation.
THE WITNESS: Correct.
ALJ MEADE: All right. I’ll note your objection. You can answer, ma’am.
by MR. EAGLE:
Q Is that -- is that your understanding?
A Yes, it is.
Q And --
A Understanding if -- if they don’t go forward with -- with this -- with the -- with this -- with this project, that they will lose their match money.
Q And is -- is it your understanding that they -- they are committed to capturing those federal funds?
A Correct.
MR. EAGLE: I have nothing further.
ALJ MEADE: All right, thank you. And why don’t we take a short break. We’ll come back in about five minutes or so.
MR. EAGLE: Okay.
(WHEREUPON, a brief recess was taken at this time)
ALJ MEADE: And we’re back on the record in the matter of Risa Patrick-Langtry versus Michigan Commission for the Blind. And Mr. Eagle, your next witness?
MR. EAGLE: We’ll -- he was on his way down --
ALJ MEADE: Oh, okay. What’s the witness’s name?
MR. EAGLE: Dave Robinson.
ALJ MEADE: Okay.
MR. HULL: Your Honor, if I could ask the relevance of this witness.
ALJ MEADE: I have no idea. I guess we’ll find out.
MR. HULL: And this -- was not the promotional -- for that facility at the time of -- of the hearing request and is -- is not currently an employee with the Commission for the Blind. Was not in a management position to oversee the disposition of this facility. I guess I’m asking the Petitioner to -- to provide a reference as to why this -- this testimony is relevant.
ALJ MEADE: Well, I’ll -- I’ll let him testify, and we can just the relevancy of it after -- after he does.
MR. HULL: Very well. Thank you, Your Honor.
ALJ MEADE: All right. Why don’t we go off the record, just so we don’t have a lot of dead air on there while we’re waiting?
(proceedings concluded at this time)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120626/f0f48e25/attachment.html>
More information about the VendorsMI
mailing list