From joeharcz at comcast.net  Thu Mar  1 02:18:50 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:18:50 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Regulation Citation for Placement of An SLA
Message-ID: <B42461D8FB744C68B72CB41475384FAD@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Daniel Frye" <danielfrye at earthlink.net>
To: <joeharcz at comcast.net>
Cc: <emily.feder at ed.gov>; <mark.snyderman at ed.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 3:09 PM
Subject: Regulation Citation for Placement of An SLA


> Joe:
> 
> Thank you for your phone call of earlier today.  Since I am 
> teleworking today, I am writing to you from my home email 
> address; ordinarily I would communicate with you from my 
> Education address.
> 
> As promised, I'm writing to provide you with the cite in Federal 
> Randolph-Sheppard regulations that confirms that the SLA in any 
> state must be placed within the rehabilitation agency responsible 
> for providing services to eligible blind consumers.  
> Consequently, the Executive Order that proposes to separate the 
> Michigan BEP program from the rehabilitation agency responsible 
> for serving the blind of Michigan (in whatever form that 
> ultimately takes) will not be valid.  This principle is outlined 
> in 34 CFR 395.2.  As explained, RSA has already conveyed this 
> problem with the currently drafted Executive Order to relevant 
> authorities in Michigan, and I feel confident that they have 
> heard our concern.  I hope this proves responsive to your 
> inquiry.
> 
> Daniel B.  Frye, JD.
> 3924 Yolando Road
> Baltimore, Maryland 21218
> (410) 241-7006 (Mobile)
> (410) 243-1818 (Home)
> (202) 245-7308 (Office)
> danielfrye at earthlink.net (Home)
> daniel.frye at ed.gov (Office)



From joeharcz at comcast.net  Thu Mar  1 13:02:14 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:02:14 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] some fed grants at jeopardy
Message-ID: <99C988E329C3443288E7ED61B63FE52B@YOUR7C60552B9E>

http://rsa.ed.gov/grant-award.cfm?nbr=RANDSHEPMI
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120301/0f466526/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Thu Mar  1 16:15:27 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 11:15:27 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] hot off the press
Message-ID: <9B8D180F09E0422B9DDD76CFFF6C57A3@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Advocates to protest Snyder's shake-up of services for the blind | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

By

Paul Egan

 

Detroit Free Press Lansing Bureau

 

 

LANSING ? Gov. Rick Snyder?s ordered shake-up of services for the blind violates federal rules and puts at risk nearly $15 million in federal rehabilitation

and training funds, say advocates who plan to demonstrate outside his office today.

 

Snyder?s plan, announced last week in an executive order, would move services for the blind out of the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and

split them between two other state departments. The Department of Human Services would be responsible for vocational rehabilitation services and the Department

of Technology, Management and Budget would be responsible for licensing blind vendors who operate in state buildings and highway rest areas.

 

But regulations to the federal Randolph-Sheppard Act related to licensing of blind vendors say only the state agency responsible for providing vocational

rehabilitation services can apply to be the state licensing agency for blind vendors.

 

Members of the National Federation of the Blind of Michigan and other advocacy groups plan a demonstration against the executive order at noon today outside

the Romney Building in Lansing, where Snyder?s offices are located. They also object to Snyder?s plan to disband the Michigan Commission for the Blind

and replace it with an advisory committee.

 

?This whole thing was ill-conceived,? said Fred Wurtzel, a spokesman for the federation. ?They did not do their homework. There are a number of other items

that we believe will unravel fairly soon.?

 

Mario Morrow, a spokesman for the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, said today ?we are currently researching and evaluating the concerns that

have been brought forth.?

 

Snyder said earlier the shake-up would promote efficiency and improve services, but advocates for the blind complain about a lack of consultation.

 

?Given the governor?s emphasis on open, transparent, and data-driven decisions in state government, we are astonished by the poorly-thought-out executive

order and the potential negative consequences it brings to blind people and the citizens of Michigan,? said Larry Posont, president of the National Federation

of the Blind of Michigan and a member of the Commission for the Blind.

 

About 40 blind vendors are licensed by the state of Michigan.

 

Contact Paul Egan: 517-372-8660 or

pegan at freepress.com

 

Source:

http://www.freep.com/article/20120301/NEWS06/120301021/rick-snyder-services-for-blind
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120301/302558eb/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Fri Mar  2 16:38:42 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 11:38:42 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] could mean lawsuit
Message-ID: <D74EF1DB210C438C926FB7920AE431FA@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Abolishing commission for blind people could mean lawsuit

 

March 2, 2012  |

Paul Egan

 

By

Paul Egan

 

Detroit Free Press Lansing Bureau

 

Lansing

Rick Snyder

Farmington Hills

University Of Michigan

list end

 

LANSING -- A dispute over an ordered shake-up in services for blind people could evolve into a legal test of Gov. Rick Snyder's executive authority, a prominent

blind attorney said Thursday.

 

Richard Bernstein of Farmington Hills, who has brought disability cases against the University of Michigan, Delta Air Lines and the Detroit Department of

Transportation, said he is researching a possible federal lawsuit against Snyder for his executive order last week abolishing the Michigan Commission for

the Blind.

 

"This was probably the most inconsiderate, mean-spirited, hostile thing that you could do to people whose lives are already made challenging," said Bernstein,

a Democrat who unsuccessfully sought the nomination for state attorney general in 2010.

 

More than a dozen blind people and supporters protested Thursday outside Snyder's Lansing office.

 

Snyder said last week that his reorganization will improve efficiencies and services to blind people. Mario Morrow, a spokesman for the Department of Licensing

and Regulatory Affairs, said Thursday that the administration is "researching and evaluating the concerns."

 

Advocates for blind people say Snyder's change violates federal rules; puts at risk nearly $15 million in federal rehabilitation and training funds, and

oversteps executive authority by abolishing a commission established by the Legislature in 1978 that gave blind Michigan residents a role in decisions

that affect them.

 

Snyder's plan moves services for blind people out of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and splits them. The Department of Human Services takes over vocational

rehabilitation services, and the Department of Technology, Management and Budget becomes responsible for licensing blind vendors who operate in state buildings

and rest areas.

 

Source:

 

 

http://www.freep.com/article/20120302/NEWS15/203020338/Abolishing-commission-for-blind-people-could-mean-lawsuit
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120302/a800af0d/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Fri Mar  2 18:14:13 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 13:14:13 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] call to action on highway vending
Message-ID: <6F4CDAA53C044D3BB0D8AD140C0847BA@Reputercat>

All-
Below is a very important email alert which was sent to the NCSAB members and stakeholders
this morning on the latest actions for the commercialization of roadside rest areas.
Time is of the essence and we all must join together immediately and contact Senator
Boxer (202) 224-3553 and Congressman Drier of the House Rules Committee
(202) 225-2305.  You could also call Senator Feinstein's office as well, and send
emails referring to the new Senate Amendment S. 1813.
Thanks to all who are taking the time to make the calls
on this very important issue to thousands of blind
vendors throughout our nation.
Here is the latest alert just put out to NCSAB. Looks like things are moving fast,
and the Senate will likely be where this is won or lost.
Good morning NCSAB members:
We have learned that the plan on the surface transportation reauthorization bill
is for the Senate to move S. 1813 first, and then for the House to take up the Senate
bill. Senator Portman of Ohio continues to push hard for the opportunity to offer
his commercialization amendment - amendment number 1742 to S. 1813 - which would
threaten business opportunities for blind entrepreneurs along federal highways and
have a devastating impact on Randolph-Sheppard programs across the country.
The Senate is poised to move quickly on S. 1813, and it is absolutely vital that
all United States Senators hear from blind vendors, SLAs, and anybody who cares about
the future of business opportunities for the blind as soon as possible. Please call
your Senators today to register your concerns with Portman amendment 1742 to S. 1813,
and pass this message along to your elected committees and consumer organizations
so that they can do the same. Again, we are working in a very tight timeframe, so
contacts will be most effective if made today.
You can reach your Senators' offices by calling the Capitol switchboard at
(202) 225-3121
.
Thank you for your continued efforts to preserve business opportunities for blind
entrepreneurs!
Take care,
Sean
Sean Whalen
Policy Associate
Linchpin Strategies, LLC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120302/90c3baf3/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Sat Mar  3 19:14:04 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 14:14:04 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required
Message-ID: <A563B268D1EC4FF2941B0559FC8AA69F@Reputercat>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Kevan Worley 
To: 'Al Falligan' ; 'Art Stevenson' ; 'Charles and Betty Allen' ; 'Jim Farley' ; 'John Fritz' ; 'Lynn Reynolds' ; 'Scott Young' ; 'Virgil Stinnett' ; 'Dave Merritt' ; 'David Phillips' ; 'Don Hudson' ; 'Gene Fleeman' ; HackneyCharles at aol.com ; 'Jeremiah Wells' ; 'Joe Shaw' ; 'John Gerber' ; 'john Jones' ; 'Lorraine Magnessun' ; 'Manny Sifuentes' ; 'Mary Hayes' ; 'Pamela' ; 'Ray Marshall' ; suncat0 at gmail.com ; terrysmith at epbfi.com ; 'Willie Black' 
Cc: 'Bridget Worley' ; Harold Wilson ; Kim Williams ; nickycolorado at netscape.net ; sharonparis at comcast.net 
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 8:49
Subject: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required


ACTION ALERT
 
TELL YOUR SENATORS TO VOTE AGAINST COMMERCIALIZATION OF HIGHWAY REST STOPS    


Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) will introduce an amendment to the transportation bill that will allow for commercial services at rest areas. Allowing state governments to sell food, fuel and convenience items directly on the shoulder of the highway will put businesses such as yours - that rely on customers exiting the highway - at a major disadvantage.  
   
Allowing commercial rest areas will not increase the overall number of hamburgers or motor fuels gallons sold, but simply transfer sales away from your current competitive business environment to the government. Simply put, commercializing rest areas will jeopardize your businesses, communities and kill jobs. 

Send a letter asking your senators to Vote NO - it will only take a few minutes.

THIS VOTE COULD COME EARLY NEXT WEEK..TAKE ACTION TODAY!
Click Here to access the NACS Grassroots website to send a pre-drafted letter.

http://www.votervoice.net/Core/core.aspx?APP=GAC&AID=1455&IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1


Thank you for your support of this important issue.



Sincerely,

 

Kevan Worley

Executive Director- National Association of Blind Merchants

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120303/8f0ff3ad/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Sat Mar  3 20:10:20 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:10:20 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [Nfbnet-members-list] FW: Legislative Alert-Surface
	TransportationBill
Message-ID: <C848FA4997FA4F82BC19DCD334C8D64F@Reputercat>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: David Andrews 
To: nfbnet-members-list at nfbnet.org 
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 0:17
Subject: [Nfbnet-members-list] FW: Legislative Alert-Surface TransportationBill



  Fellow Federationists:
   
  I am writing to update you on a potential threat to the Randolph-Sheppard program.  Congressman LaTourette and Senator Portman of Ohio are planning to offer amendments to the House and Senate versions of the surface transportation bill.  Their amendments would allow states to commercialize rest areas on federal highways and interstates.  It appears that the Senate is going to take the first action early next week (March 5-9), considering amendments to the Senate surface transportation bill, S. 1813.  Senator Portman's amendment is number 1742.  
   
  Currently, many blind vendors operate vending machines at interstate rest areas throughout the country.  If commercialization is allowed, these blind vendors stand a great chance of losing their livelihoods.  We must educate our members of Congress about the impact of commercialization on blind vendors.  
   
  I will be updating this issue as information becomes available; however, we are asking you to take immediate action to defeat this threat to the Randolph-Sheppard program.  It is essential that we make as many calls as possible on Monday, March 5, 2012.  Please see the action items listed below, and contact me with any questions.  I have included my contact information at the end of this message.  Thank you all very much in advance for your work on this issue!  
   
  Please take the following action items: 
   
  ?          Call your senators and urge them to oppose amendment number 1742 to the surface transportation bill, S. 1813.  You can be connected to your senators by calling the Capitol Switchboard at 202-225-3121.
   
  ?          Call Senator Portman (202-224-3353), and urge him to withdraw his amendment number 1742 to the Senate transportation bill, S. 1813; we must tell his office that this would negatively impact vendors in the Randolph-Sheppard program.  
   
  ?          Call Senator Harry Reid (202-224-3542), Senate Majority Leader, and urge him to refuse to allow Senator Portman's amendment number 1742 to be considered during debate on S. 1813 because of the negative impact to blind vendors that would result from this amendment.  
   
  ?          Call Senator Barbara Boxer (202-224-3553), Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, and urge her to oppose any amendment to S. 1813 that calls for commercialization on federal highways and interstates because of the negative impact to blind vendors.  
   
  Jesse
   
   
  Jesse Hartle
  Government Programs Specialist
  Phone:  (410) 659-9314, Ext. 2233
  Email:  jhartle at nfb.org
   


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Nfbnet-members-list mailing list
Nfbnet-members-list at nfbnet.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120303/6eb0e694/attachment.html>

From f.wurtzel at att.net  Sun Mar  4 02:19:06 2012
From: f.wurtzel at att.net (Fred Wurtzel)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 21:19:06 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required
In-Reply-To: <A563B268D1EC4FF2941B0559FC8AA69F@Reputercat>
References: <A563B268D1EC4FF2941B0559FC8AA69F@Reputercat>
Message-ID: <017a01ccf9ad$2debfa80$89c3ef80$@att.net>

Hi Kevan,

 

Thanks for this.  I will be on it on Monday morning.

 

Warmest Regards,

 

Fred

 

From: vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Joe Sontag
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 2:14 PM
To: VENDORSMI List; NFBMI List
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required

 

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Kevan Worley <mailto:kevanworley at blindmerchants.org>  

To: 'Al Falligan' <mailto:ruthfalligan at att.net>  ; 'Art Stevenson'
<mailto:artds55 at comcast.net>  ; 'Charles and Betty Allen'
<mailto:clbtallen at aol.com>  ; 'Jim Farley' <mailto:jimfarley86 at yahoo.com>  ;
'John Fritz' <mailto:johnfritz at centurytel.net>  ; 'Lynn Reynolds'
<mailto:lhr1827 at optonline.net>  ; 'Scott Young'
<mailto:sdy10vend at comcast.net>  ; 'Virgil Stinnett'
<mailto:one.fisherman at hawaiiantel.net>  ; 'Dave Merritt'
<mailto:dwm2 at netzero.net>  ; 'David Phillips'
<mailto:ballahack at earthlink.net>  ; 'Don Hudson'
<mailto:priscillajhudson at comcast.net>  ; 'Gene Fleeman'
<mailto:gene_fleeman at yahoo.com>  ; HackneyCharles at aol.com ; 'Jeremiah Wells'
<mailto:jeremiah54 at earthlink.net>  ; 'Joe Shaw' <mailto:jrs3147 at comcast.net>
; 'John Gerber' <mailto:jeg80 at comcast.net>  ; 'john Jones'
<mailto:jpj1955 at aol.com>  ; 'Lorraine Magnessun' <mailto:hjm2 at verizon.net>
; 'Manny Sifuentes' <mailto:mannyjs at gmail.com>  ; 'Mary Hayes'
<mailto:mhenterprise at bellsouth.net>  ; 'Pamela' <mailto:pjschnurr at att.net>
; 'Ray Marshall' <mailto:bimbo at unm.edu>  ; suncat0 at gmail.com ;
terrysmith at epbfi.com ; 'Willie Black' <mailto:wdblackis at comcast.net>  

Cc: 'Bridget Worley' <mailto:bridget at blindmerchants.org>  ; Harold Wilson
<mailto:harold.wilson2 at verizon.net>  ; Kim Williams <mailto:rkvend at aol.com>
; nickycolorado at netscape.net ; sharonparis at comcast.net 

Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 8:49

Subject: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required

 

 
<http://email.nacsonline.com/redir.asp?src=actionalert_030212_top&url=http:/
/www.votervoice.net/Groups/NACS/Advocacy/?IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1> ACTION
ALERT
 
TELL YOUR SENATORS TO VOTE AGAINST COMMERCIALIZATION OF HIGHWAY REST STOPS



Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) will introduce an amendment to the transportation
bill that will allow for commercial services at rest areas. Allowing state
governments to sell food, fuel and convenience items directly on the
shoulder of the highway will put businesses such as yours - that rely on
customers exiting the highway - at a major disadvantage.  
   
Allowing commercial rest areas will not increase the overall number of
hamburgers or motor fuels gallons sold, but simply transfer sales away from
your current competitive business environment to the government. Simply put,
commercializing rest areas will jeopardize your businesses, communities and
kill jobs. 

Send a letter asking your senators to Vote NO - it will only take a few
minutes.

THIS VOTE COULD COME EARLY NEXT WEEK..TAKE ACTION TODAY!
Click Here
<http://email.nacsonline.com/redir.asp?src=actionalert_030212&url=http://www
.votervoice.net/Groups/NACS/Advocacy/?IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1>  to access
the NACS Grassroots website to send a pre-drafted letter.

http://www.votervoice.net/Core/core.aspx?APP=GAC
<http://www.votervoice.net/Core/core.aspx?APP=GAC&AID=1455&IssueID=27808&Sit
eID=-1> &AID=1455&IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1


Thank you for your support of this important issue.

Sincerely,

 

Kevan Worley

Executive Director- National Association of Blind Merchants

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120303/151089b5/attachment.html>

From f.wurtzel at att.net  Sun Mar  4 02:21:01 2012
From: f.wurtzel at att.net (Fred Wurtzel)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 21:21:01 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required
In-Reply-To: <A563B268D1EC4FF2941B0559FC8AA69F@Reputercat>
References: <A563B268D1EC4FF2941B0559FC8AA69F@Reputercat>
Message-ID: <017f01ccf9ad$725dcc70$57196550$@att.net>

Hi Joe,

 

Thanks for the heads-up.

 

Warmest Regards,

 

Fred

 

From: vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Joe Sontag
Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 2:14 PM
To: VENDORSMI List; NFBMI List
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required

 

 

----- Original Message ----- 

From: Kevan Worley <mailto:kevanworley at blindmerchants.org>  

To: 'Al Falligan' <mailto:ruthfalligan at att.net>  ; 'Art Stevenson'
<mailto:artds55 at comcast.net>  ; 'Charles and Betty Allen'
<mailto:clbtallen at aol.com>  ; 'Jim Farley' <mailto:jimfarley86 at yahoo.com>  ;
'John Fritz' <mailto:johnfritz at centurytel.net>  ; 'Lynn Reynolds'
<mailto:lhr1827 at optonline.net>  ; 'Scott Young'
<mailto:sdy10vend at comcast.net>  ; 'Virgil Stinnett'
<mailto:one.fisherman at hawaiiantel.net>  ; 'Dave Merritt'
<mailto:dwm2 at netzero.net>  ; 'David Phillips'
<mailto:ballahack at earthlink.net>  ; 'Don Hudson'
<mailto:priscillajhudson at comcast.net>  ; 'Gene Fleeman'
<mailto:gene_fleeman at yahoo.com>  ; HackneyCharles at aol.com ; 'Jeremiah Wells'
<mailto:jeremiah54 at earthlink.net>  ; 'Joe Shaw' <mailto:jrs3147 at comcast.net>
; 'John Gerber' <mailto:jeg80 at comcast.net>  ; 'john Jones'
<mailto:jpj1955 at aol.com>  ; 'Lorraine Magnessun' <mailto:hjm2 at verizon.net>
; 'Manny Sifuentes' <mailto:mannyjs at gmail.com>  ; 'Mary Hayes'
<mailto:mhenterprise at bellsouth.net>  ; 'Pamela' <mailto:pjschnurr at att.net>
; 'Ray Marshall' <mailto:bimbo at unm.edu>  ; suncat0 at gmail.com ;
terrysmith at epbfi.com ; 'Willie Black' <mailto:wdblackis at comcast.net>  

Cc: 'Bridget Worley' <mailto:bridget at blindmerchants.org>  ; Harold Wilson
<mailto:harold.wilson2 at verizon.net>  ; Kim Williams <mailto:rkvend at aol.com>
; nickycolorado at netscape.net ; sharonparis at comcast.net 

Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 8:49

Subject: Action Alert! Your Immediate Action is Required

 

 
<http://email.nacsonline.com/redir.asp?src=actionalert_030212_top&url=http:/
/www.votervoice.net/Groups/NACS/Advocacy/?IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1> ACTION
ALERT
 
TELL YOUR SENATORS TO VOTE AGAINST COMMERCIALIZATION OF HIGHWAY REST STOPS



Senator Rob Portman (R-OH) will introduce an amendment to the transportation
bill that will allow for commercial services at rest areas. Allowing state
governments to sell food, fuel and convenience items directly on the
shoulder of the highway will put businesses such as yours - that rely on
customers exiting the highway - at a major disadvantage.  
   
Allowing commercial rest areas will not increase the overall number of
hamburgers or motor fuels gallons sold, but simply transfer sales away from
your current competitive business environment to the government. Simply put,
commercializing rest areas will jeopardize your businesses, communities and
kill jobs. 

Send a letter asking your senators to Vote NO - it will only take a few
minutes.

THIS VOTE COULD COME EARLY NEXT WEEK..TAKE ACTION TODAY!
Click Here
<http://email.nacsonline.com/redir.asp?src=actionalert_030212&url=http://www
.votervoice.net/Groups/NACS/Advocacy/?IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1>  to access
the NACS Grassroots website to send a pre-drafted letter.

http://www.votervoice.net/Core/core.aspx?APP=GAC
<http://www.votervoice.net/Core/core.aspx?APP=GAC&AID=1455&IssueID=27808&Sit
eID=-1> &AID=1455&IssueID=27808&SiteID=-1


Thank you for your support of this important issue.

Sincerely,

 

Kevan Worley

Executive Director- National Association of Blind Merchants

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120303/9c16b184/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 20:51:07 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 15:51:07 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] volunteers still needed
Message-ID: <BA849F125C5347F9A022D3D4FFCE6640@Reputercat>

As many of you know, the NFB of Michigan held a successful demonstration at the Governor's
offices on March 1 in protest of his executive order that abolishes the Commission
for the Blind and would split up the pieces between two different departments. This
was followed by visits to the offices of many members of the House Appropriations
Committee.  We believe that it is crucial to reach as many members of both the House
and Senate appropriations committies with our message as soon as we can in order
to stop this ill-conceived plan of the Governor's in its tracks, but there are still
more contacts to be made, especially on the Senate side.
If you can be in Lansing on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, March 6, 7 or 8,  and
have time to pay a visit to some of our state senators and representatives, then
I need to hear from you as soon as possible.  Right now, Tuesday and Thursday are the days when we need help most.
I may be reached at:
suncat0 at gmail.com
or by phone at:
(517) 256-2514
Hope to hear from a number of you soon!
Joe Sontag
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120304/7e7bc63c/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Mon Mar  5 15:59:39 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:59:39 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] nfb and restaurant assoc pr
Message-ID: <D14405FDB48A4A90AFC46B5F8AA4616E@YOUR7C60552B9E>

National Federation of the Blind and National Restaurant Association Urge Congress to Reject Commercializing Rest Stops

 

WASHINGTON -- The

National Federation of the Blind,

the oldest and largest nationwide organization of blind Americans, and the National Restaurant Association, the largest organization of restaurant owners,

today urged the United States Congress to reject legislation that would allow the commercialization of highway rest stops. Currently, the only commercial

activity permitted at such rest stops is the operation of vending machines by blind entrepreneurs under the Randolph-Sheppard Act. Commercializing rest

stops would also jeopardize the business of restaurants and convenience stores that operate at highway exits.

 

Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said: ?This legislation would threaten the livelihoods of hundreds of blind entrepreneurs

in the United States who depend on revenue from rest-stop vending machines. With an unemployment rate among blind Americans that exceeds 70 percent, such

a move is deeply irresponsible, since these entrepreneurs will lose their businesses and be forced to rely on public assistance. We urge Congress to reject

this ill-considered and reckless proposal.?

 

Brendan Flanagan, a spokesperson for the National Restaurant Association, said: ?This legislation threatens private businesses of all sizes and their employees

who rely on drivers exiting the highway in order to purchase food and conveniences. It is an attempt to take money away from these businesses to fill state

coffers. It is anti-competitive and will kill jobs.?

List of 1 items

? 

list end

 

Annette Lutz, who operates a vending facility at an interstate rest area on I-75 in Auglaize County, Ohio, said: ?I do not know how I will contribute to

supporting my family if this legislation passes, since I rely on the income from the vending machines that I?m permitted to operate to pay our bills and

raise my child. My vending machines can?t compete with state-financed full-service food operations, so my business will disappear. My blind daughter is

also interested in becoming an entrepreneur but if this legislation passes that opportunity will not be there for her. I hope Congress will remember people

like us and shut down this effort to take money away from entrepreneurs and give it to the state government.?

 

The legislation, which is part of a transportation bill being considered in both houses of Congress, has been put forward by Senator Rob Portman (R-OH)

and Congressman Steve LaTourette (R-OH). The legislation is also opposed by the National Council of State Agencies for the Blind, the National Association

of Convenience Stores (NACS), and the National Association of Truck Stop Operators (NATSO), among others.

 

About the National Federation of the Blind

 

With more than 50,000 members, the National Federation of the Blind is the largest and most influential membership organization of blind people in the United

States. The NFB improves blind people?s lives through advocacy, education, research, technology, and programs encouraging independence and self-confidence.

It is the leading force in the blindness field today and the voice of the nation's blind. In January 2004 the NFB opened the National Federation of the

Blind Jernigan Institute, the first research and training center in the United States for the blind led by the blind.

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120305/34e1c7b7/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 16:58:49 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:58:49 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] nfb and restaurant assoc pr
Message-ID: <C61E40AC0D694B9FB23A680A0F1CC893@Reputercat>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: <Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 10:59
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] nfb and restaurant assoc pr


National Federation of the Blind and National Restaurant Association Urge 
Congress to Reject Commercializing Rest Stops



WASHINGTON -- The

National Federation of the Blind,

the oldest and largest nationwide organization of blind Americans, and the 
National Restaurant Association, the largest organization of restaurant 
owners,

today urged the United States Congress to reject legislation that would 
allow the commercialization of highway rest stops. Currently, the only 
commercial

activity permitted at such rest stops is the operation of vending machines 
by blind entrepreneurs under the Randolph-Sheppard Act. Commercializing rest

stops would also jeopardize the business of restaurants and convenience 
stores that operate at highway exits.



Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said: 
?This legislation would threaten the livelihoods of hundreds of blind 
entrepreneurs

in the United States who depend on revenue from rest-stop vending machines. 
With an unemployment rate among blind Americans that exceeds 70 percent, 
such

a move is deeply irresponsible, since these entrepreneurs will lose their 
businesses and be forced to rely on public assistance. We urge Congress to 
reject

this ill-considered and reckless proposal.?



Brendan Flanagan, a spokesperson for the National Restaurant Association, 
said: ?This legislation threatens private businesses of all sizes and their 
employees

who rely on drivers exiting the highway in order to purchase food and 
conveniences. It is an attempt to take money away from these businesses to 
fill state

coffers. It is anti-competitive and will kill jobs.?

List of 1 items

?

list end



Annette Lutz, who operates a vending facility at an interstate rest area on 
I-75 in Auglaize County, Ohio, said: ?I do not know how I will contribute to

supporting my family if this legislation passes, since I rely on the income 
from the vending machines that I?m permitted to operate to pay our bills and

raise my child. My vending machines can?t compete with state-financed 
full-service food operations, so my business will disappear. My blind 
daughter is

also interested in becoming an entrepreneur but if this legislation passes 
that opportunity will not be there for her. I hope Congress will remember 
people

like us and shut down this effort to take money away from entrepreneurs and 
give it to the state government.?



The legislation, which is part of a transportation bill being considered in 
both houses of Congress, has been put forward by Senator Rob Portman (R-OH)

and Congressman Steve LaTourette (R-OH). The legislation is also opposed by 
the National Council of State Agencies for the Blind, the National 
Association

of Convenience Stores (NACS), and the National Association of Truck Stop 
Operators (NATSO), among others.



About the National Federation of the Blind



With more than 50,000 members, the National Federation of the Blind is the 
largest and most influential membership organization of blind people in the 
United

States. The NFB improves blind people?s lives through advocacy, education, 
research, technology, and programs encouraging independence and 
self-confidence.

It is the leading force in the blindness field today and the voice of the 
nation's blind. In January 2004 the NFB opened the National Federation of 
the

Blind Jernigan Institute, the first research and training center in the 
United States for the blind led by the blind.


_______________________________________________
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
nfbmi-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/suncat0%40gmail.com




From joeharcz at comcast.net  Mon Mar  5 17:37:39 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 12:37:39 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: Response to FOIA Request Dated February 2, 2012,
	Received March 2, 2012
Message-ID: <96F5D3E1DF0E4DD3A8C552433DC8886E@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Farmer, Mel (LARA) 
To: 'joe harcz Comcast' 
Cc: Cannon, Patrick (LARA) ; Haynes, Carla (LARA) 
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 12:30 PM
Subject: FW: Response to FOIA Request Dated February 2, 2012, Received March 2, 2012


 

 

 

March 5, 2012

 

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail: joeharcz at comcast.net

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI 48458

 

Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

 

Dear Mr. Harcz:

 

This notice is in response to your email request to me  dated February 2, 2012, received March 2, 2012, for copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

".any e-mail correspondence between any personnel of the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs and the United States Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services Administration prior to and related to Executive Order No. 2012-2."

 

 Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

 

Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state's FOIA ,your request is granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the Department falling within the scope of your request, subject to MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

 

MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state's FOIA provides that a public body may charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search, examination, review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt information. The Department has determined that it's +3,600  employees will have to be drawn away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of 10-15 minutes each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records to determine if they are responsive to your request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible statutory exemptions from public disclosure. For the above reasons, the Department, pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(3) of the FOIA, has determined that failure to charge a fee, in this particular instance, will result in unreasonably high costs to the Department. The estimated costs to process this request, based on the hourly wages (including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid Department employee ( General Office Assistant 5 at $25.10/hour, including benefits) capable of performing the necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00, is  $18, 805.00. This estimated processing cost is based on the following calculations:

--10 to 15 minutes X 3,600 employees =36,000 & 54,000 minutes=600 to 900 hours

--600 hours & 900 hours X $25.10/hour = $15,060 & $22,590 

--$15,060 + $22,590 = $37,650 X 50% = $18,825.00 average

--$18,825.00 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $18,805.00

 

Therefore, in order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular request, based on the hourly wages of the lowest paid Department employees capable of performing the necessary tasks to process the request, under MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the state's FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $9,402.50 (50% of the $ 18,805.00) which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

 

 

After receipt of the good faith deposit of $9,392.50 and upon completing the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed exemptions; and inform you of your remedial rights.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Melvin Farmer, Jr.

Central FOIA Coordinator

 

                                                                               DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

                                                                                       FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

 

NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

Mt. Morris, MI  48458

 

REQUEST RECEIVED:  March, 2012

TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

 

DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

(517) 373-0194

Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages and benefit costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records, the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs exceeding $50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs are related to your request for:  E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE FROM 

ALL  DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION REHABILITATION SERVICES RELATED TO EXECUTIVE ORDER 2012-2

 

INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

 

LABOR COST ESTIMATE

--Search/Review: Hours: 600 to 900 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $25.10 =   $15,060.00 to $22,590.00

-- Average: $15,060 = $22,590 = $37,650 X 50% =                                               $18,825.00

               

TOTAL LABOR ESTIMATE:                                                                                                              $18,825.00

POSTAGE (estimate):     $0

DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of $.25       $0

OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.):        $0

SUBTOTAL:                                                                                                           $0

Less waived indigency offset:                                                                      $20.00

INVOICE TOTAL:                                                                                                                              $18,805.00

 

DEPOSIT*                                                                                                                                            $9,402.50

 

REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID:                                                                                          $9,402.50

 

Make check or money order payable to:              

STATE OF MICHIGAN                             

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

Office Services Mailroom

7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

Lansing, MI  48909

 

PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

 

*Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may vary somewhat

  from this amount.

 

 

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120305/a78a8981/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar  6 17:23:30 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 12:23:30 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: FOIA
Message-ID: <2ECB1E771FC24BB88F994F369B1EC684@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Farmer, Mel (LARA) 
To: 'joe harcz Comcast' 
Cc: Cannon, Patrick (LARA) ; Haynes, Carla (LARA) ; Burton, Diane (LARA) 
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:59 AM
Subject: FW: FOIA


 
March 6, 2012

 

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail: joeharcz at comcast.net

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI 48458

 

Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

 

Dear Mr. Harcz:

 

This notice is in response to your February 29, 2012 email request to me for copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

".any e-mail correspondence between any personnel within the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs during the past two months relative to any transfers in fact or in the powers and duties of the Michigan Commission for the Blind including its board that went into Executive Order No. 2012-2."

 

 Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

 

Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state's FOIA ,your request is granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the Department falling within the scope of your request; and subject to the payment of processing fees assessed per MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

 

MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state's FOIA provides that a public body may charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search, examination, review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt information. The Department has determined that no Michigan Commission for the Blind staff have any records related to this particular request. The Department has also determined that at least nine executive level employees will have to be drawn away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of one hour each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records from December 29, 2011 through February 29, 2012 to determine if they are responsive to your request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible statutory exemptions from public disclosure. Further, as it is possible that some emails responsive to this request may have been purged during the timeframe of this request, the Department requested that the Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) provide an estimate of costs to search for and retrieve purged records that may be responsive to this request. The DTMB estimate (see attached) is $745,416.00 .  

 

The Department's   estimated costs to process this request, based on the hourly wages ($62.34 /hr, including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid Department employee ( State Division Office Administrator  17)capable of performing the necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00, is   $541.06 .This  estimated processing cost is based on the following calculations:

--9 employees X 9 hours = 9 hours 

--9 hours X $62.34/hour = $561.06

--$561.06 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $541.06

 

The combined DTMB and Department estimated costs to process this particular request is $745,957.06, including the indigency waiver of $20.00.

 

For the abovementioned reasons and pursuant to MCL 14.234, Section 4(3) of the state's FOIA, the Department has determined that failure to charge a fee in this particular instance would result in unreasonably high costs and undue financial and administrative burdens to the Department.

 

In order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular request, based on the above and pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the state's FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $372, 978.53 (50% of the $ 745,957.06 estimated cost)

 which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

 

 

After receipt of the good faith deposit of $372,978.53 and upon completing the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed exemptions; and inform you of your remedial rights.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Melvin Farmer, Jr.

Central FOIA Coordinator

 

Attachment

 

                                                                          DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

                                                                                 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

 

NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

Mt. Morris, MI  48458

 

REQUEST RECEIVED:  February 29, 2012

TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

 

DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

(517) 373-0194

Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages and benefit costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records, the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs exceeding $50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs are related to your request for: 

Copies of E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE OF ALL DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES RELATED TO EXECUTIVE 

ORDER 2012-2  FROM DECEMBER 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2012.

 

INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

 

LABOR COST ESTIMATE

--Search/Review: Hours: 9 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $62.34 =                                         $561.06

POSTAGE (estimate):                                                                                                            --

DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of $.25                             --

OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.):                   $745,416.00

SUBTOTAL:                                                                                                                      $745,977.06

Less waived indigency offset:                                                                                  $           20.00

INVOICE TOTAL:                                                                                                             $745,957.06

 

DEPOSIT*                                                                                                                         $372,978.53

 

REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID:                                                                      $372,978.53

 

Make check or money order payable to:              

STATE OF MICHIGAN                             

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

Office Services Mailroom

7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

Lansing, MI  48909

 

PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

 

*Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may vary somewhat

  from this amount.

 

 

DTMB ATTACHMENT

 From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB) 
 Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:23 PM
 To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
 Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Estimate without Governor's email accounts

Approximately 56 days backups to restore 

Number of stores to restore around 6

Number mailboxes = 9 estimate ( 9 clients in 6 stores)

Number of stores to restore 56 X 6 = 336

Cost 6 stores to restore per date = 2218.50

Total estimated cost (2218.50 X 336) = $745416.00

Ram 

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan - DTMB

From: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB) 
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:23 AM
To: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Roughly 9 or so:

Steven Hilfinger

Steve Arwood

Mike Zimmer

Melanie Brown

Diane Burton

Karen Towne

MCB Director Cannon

MCB Commissioners??? - No names given here

Governor's E-mail??

 

From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB) 
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:20 AM
To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

 

Dorinda

Can you provide number of email accounts and their names to estimate cost for FOIA?. We do not have access to their archives(.pst files).   Ram  

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan - DTMB"

 

 

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120306/747a505b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5675 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120306/747a505b/attachment.jpg>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar  6 21:37:32 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:37:32 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: FOIA
Message-ID: <C53969E1C88C41518D43FDC10AAC63A9@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: joe harcz Comcast 
To: Farmer, Mel (LARA) 
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: FOIA


March 6, 2012

Dear Mr. Farmer,

I am writing to thank you for your $20 indigency waiver on this request. Let me tell you that sure takes the sting out of this thing.

I certainly hope the "rocket scientists" over there at the Department of Technology Management and Budget didn't burn out the entire MAIN system with their calculation of over time for all these GS-17 tasked with all this very sensitive information regarding public policy that could impact tens of millions of federal dollars meant for people with disabilities.

Anyway thanks so much for the $20 item once again.

Sincerely,

Paul "Joe" Harcz, Jr.

cc: several

(P.S. I'd let you know whom I'm cc'g here, but then it would cost you a whole bunch of money for that little piece of information.)
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Farmer, Mel (LARA) 
  To: 'joe harcz Comcast' 
  Cc: Cannon, Patrick (LARA) ; Haynes, Carla (LARA) ; Burton, Diane (LARA) 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:59 AM
  Subject: FW: FOIA


   
  March 6, 2012

   

  Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

  E-mail: joeharcz at comcast.net

  1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

  Mt. Morris, MI 48458

   

  Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

   

  Dear Mr. Harcz:

   

  This notice is in response to your February 29, 2012 email request to me for copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

  ".any e-mail correspondence between any personnel within the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs during the past two months relative to any transfers in fact or in the powers and duties of the Michigan Commission for the Blind including its board that went into Executive Order No. 2012-2."

   

   Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

   

  Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state's FOIA ,your request is granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the Department falling within the scope of your request; and subject to the payment of processing fees assessed per MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

   

  MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state's FOIA provides that a public body may charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search, examination, review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt information. The Department has determined that no Michigan Commission for the Blind staff have any records related to this particular request. The Department has also determined that at least nine executive level employees will have to be drawn away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of one hour each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records from December 29, 2011 through February 29, 2012 to determine if they are responsive to your request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible statutory exemptions from public disclosure. Further, as it is possible that some emails responsive to this request may have been purged during the timeframe of this request, the Department requested that the Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) provide an estimate of costs to search for and retrieve purged records that may be responsive to this request. The DTMB estimate (see attached) is $745,416.00 .  

   

  The Department's   estimated costs to process this request, based on the hourly wages ($62.34 /hr, including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid Department employee ( State Division Office Administrator  17)capable of performing the necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00, is   $541.06 .This  estimated processing cost is based on the following calculations:

  --9 employees X 9 hours = 9 hours 

  --9 hours X $62.34/hour = $561.06

  --$561.06 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $541.06

   

  The combined DTMB and Department estimated costs to process this particular request is $745,957.06, including the indigency waiver of $20.00.

   

  For the abovementioned reasons and pursuant to MCL 14.234, Section 4(3) of the state's FOIA, the Department has determined that failure to charge a fee in this particular instance would result in unreasonably high costs and undue financial and administrative burdens to the Department.

   

  In order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular request, based on the above and pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the state's FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $372, 978.53 (50% of the $ 745,957.06 estimated cost)

   which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

   

   

  After receipt of the good faith deposit of $372,978.53 and upon completing the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed exemptions; and inform you of your remedial rights.

   

  Sincerely,

   

   

  Melvin Farmer, Jr.

  Central FOIA Coordinator

   

  Attachment

   

                                                                            DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

                                                                                   FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

   

  NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

  Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

  E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

  1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

  Mt. Morris, MI  48458

   

  REQUEST RECEIVED:  February 29, 2012

  TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

  REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

  EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

  EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

  REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

  ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

   

  DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

  (517) 373-0194

  Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

  The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages and benefit costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records, the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs exceeding $50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs are related to your request for: 

  Copies of E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE OF ALL DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES RELATED TO EXECUTIVE 

  ORDER 2012-2  FROM DECEMBER 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2012.

   

  INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

   

  LABOR COST ESTIMATE

  --Search/Review: Hours: 9 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $62.34 =                                         $561.06

  POSTAGE (estimate):                                                                                                            --

  DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of $.25                             --

  OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.):                   $745,416.00

  SUBTOTAL:                                                                                                                      $745,977.06

  Less waived indigency offset:                                                                                  $           20.00

  INVOICE TOTAL:                                                                                                             $745,957.06

   

  DEPOSIT*                                                                                                                         $372,978.53

   

  REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID:                                                                      $372,978.53

   

  Make check or money order payable to:              

  STATE OF MICHIGAN                             

  Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

  Office Services Mailroom

  7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

  Lansing, MI  48909

   

  PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

   

  *Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may vary somewhat

    from this amount.

   

   

  DTMB ATTACHMENT

   From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB) 
   Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:23 PM
   To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
   Subject: RE: FOIA

  Dorinda

  Estimate without Governor's email accounts

  Approximately 56 days backups to restore 

  Number of stores to restore around 6

  Number mailboxes = 9 estimate ( 9 clients in 6 stores)

  Number of stores to restore 56 X 6 = 336

  Cost 6 stores to restore per date = 2218.50

  Total estimated cost (2218.50 X 336) = $745416.00

  Ram 

  R Surapaneni

  State of Michigan - DTMB

  From: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB) 
  Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:23 AM
  To: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
  Subject: RE: FOIA

  Roughly 9 or so:

  Steven Hilfinger

  Steve Arwood

  Mike Zimmer

  Melanie Brown

  Diane Burton

  Karen Towne

  MCB Director Cannon

  MCB Commissioners??? - No names given here

  Governor's E-mail??

   

  From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB) 
  Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:20 AM
  To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
  Subject: RE: FOIA

   

  Dorinda

  Can you provide number of email accounts and their names to estimate cost for FOIA?. We do not have access to their archives(.pst files).   Ram  

  R Surapaneni

  State of Michigan - DTMB"

   

   

   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120306/9534cf4a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5675 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120306/9534cf4a/attachment.jpg>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar  6 22:49:22 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 17:49:22 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw:  Fw: FOIA
Message-ID: <0F2AEFD2B19546C9AF51AA1B4EEEBC28@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: joe harcz Comcast 
To: nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org 
Cc: Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org 
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 4:37 PM
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: FOIA



----- Original Message ----- 
From: joe harcz Comcast 
To: Farmer, Mel (LARA) 
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: FOIA


March 6, 2012

Dear Mr. Farmer,

I am writing to thank you for your $20 indigency waiver on this request. Let me tell you that sure takes the sting out of this thing.

I certainly hope the "rocket scientists" over there at the Department of Technology Management and Budget didn't burn out the entire MAIN system with their calculation of over time for all these GS-17 tasked with all this very sensitive information regarding public policy that could impact tens of millions of federal dollars meant for people with disabilities.

Anyway thanks so much for the $20 item once again.

Sincerely,

Paul "Joe" Harcz, Jr.

cc: several

(P.S. I'd let you know whom I'm cc'g here, but then it would cost you a whole bunch of money for that little piece of information.)
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Farmer, Mel (LARA) 
  To: 'joe harcz Comcast' 
  Cc: Cannon, Patrick (LARA) ; Haynes, Carla (LARA) ; Burton, Diane (LARA) 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:59 AM
  Subject: FW: FOIA


   
  March 6, 2012

   

  Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

  E-mail: joeharcz at comcast.net

  1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

  Mt. Morris, MI 48458

   

  Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

   

  Dear Mr. Harcz:

   

  This notice is in response to your February 29, 2012 email request to me for copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

  ".any e-mail correspondence between any personnel within the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs during the past two months relative to any transfers in fact or in the powers and duties of the Michigan Commission for the Blind including its board that went into Executive Order No. 2012-2."

   

   Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the state's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

   

  Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state's FOIA ,your request is granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the Department falling within the scope of your request; and subject to the payment of processing fees assessed per MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

   

  MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state's FOIA provides that a public body may charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search, examination, review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt information. The Department has determined that no Michigan Commission for the Blind staff have any records related to this particular request. The Department has also determined that at least nine executive level employees will have to be drawn away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of one hour each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records from December 29, 2011 through February 29, 2012 to determine if they are responsive to your request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible statutory exemptions from public disclosure. Further, as it is possible that some emails responsive to this request may have been purged during the timeframe of this request, the Department requested that the Michigan Department of Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) provide an estimate of costs to search for and retrieve purged records that may be responsive to this request. The DTMB estimate (see attached) is $745,416.00 .  

   

  The Department's   estimated costs to process this request, based on the hourly wages ($62.34 /hr, including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid Department employee ( State Division Office Administrator  17)capable of performing the necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00, is   $541.06 .This  estimated processing cost is based on the following calculations:

  --9 employees X 9 hours = 9 hours 

  --9 hours X $62.34/hour = $561.06

  --$561.06 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $541.06

   

  The combined DTMB and Department estimated costs to process this particular request is $745,957.06, including the indigency waiver of $20.00.

   

  For the abovementioned reasons and pursuant to MCL 14.234, Section 4(3) of the state's FOIA, the Department has determined that failure to charge a fee in this particular instance would result in unreasonably high costs and undue financial and administrative burdens to the Department.

   

  In order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular request, based on the above and pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the state's FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $372, 978.53 (50% of the $ 745,957.06 estimated cost)

   which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

   

   

  After receipt of the good faith deposit of $372,978.53 and upon completing the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed exemptions; and inform you of your remedial rights.

   

  Sincerely,

   

   

  Melvin Farmer, Jr.

  Central FOIA Coordinator

   

  Attachment

   

                                                                            DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

                                                                                   FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

   

  NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

  Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

  E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

  1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

  Mt. Morris, MI  48458

   

  REQUEST RECEIVED:  February 29, 2012

  TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

  REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

  EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

  EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

  REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

  ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

   

  DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

  (517) 373-0194

  Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

  The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages and benefit costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records, the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs exceeding $50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs are related to your request for: 

  Copies of E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE OF ALL DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES RELATED TO EXECUTIVE 

  ORDER 2012-2  FROM DECEMBER 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2012.

   

  INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

   

  LABOR COST ESTIMATE

  --Search/Review: Hours: 9 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $62.34 =                                         $561.06

  POSTAGE (estimate):                                                                                                            --

  DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of $.25                             --

  OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.):                   $745,416.00

  SUBTOTAL:                                                                                                                      $745,977.06

  Less waived indigency offset:                                                                                  $           20.00

  INVOICE TOTAL:                                                                                                             $745,957.06

   

  DEPOSIT*                                                                                                                         $372,978.53

   

  REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID:                                                                      $372,978.53

   

  Make check or money order payable to:              

  STATE OF MICHIGAN                             

  Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

  Office Services Mailroom

  7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

  Lansing, MI  48909

   

  PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

   

  *Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may vary somewhat

    from this amount.

   

   

  DTMB ATTACHMENT

   From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB) 
   Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:23 PM
   To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
   Subject: RE: FOIA

  Dorinda

  Estimate without Governor's email accounts

  Approximately 56 days backups to restore 

  Number of stores to restore around 6

  Number mailboxes = 9 estimate ( 9 clients in 6 stores)

  Number of stores to restore 56 X 6 = 336

  Cost 6 stores to restore per date = 2218.50

  Total estimated cost (2218.50 X 336) = $745416.00

  Ram 

  R Surapaneni

  State of Michigan - DTMB

  From: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB) 
  Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:23 AM
  To: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
  Subject: RE: FOIA

  Roughly 9 or so:

  Steven Hilfinger

  Steve Arwood

  Mike Zimmer

  Melanie Brown

  Diane Burton

  Karen Towne

  MCB Director Cannon

  MCB Commissioners??? - No names given here

  Governor's E-mail??

   

  From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB) 
  Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:20 AM
  To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
  Subject: RE: FOIA

   

  Dorinda

  Can you provide number of email accounts and their names to estimate cost for FOIA?. We do not have access to their archives(.pst files).   Ram  

  R Surapaneni

  State of Michigan - DTMB"

   

   

   



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
Vendorsmi mailing list
Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Vendorsmi:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120306/07cef2f7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5675 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120306/07cef2f7/attachment.jpg>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Wed Mar  7 15:21:12 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 10:21:12 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] rehab act ada meeting info request
Message-ID: <45E3CA25D7B740F3BBC635D256869F15@YOUR7C60552B9E>

I suggest all citizens do likewise...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: "Patrick Cannon MCB Dir." <cannonp at MICHIGAN.GOV>
Cc: "lydia Schuck MCB Comm." <laschuck at juno.com>; "MARK CODY" 
<MCODY at mpas.org>; "Senator John Gleason" <senjgleason at senate.michigan.gov>; 
"Richard Bernstein Esq" <rbernstein at sambernstein.com>; "Phyllis Magbanua" 
<phyllismagbanua at comcast.net>; "Craig McManus RSA" <Craig.McManus at ed.gov>; 
<nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>; "Elmer Cerano MPAS" <ECERANO at mpas.org>; "Joe Sibley 
MCBVI Pres." <joe.sibley at comcast.net>; "John Scott MCB Comm." 
<jcscot at sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 8:10 AM
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] rehab act ada meeting info request


> March 7 2012 ADA Rehab Act Request
>
>
>
> Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
>
> 1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.
>
> Mt. Morris, MI  48458
>
> 810-516-5262
>
> joeharcz at comcast.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Re: Information Related to Next MCB Meeting
>
>
>
> Patrick D. cannon
>
> Director, Michigan Commission for the Blind
>
>
>
> (VIA E-mail)
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Mr. Cannon,
>
>
>
> I am writing today to request all correspondences and all information 
> including draft meeting minutes, ALJ rulings, state plan data, and 
> information related to the financial activities of the Michigan Commission 
> for the Blind and the establishment of the agenda for its next scheduled 
> meeting. Of course, these should include all correspondences between 
> yourself and MCB Commissioners as well as all LARA staff including Deputy 
> Director Arwood in this regard.
>
>
>
> As these documents relate to meetings required under the Rehabilitation 
> Act of 1973, and whereas that very act requires all information related to 
> them is made routinely available and accessible to members of the public 
> this is not a Freedom of Information Act Request. Rather it is again a 
> request made pursuant to known obligations; known civil rights 
> obligations, pursuant to relevant provisions of the Rehabilitation Act and 
> provisions of Title II, subpart e, of the Americans with Disabilities Act 
> of 1990.
>
>
>
> I, as a blind citizen request timely delivery of the requested information 
> without surcharge as either/or Word attachments to my e-mail address 
> listed above and/or plain text enclosures to same.
>
>
>
> Failure to respond let alone to provide the requested information is a 
> violation of my civil rights and is actionable.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
>
>
>
> Cc: Steven Arwood, LARA
>
> Cc: MCB Board
>
> Cc: National Federation of the Blind
>
> Cc: MCBVI
>
> Cc: Richard Bernstein, Esq.
>
> Cc: Michigan Protection and Advocacy Services
>
> Cc: Office for Civil Rights, Education
>
> Cc: RSA
>
> Cc: Senator John Gleason
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfbmi-talk mailing list
> nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nfbmi-talk:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net 




From joeharcz at comcast.net  Thu Mar  8 02:31:07 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 21:31:07 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here
Message-ID: <353A8240893B4D5BB89A9D830A0A3261@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 6:17 PM
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here


Dear Mr. Farmer,
We might need a U.S. and Michigan Attorney General's ruling on such recent 
purges of information as those you suggest don't you think.
 Regardless we might also need some court actions which you will surely 
lose, but don't forget the federal civil rights ramifications here as you've 
violated
my civil rights and again those of my class over and over again on these 
accounts using your abuses of State law...I certainly will be asking several 
attorney's
at law about this issue as you present it as well as those within the 
Michigan attorney General's office. And if that is not enough I'm going for 
personal
actions against yourself and others in this sordid affair.
I've already sent both your ludicrous e-mail here and the cc's of these 
principles in law involved have gone viral, aka the internet.
Best thing I can figure here for yourself and others involved is to be as 
open, transparent and  well.. transparent and not to continue to 
obfiscate...
 as you are as possible...otherwise ...well you know follow the laws of this 
land and not try to snow and mess with a man who is blind just because he is
blind.
That sort of thing can get folks like yourself in a whole lot of trouble and 
it sure can get the ones you are covering for in more trouble.
Say have you heard of "spoliation"?
Well I'm sure the feds and the Michigan A.G. have heard of that term.
Now, Mr. Farmer when you go to Federal Court are you certain that you wish 
to report that those cited actually destroyed electronic records as you've 
suggested
herein?
and are you sure as FOIA officer for the LARA personnel whom have violated 
state and federal laws here as you've suggested: namely Hilfiger, Zimmer, 
Atwood,
Cannon, et al  that you, Mr. Farmer wishes to fall upon his sword to protect 
them in these regards?
Or do you wish for me to pay your sorry behind quadzillions in personal 
funds for public records that should be made public in the first instance? 
Let me
tell you sir the only one paying for anything in these regards will be 
yourself in court orders and that goes to the scofflaws you are covering for 
too.
I'm really getting pretty tired of dealing with pathetic public officials 
here like yourself who is supposed to make public records accessable and who 
because
of my blindness and poverty preys upon me in such a vicious manner that is 
most ludicrous and a violation of civil and Constitutional rights upon its 
very
face.
and  I think it is a matter of federal investigation and again there are 
issues of spoliation of records that are criminal in nature involved here.
The choices for you, Mr. Farmer are whether or not you are going to remit 
required documents to this citizen and to the public or whether or not you 
risk
criminal charges.
For suborning spoliation by other means is indeed a criminal offense as are 
spoliation of anything or aiding and abetting in same.
Now this said I'm formally requesting right now from you Mr. Farmer any 
directive from the likes of Hilfiger, Arwood, Zimmer or anyone at LARA or 
any other
agency of government to deny me access to these records  by any means 
including those aforementioned.
Moreover, these documents and requests will be going to federal and state 
over site committees of both Parties, and again will become viral 
so-to-speak.
My requests for information in all of these regards have and will continue 
to go to all sorts of media and to all sorts of legal and other resources.
Moreover, once again as you've continued to prey upon my poverty and my 
blindness you, sir have made yourself liable to 1983 actions for your 
personal abuses
of my very civil rights established and codified under both the First 
Amendment on several grounds, and Article V of the 14th Amendment "due 
process and
equal protection" clause as defined under the ADA and the Rehabilitation 
Act, Section 504.
In short you make yourself culpable to actions and to damages and awards 
personally by acting in such a fashion depriving myself and my class of 
fundamental
civil rights protections knowingly. Thus the best resort is to give up the 
information as requested and not to engage in any other further civil rights
or allegedly criminal activities including what amounts to a bullying cover 
up of events here sir.
Most sincerely and With Litigation and Damages in Mind,
Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
cc: Richard Bernstein, Esq.
cc: senator John Gleason
cc: MCBCommissiniors
cc: Tom Quasarno, Michigan Attorney General's Office
cc: Michigan Attorney General
cc: Senator Debbie Stabenow
cc: Office for Civil Rights U.S. department of Ed.
cc: Michigan ACLU
cc: U.S. Department of Justice
cc: several media outlets
cc: several State of Michigan Legislators of Both Parties
 Message -----
Block quote start
From:
Farmer, Mel (LARA)
To:
'joe harcz Comcast'
Cc:
Haynes, Carla (LARA)
;
Cannon, Patrick (LARA)
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: FOIA

Mr. Harcz, for your information, the records retention policies you refer to 
are applicable for hard copy records, not PC emails. PC emails are routinely
purged by employees, or the DTMB controlled system that automatically 
deletes emails not purposely saved. This is routinely done to maintain 
bandwith capacity
on the state?s internet system.

Thusly, without DTMB first performing a search for and retrieval of all 
purged emails of the 9 employees indicated in my response, the Department 
will not
be able to review and determine whether any of them may responsive to your 
February 29, 2012 request.

From: joe harcz Comcast [mailto:joeharcz at comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 11:31 AM
To: Farmer, Mel (LARA)
Subject: Re: FOIA

March  7, 2012

Dear Mr. Farmer,

I am writing today to note one element of your ludicrous response here.That 
is your allusion to records that have been and may have been "purged" 
related
to this FOIA and related laws request.

We have state and federal issues at stake here. We have several laws at 
issue and now hundreds of millions of funds at stake.

Now I ask you this: "What documents have been purged"?

By the way how does this all jive with requirements for document retention 
under various laws and how might this all jive in lay terms with the "False 
Statements
Act"?

There needs to be and will be a Federal investigation of this issue sir.

Sincerely,

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

Block quote start

----- Original Message -----

From:
Farmer, Mel (LARA)

To:
'joe harcz Comcast'

Cc:
Cannon, Patrick (LARA)
;
Haynes, Carla (LARA)
;
Burton, Diane (LARA)

Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:59 AM

Subject: FW: FOIA

March 6, 2012

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:
joeharcz at comcast.net

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI 48458

Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

Dear Mr. Harcz:

This notice is in response to your February 29, 2012 email request to me for 
copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

??any e-mail correspondence between any personnel within the Michigan 
Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs during the past two months 
relative
to any transfers in fact or in the powers and duties of the Michigan 
Commission for the Blind including its board that went into Executive Order 
No. 2012-2.?

 Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the 
state?s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state?s FOIA ,your request is 
granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the 
Department
falling within the scope of your request; and subject to the payment of 
processing fees assessed per MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state?s FOIA provides that a public body may 
charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search, 
examination,
review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt 
information. The Department has determined that no Michigan Commission for 
the Blind staff
have any records related to this particular request. The Department has also 
determined that at least nine executive level employees will have to be 
drawn
away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of one hour 
each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records from December 29, 
2011
through February 29, 2012 to determine if they are responsive to your 
request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible 
statutory
exemptions from public disclosure. Further, as it is possible that some 
emails responsive to this request may have been purged during the timeframe 
of
this request, the Department requested that the Michigan Department of 
Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) provide an estimate of costs to 
search
for and retrieve purged records that may be responsive to this request. The 
DTMB estimate (see attached) is $745,416.00 .

The Department?s   estimated costs to process this request, based on the 
hourly wages ($62.34 /hr, including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid 
Department
employee ( State Division Office Administrator  17)capable of performing the 
necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00,
is   $541.06 .This  estimated processing cost is based on the following 
calculations:

--9 employees X 9 hours = 9 hours

--9 hours X $62.34/hour = $561.06

--$561.06 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $541.06

The combined DTMB and Department estimated costs to process this particular 
request is $745,957.06, including the indigency waiver of $20.00.

For the abovementioned reasons and pursuant to MCL 14.234, Section 4(3) of 
the state?s FOIA, the Department has determined that failure to charge a fee
in this particular instance would result in unreasonably high costs and 
undue financial and administrative burdens to the Department.

In order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular 
request, based on the above and pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the 
state?s
FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $372, 978.53 (50% 
of the $ 745,957.06 estimated cost)

 which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the 
FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

After receipt of the good faith deposit of $372,978.53 and upon completing 
the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of
any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested 
records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed 
exemptions;
and inform you of your remedial rights.

Sincerely,

Melvin Farmer, Jr.

Central FOIA Coordinator

Attachment

                                                                          DEPARTMENT 
OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS

                                                                             
     FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

Mt. Morris, MI  48458

REQUEST RECEIVED:  February 29, 2012

TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

(517) 373-0194

Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with 
requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages 
and benefit
costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the 
duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other
related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records, 
the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs 
exceeding
$50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs 
are related to your request for:

Copies of E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE OF ALL DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES RELATED TO 
EXECUTIVE

ORDER 2012-2  FROM DECEMBER 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2012.

INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

LABOR COST ESTIMATE

--Search/Review: Hours: 9 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $62.34 = 
$561.06

POSTAGE 
            --

DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of 
     --

OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.): 
$745,416.00

SUBTOTAL: 
$745,977.06

Less waived indigency offset: 
$           20.00

INVOICE TOTAL: 
$745,957.06

DEPOSIT* 
$372,978.53

REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID: 
$372,978.53

Make check or money order payable to:

STATE OF MICHIGAN

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

Office Services Mailroom

7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

Lansing, MI  48909

PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

*Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an 
estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may 
vary somewhat

  from this amount.

DTMB ATTACHMENT

 From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
 Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:23 PM
 To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
 Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Estimate without Governor?s email accounts

Approximately 56 days backups to restore

Number of stores to restore around 6

Number mailboxes = 9 estimate ( 9 clients in 6 stores)

Number of stores to restore 56 X 6 = 336

Cost 6 stores to restore per date = 2218.50

Total estimated cost (2218.50 X 336) = $745416.00

Ram

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan ? DTMB

From: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:23 AM
To: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Roughly 9 or so:

Steven Hilfinger

Steve Arwood

Mike Zimmer

Melanie Brown

Diane Burton

Karen Towne

MCB Director Cannon

MCB Commissioners??? ? No names given here

Governor?s E-mail??

From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:20 AM
To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Can you provide number of email accounts and their names to estimate cost 
for FOIA?. We do not have access to their archives(.pst files).   Ram

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan ? DTMB?

Block quote end
Block quote end
_______________________________________________
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
nfbmi-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net 




From suncat0 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  8 13:23:52 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 08:23:52 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here
References: <353A8240893B4D5BB89A9D830A0A3261@YOUR7C60552B9E>
Message-ID: <EBB6DDB03DCA4F92B9C4FA238CE5A496@Reputercat>

As much as I agree with you on this topic, Joe, this message is not 
specifically related to things happening in the BEP and is off topic here.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 21:31
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 6:17 PM
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here


Dear Mr. Farmer,
We might need a U.S. and Michigan Attorney General's ruling on such recent
purges of information as those you suggest don't you think.
 Regardless we might also need some court actions which you will surely
lose, but don't forget the federal civil rights ramifications here as you've
violated
my civil rights and again those of my class over and over again on these
accounts using your abuses of State law...I certainly will be asking several
attorney's
at law about this issue as you present it as well as those within the
Michigan attorney General's office. And if that is not enough I'm going for
personal
actions against yourself and others in this sordid affair.
I've already sent both your ludicrous e-mail here and the cc's of these
principles in law involved have gone viral, aka the internet.
Best thing I can figure here for yourself and others involved is to be as
open, transparent and  well.. transparent and not to continue to
obfiscate...
 as you are as possible...otherwise ...well you know follow the laws of this
land and not try to snow and mess with a man who is blind just because he is
blind.
That sort of thing can get folks like yourself in a whole lot of trouble and
it sure can get the ones you are covering for in more trouble.
Say have you heard of "spoliation"?
Well I'm sure the feds and the Michigan A.G. have heard of that term.
Now, Mr. Farmer when you go to Federal Court are you certain that you wish
to report that those cited actually destroyed electronic records as you've
suggested
herein?
and are you sure as FOIA officer for the LARA personnel whom have violated
state and federal laws here as you've suggested: namely Hilfiger, Zimmer,
Atwood,
Cannon, et al  that you, Mr. Farmer wishes to fall upon his sword to protect
them in these regards?
Or do you wish for me to pay your sorry behind quadzillions in personal
funds for public records that should be made public in the first instance?
Let me
tell you sir the only one paying for anything in these regards will be
yourself in court orders and that goes to the scofflaws you are covering for
too.
I'm really getting pretty tired of dealing with pathetic public officials
here like yourself who is supposed to make public records accessable and who
because
of my blindness and poverty preys upon me in such a vicious manner that is
most ludicrous and a violation of civil and Constitutional rights upon its
very
face.
and  I think it is a matter of federal investigation and again there are
issues of spoliation of records that are criminal in nature involved here.
The choices for you, Mr. Farmer are whether or not you are going to remit
required documents to this citizen and to the public or whether or not you
risk
criminal charges.
For suborning spoliation by other means is indeed a criminal offense as are
spoliation of anything or aiding and abetting in same.
Now this said I'm formally requesting right now from you Mr. Farmer any
directive from the likes of Hilfiger, Arwood, Zimmer or anyone at LARA or
any other
agency of government to deny me access to these records  by any means
including those aforementioned.
Moreover, these documents and requests will be going to federal and state
over site committees of both Parties, and again will become viral
so-to-speak.
My requests for information in all of these regards have and will continue
to go to all sorts of media and to all sorts of legal and other resources.
Moreover, once again as you've continued to prey upon my poverty and my
blindness you, sir have made yourself liable to 1983 actions for your
personal abuses
of my very civil rights established and codified under both the First
Amendment on several grounds, and Article V of the 14th Amendment "due
process and
equal protection" clause as defined under the ADA and the Rehabilitation
Act, Section 504.
In short you make yourself culpable to actions and to damages and awards
personally by acting in such a fashion depriving myself and my class of
fundamental
civil rights protections knowingly. Thus the best resort is to give up the
information as requested and not to engage in any other further civil rights
or allegedly criminal activities including what amounts to a bullying cover
up of events here sir.
Most sincerely and With Litigation and Damages in Mind,
Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
cc: Richard Bernstein, Esq.
cc: senator John Gleason
cc: MCBCommissiniors
cc: Tom Quasarno, Michigan Attorney General's Office
cc: Michigan Attorney General
cc: Senator Debbie Stabenow
cc: Office for Civil Rights U.S. department of Ed.
cc: Michigan ACLU
cc: U.S. Department of Justice
cc: several media outlets
cc: several State of Michigan Legislators of Both Parties
 Message -----
Block quote start
From:
Farmer, Mel (LARA)
To:
'joe harcz Comcast'
Cc:
Haynes, Carla (LARA)
;
Cannon, Patrick (LARA)
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: FOIA

Mr. Harcz, for your information, the records retention policies you refer to
are applicable for hard copy records, not PC emails. PC emails are routinely
purged by employees, or the DTMB controlled system that automatically
deletes emails not purposely saved. This is routinely done to maintain
bandwith capacity
on the state?s internet system.

Thusly, without DTMB first performing a search for and retrieval of all
purged emails of the 9 employees indicated in my response, the Department
will not
be able to review and determine whether any of them may responsive to your
February 29, 2012 request.

From: joe harcz Comcast [mailto:joeharcz at comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 11:31 AM
To: Farmer, Mel (LARA)
Subject: Re: FOIA

March  7, 2012

Dear Mr. Farmer,

I am writing today to note one element of your ludicrous response here.That
is your allusion to records that have been and may have been "purged"
related
to this FOIA and related laws request.

We have state and federal issues at stake here. We have several laws at
issue and now hundreds of millions of funds at stake.

Now I ask you this: "What documents have been purged"?

By the way how does this all jive with requirements for document retention
under various laws and how might this all jive in lay terms with the "False
Statements
Act"?

There needs to be and will be a Federal investigation of this issue sir.

Sincerely,

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

Block quote start

----- Original Message -----

From:
Farmer, Mel (LARA)

To:
'joe harcz Comcast'

Cc:
Cannon, Patrick (LARA)
;
Haynes, Carla (LARA)
;
Burton, Diane (LARA)

Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:59 AM

Subject: FW: FOIA

March 6, 2012

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:
joeharcz at comcast.net

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI 48458

Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

Dear Mr. Harcz:

This notice is in response to your February 29, 2012 email request to me for
copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

??any e-mail correspondence between any personnel within the Michigan
Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs during the past two months
relative
to any transfers in fact or in the powers and duties of the Michigan
Commission for the Blind including its board that went into Executive Order
No. 2012-2.?

 Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the
state?s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state?s FOIA ,your request is
granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the
Department
falling within the scope of your request; and subject to the payment of
processing fees assessed per MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state?s FOIA provides that a public body may
charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search,
examination,
review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt
information. The Department has determined that no Michigan Commission for
the Blind staff
have any records related to this particular request. The Department has also
determined that at least nine executive level employees will have to be
drawn
away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of one hour
each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records from December 29,
2011
through February 29, 2012 to determine if they are responsive to your
request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible
statutory
exemptions from public disclosure. Further, as it is possible that some
emails responsive to this request may have been purged during the timeframe
of
this request, the Department requested that the Michigan Department of
Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) provide an estimate of costs to
search
for and retrieve purged records that may be responsive to this request. The
DTMB estimate (see attached) is $745,416.00 .

The Department?s   estimated costs to process this request, based on the
hourly wages ($62.34 /hr, including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid
Department
employee ( State Division Office Administrator  17)capable of performing the
necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00,
is   $541.06 .This  estimated processing cost is based on the following
calculations:

--9 employees X 9 hours = 9 hours

--9 hours X $62.34/hour = $561.06

--$561.06 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $541.06

The combined DTMB and Department estimated costs to process this particular
request is $745,957.06, including the indigency waiver of $20.00.

For the abovementioned reasons and pursuant to MCL 14.234, Section 4(3) of
the state?s FOIA, the Department has determined that failure to charge a fee
in this particular instance would result in unreasonably high costs and
undue financial and administrative burdens to the Department.

In order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular
request, based on the above and pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the
state?s
FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $372, 978.53 (50%
of the $ 745,957.06 estimated cost)

 which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the
FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

After receipt of the good faith deposit of $372,978.53 and upon completing
the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of
any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested
records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed
exemptions;
and inform you of your remedial rights.

Sincerely,

Melvin Farmer, Jr.

Central FOIA Coordinator

Attachment

                                                                          DEPARTMENT
OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS


     FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

Mt. Morris, MI  48458

REQUEST RECEIVED:  February 29, 2012

TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

(517) 373-0194

Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with
requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages
and benefit
costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the
duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other
related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records,
the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs
exceeding
$50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs
are related to your request for:

Copies of E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE OF ALL DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES RELATED TO
EXECUTIVE

ORDER 2012-2  FROM DECEMBER 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2012.

INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

LABOR COST ESTIMATE

--Search/Review: Hours: 9 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $62.34 =
$561.06

POSTAGE
            --

DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of
     --

OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.):
$745,416.00

SUBTOTAL:
$745,977.06

Less waived indigency offset:
$           20.00

INVOICE TOTAL:
$745,957.06

DEPOSIT*
$372,978.53

REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID:
$372,978.53

Make check or money order payable to:

STATE OF MICHIGAN

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

Office Services Mailroom

7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

Lansing, MI  48909

PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

*Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an
estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may
vary somewhat

  from this amount.

DTMB ATTACHMENT

 From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
 Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:23 PM
 To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
 Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Estimate without Governor?s email accounts

Approximately 56 days backups to restore

Number of stores to restore around 6

Number mailboxes = 9 estimate ( 9 clients in 6 stores)

Number of stores to restore 56 X 6 = 336

Cost 6 stores to restore per date = 2218.50

Total estimated cost (2218.50 X 336) = $745416.00

Ram

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan ? DTMB

From: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:23 AM
To: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Roughly 9 or so:

Steven Hilfinger

Steve Arwood

Mike Zimmer

Melanie Brown

Diane Burton

Karen Towne

MCB Director Cannon

MCB Commissioners??? ? No names given here

Governor?s E-mail??

From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:20 AM
To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Can you provide number of email accounts and their names to estimate cost
for FOIA?. We do not have access to their archives(.pst files).   Ram

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan ? DTMB?

Block quote end
Block quote end
_______________________________________________
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbmi-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net


_______________________________________________
Vendorsmi mailing list
Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
Vendorsmi:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/suncat0%40gmail.com 




From joeharcz at comcast.net  Thu Mar  8 13:42:45 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 08:42:45 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here
References: <353A8240893B4D5BB89A9D830A0A3261@YOUR7C60552B9E>
	<EBB6DDB03DCA4F92B9C4FA238CE5A496@Reputercat>
Message-ID: <1E233462D984405A9768D1DF934C5C60@YOUR7C60552B9E>

The thing that makes this on topic is that there will be no, and Repeat no 
BEP program in the State of Michigan if these things go through. So I 
disagree in that this is right on topic.

Sincerely,

Joe Harcz
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Sontag" <suncat0 at gmail.com>
To: "NFB of Michigan Vendors List" <vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here


As much as I agree with you on this topic, Joe, this message is not
specifically related to things happening in the BEP and is off topic here.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 21:31
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 6:17 PM
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] i'm not kidding here


Dear Mr. Farmer,
We might need a U.S. and Michigan Attorney General's ruling on such recent
purges of information as those you suggest don't you think.
 Regardless we might also need some court actions which you will surely
lose, but don't forget the federal civil rights ramifications here as you've
violated
my civil rights and again those of my class over and over again on these
accounts using your abuses of State law...I certainly will be asking several
attorney's
at law about this issue as you present it as well as those within the
Michigan attorney General's office. And if that is not enough I'm going for
personal
actions against yourself and others in this sordid affair.
I've already sent both your ludicrous e-mail here and the cc's of these
principles in law involved have gone viral, aka the internet.
Best thing I can figure here for yourself and others involved is to be as
open, transparent and  well.. transparent and not to continue to
obfiscate...
 as you are as possible...otherwise ...well you know follow the laws of this
land and not try to snow and mess with a man who is blind just because he is
blind.
That sort of thing can get folks like yourself in a whole lot of trouble and
it sure can get the ones you are covering for in more trouble.
Say have you heard of "spoliation"?
Well I'm sure the feds and the Michigan A.G. have heard of that term.
Now, Mr. Farmer when you go to Federal Court are you certain that you wish
to report that those cited actually destroyed electronic records as you've
suggested
herein?
and are you sure as FOIA officer for the LARA personnel whom have violated
state and federal laws here as you've suggested: namely Hilfiger, Zimmer,
Atwood,
Cannon, et al  that you, Mr. Farmer wishes to fall upon his sword to protect
them in these regards?
Or do you wish for me to pay your sorry behind quadzillions in personal
funds for public records that should be made public in the first instance?
Let me
tell you sir the only one paying for anything in these regards will be
yourself in court orders and that goes to the scofflaws you are covering for
too.
I'm really getting pretty tired of dealing with pathetic public officials
here like yourself who is supposed to make public records accessable and who
because
of my blindness and poverty preys upon me in such a vicious manner that is
most ludicrous and a violation of civil and Constitutional rights upon its
very
face.
and  I think it is a matter of federal investigation and again there are
issues of spoliation of records that are criminal in nature involved here.
The choices for you, Mr. Farmer are whether or not you are going to remit
required documents to this citizen and to the public or whether or not you
risk
criminal charges.
For suborning spoliation by other means is indeed a criminal offense as are
spoliation of anything or aiding and abetting in same.
Now this said I'm formally requesting right now from you Mr. Farmer any
directive from the likes of Hilfiger, Arwood, Zimmer or anyone at LARA or
any other
agency of government to deny me access to these records  by any means
including those aforementioned.
Moreover, these documents and requests will be going to federal and state
over site committees of both Parties, and again will become viral
so-to-speak.
My requests for information in all of these regards have and will continue
to go to all sorts of media and to all sorts of legal and other resources.
Moreover, once again as you've continued to prey upon my poverty and my
blindness you, sir have made yourself liable to 1983 actions for your
personal abuses
of my very civil rights established and codified under both the First
Amendment on several grounds, and Article V of the 14th Amendment "due
process and
equal protection" clause as defined under the ADA and the Rehabilitation
Act, Section 504.
In short you make yourself culpable to actions and to damages and awards
personally by acting in such a fashion depriving myself and my class of
fundamental
civil rights protections knowingly. Thus the best resort is to give up the
information as requested and not to engage in any other further civil rights
or allegedly criminal activities including what amounts to a bullying cover
up of events here sir.
Most sincerely and With Litigation and Damages in Mind,
Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.
cc: Richard Bernstein, Esq.
cc: senator John Gleason
cc: MCBCommissiniors
cc: Tom Quasarno, Michigan Attorney General's Office
cc: Michigan Attorney General
cc: Senator Debbie Stabenow
cc: Office for Civil Rights U.S. department of Ed.
cc: Michigan ACLU
cc: U.S. Department of Justice
cc: several media outlets
cc: several State of Michigan Legislators of Both Parties
 Message -----
Block quote start
From:
Farmer, Mel (LARA)
To:
'joe harcz Comcast'
Cc:
Haynes, Carla (LARA)
;
Cannon, Patrick (LARA)
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: FOIA

Mr. Harcz, for your information, the records retention policies you refer to
are applicable for hard copy records, not PC emails. PC emails are routinely
purged by employees, or the DTMB controlled system that automatically
deletes emails not purposely saved. This is routinely done to maintain
bandwith capacity
on the state?s internet system.

Thusly, without DTMB first performing a search for and retrieval of all
purged emails of the 9 employees indicated in my response, the Department
will not
be able to review and determine whether any of them may responsive to your
February 29, 2012 request.

From: joe harcz Comcast [mailto:joeharcz at comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2012 11:31 AM
To: Farmer, Mel (LARA)
Subject: Re: FOIA

March  7, 2012

Dear Mr. Farmer,

I am writing today to note one element of your ludicrous response here.That
is your allusion to records that have been and may have been "purged"
related
to this FOIA and related laws request.

We have state and federal issues at stake here. We have several laws at
issue and now hundreds of millions of funds at stake.

Now I ask you this: "What documents have been purged"?

By the way how does this all jive with requirements for document retention
under various laws and how might this all jive in lay terms with the "False
Statements
Act"?

There needs to be and will be a Federal investigation of this issue sir.

Sincerely,

Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

Block quote start

----- Original Message -----

From:
Farmer, Mel (LARA)

To:
'joe harcz Comcast'

Cc:
Cannon, Patrick (LARA)
;
Haynes, Carla (LARA)
;
Burton, Diane (LARA)

Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2012 11:59 AM

Subject: FW: FOIA

March 6, 2012

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:
joeharcz at comcast.net

1365 E. Mt. Morris Rd.

Mt. Morris, MI 48458

Re:  Executive Order 2012-2 Email Records Request

Dear Mr. Harcz:

This notice is in response to your February 29, 2012 email request to me for
copies of existing, nonexempt public records you describe as:

??any e-mail correspondence between any personnel within the Michigan
Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs during the past two months
relative
to any transfers in fact or in the powers and duties of the Michigan
Commission for the Blind including its board that went into Executive Order
No. 2012-2.?

 Please be informed that the Department is processing this request under the
state?s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), MCL 15.231 et seq.

Pursuant to MCL 15.235, Section 5(2)(a) of the state?s FOIA ,your request is
granted as to existing, nonexempt records in the possession of the
Department
falling within the scope of your request; and subject to the payment of
processing fees assessed per MCL 15.234 of the FOIA.

MCL 234, Section 4(1) of the state?s FOIA provides that a public body may
charge a fee for public record search, including costs, for the search,
examination,
review, and the deletion and separation of exempt from nonexempt
information. The Department has determined that no Michigan Commission for
the Blind staff
have any records related to this particular request. The Department has also
determined that at least nine executive level employees will have to be
drawn
away from their respective duties and assignments for an average of one hour
each to search for, locate, and retrieve email records from December 29,
2011
through February 29, 2012 to determine if they are responsive to your
request; and to examine and review the responsive records for possible
statutory
exemptions from public disclosure. Further, as it is possible that some
emails responsive to this request may have been purged during the timeframe
of
this request, the Department requested that the Michigan Department of
Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB) provide an estimate of costs to
search
for and retrieve purged records that may be responsive to this request. The
DTMB estimate (see attached) is $745,416.00 .

The Department?s   estimated costs to process this request, based on the
hourly wages ($62.34 /hr, including fringe benefits) of the lowest paid
Department
employee ( State Division Office Administrator  17)capable of performing the
necessary tasks to comply with your request, including the waiver of $20.00,
is   $541.06 .This  estimated processing cost is based on the following
calculations:

--9 employees X 9 hours = 9 hours

--9 hours X $62.34/hour = $561.06

--$561.06 - $20.00 indigency waiver = $541.06

The combined DTMB and Department estimated costs to process this particular
request is $745,957.06, including the indigency waiver of $20.00.

For the abovementioned reasons and pursuant to MCL 14.234, Section 4(3) of
the state?s FOIA, the Department has determined that failure to charge a fee
in this particular instance would result in unreasonably high costs and
undue financial and administrative burdens to the Department.

In order for the Department to continue the processing of this particular
request, based on the above and pursuant to MCL 15.234, Section 4(2) of the
state?s
FOIA, the Department requires a good faith deposit payment $372, 978.53 (50%
of the $ 745,957.06 estimated cost)

 which includes the $20.00 fee waiver per MCL 15.234, Section 4(1) of the
FOIA. See the attached FOIA invoice illustrating payment instructions

After receipt of the good faith deposit of $372,978.53 and upon completing
the processing of your request, the Department will notify you in writing of
any balance due and payable (or owed you) before copies of the requested
records are forwarded to you; explain any statutory basis for any claimed
exemptions;
and inform you of your remedial rights.

Sincerely,

Melvin Farmer, Jr.

Central FOIA Coordinator

Attachment

                                                                          DEPARTMENT
OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS


     FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT INVOICE

NAME AND ADDRESS OF REQUESTER:

Mr. Paul Joseph Harcz, Jr.

E-mail:  joeharcz at comcast.com

1365 E. Mt. Morris Road

Mt. Morris, MI  48458

REQUEST RECEIVED:  February 29, 2012

TYPE OF REQUEST:  Email

REQUEST PARTIALLY DENIED:  No

EXEMPT INFORMATION WITHHELD/REDACTED:  To be determined

EXTENDED RESPONSE NOTICE ISSUED:  No

REQUESTED INFORMATION WILL BE:  Emailed/Invoiced For Partial Payment

ACCOUNT CODE:  MCB Index:  36200    PCA:      11343

DLARA CONTACT:  Melvin Farmer, Central FOIA Coordinator

(517) 373-0194

Ottawa Building, 4th Floor, 611 W. Ottawa, Lansing, MI  48909

The FOIA provides that the department may charge a fee to comply with
requests for public records.  The processing fee is composed of hourly wages
and benefit
costs of the lowest paid employee(s) capable of processing the request; the
duplication of records at assessed costs per page; mailing costs; and other
related special costs.  Prior to searching and copying requested records,
the department may request full payment or 50% of the estimated costs
exceeding
$50.00 with the balance required before mailing the records.  Assessed costs
are related to your request for:

Copies of E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE OF ALL DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES RELATED TO
EXECUTIVE

ORDER 2012-2  FROM DECEMBER 29, 2011 THROUGH FEBRUARY 29, 2012.

INVOICE CALCULATIONS/INSTRUCTIONS

LABOR COST ESTIMATE

--Search/Review: Hours: 9 hrs. x Hourly Rate: $62.34 =
$561.06

POSTAGE
            --

DUPLICATING:  Number of Pages times Copying Rate of
     --

OTHER (overtime, audio tapes, discs, photos, security, etc.):
$745,416.00

SUBTOTAL:
$745,977.06

Less waived indigency offset:
$           20.00

INVOICE TOTAL:
$745,957.06

DEPOSIT*
$372,978.53

REMAINING AMOUNT TO BE PAID:
$372,978.53

Make check or money order payable to:

STATE OF MICHIGAN

Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs

Office Services Mailroom

7150 Harris Drive, PO Box 30015

Lansing, MI  48909

PLEASE RETURN/REFER TO ORIGINAL COPY OF THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT

*Please note that if a deposit is requested, the indicated amount is an
estimate of the cost of complying with your request.  The actual cost may
vary somewhat

  from this amount.

DTMB ATTACHMENT

 From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
 Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 4:23 PM
 To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
 Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Estimate without Governor?s email accounts

Approximately 56 days backups to restore

Number of stores to restore around 6

Number mailboxes = 9 estimate ( 9 clients in 6 stores)

Number of stores to restore 56 X 6 = 336

Cost 6 stores to restore per date = 2218.50

Total estimated cost (2218.50 X 336) = $745416.00

Ram

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan ? DTMB

From: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:23 AM
To: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Roughly 9 or so:

Steven Hilfinger

Steve Arwood

Mike Zimmer

Melanie Brown

Diane Burton

Karen Towne

MCB Director Cannon

MCB Commissioners??? ? No names given here

Governor?s E-mail??

From: Surapaneni, Ramakrishna (DTMB)
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 8:20 AM
To: Sparks-Boak, Dorinda (DTMB)
Subject: RE: FOIA

Dorinda

Can you provide number of email accounts and their names to estimate cost
for FOIA?. We do not have access to their archives(.pst files).   Ram

R Surapaneni

State of Michigan ? DTMB?

Block quote end
Block quote end
_______________________________________________
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
nfbmi-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net


_______________________________________________
Vendorsmi mailing list
Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
Vendorsmi:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/suncat0%40gmail.com


_______________________________________________
Vendorsmi mailing list
Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
Vendorsmi:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net 




From suncat0 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  8 13:31:46 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 08:31:46 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] A Reminder
Message-ID: <362896F4046B4461935E810B2F77BD16@Reputercat>

Messages posted to this list should be confined to those having content that is directly related to the Business Enterprise Program in Michigan or to Randolph-Sheppard issues nationally.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120308/920e816b/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Thu Mar  8 16:32:05 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:32:05 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] A Reminder
References: <362896F4046B4461935E810B2F77BD16@Reputercat>
Message-ID: <3F5321BD720E46EBB0E8F1858B05E592@YOUR7C60552B9E>

And what the heck does this message have to do withh the same and everything. Look at the content of the bloody thing will you.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Joe Sontag 
  To: VENDORSMI List 
  Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 8:31 AM
  Subject: [Vendorsmi] A Reminder


  Messages posted to this list should be confined to those having content that is directly related to the Business Enterprise Program in Michigan or to Randolph-Sheppard issues nationally.  


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Vendorsmi mailing list
  Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Vendorsmi:
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120308/1ea870bb/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 19:47:22 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 14:47:22 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] help save our highway jobs
Message-ID: <412DDAB4EF034DA5A15BBEBB73F1A4FF@Reputercat>

Today and Monday may be your last chance to call Senators Carl Levin and 
Debbie Stabenow and urge them to vote against amendment 1742 which, if 
adopted, will permit the commercialization of federal highway rest areas and 
put many blind people out of work.  A vote on this dangerous amendment is 
expected early next week.

You can reach the Capitol switchboard and be connected to your Senators'
offices by calling (202) 225-3121.  Senator Levin's office has not heard 
from many blind people so far, so it is crucial that we make our wishes 
known.  Some of the best jobs in our program depend on it.

Joe Sontag





From joeharcz at comcast.net  Fri Mar  9 19:54:52 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 14:54:52 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] help save our highway jobs
References: <412DDAB4EF034DA5A15BBEBB73F1A4FF@Reputercat>
Message-ID: <307494EABC0441BA9605F3BF0A56B8E1@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Done...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Sontag" <suncat0 at gmail.com>
To: "VENDORSMI List" <vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
Cc: "James Hull" <hullj at michigan.gov>; "Connie Zanger" 
<ZangerC at michigan.gov>; "James Chaney" <resolutioncomm at sbcglobal.net>; 
"Patrick Cannon" <CannonP at michigan.gov>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 2:47 PM
Subject: [Vendorsmi] help save our highway jobs


> Today and Monday may be your last chance to call Senators Carl Levin and 
> Debbie Stabenow and urge them to vote against amendment 1742 which, if 
> adopted, will permit the commercialization of federal highway rest areas 
> and put many blind people out of work.  A vote on this dangerous amendment 
> is expected early next week.
>
> You can reach the Capitol switchboard and be connected to your Senators'
> offices by calling (202) 225-3121.  Senator Levin's office has not heard 
> from many blind people so far, so it is crucial that we make our wishes 
> known.  Some of the best jobs in our program depend on it.
>
> Joe Sontag
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vendorsmi mailing list
> Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> Vendorsmi:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net 




From brightsmile1953 at comcast.net  Fri Mar  9 23:33:57 2012
From: brightsmile1953 at comcast.net (Mary Ann Robinson)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 18:33:57 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] help save our highway jobs
References: <412DDAB4EF034DA5A15BBEBB73F1A4FF@Reputercat>
	<307494EABC0441BA9605F3BF0A56B8E1@YOUR7C60552B9E>
Message-ID: <BDF6E226E74D4FA7AC0DB43F2DD9D04E@maryannslptp>

I called both.  It only takes a minute.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: "Joe Sontag" <suncat0 at gmail.com>; "NFB of Michigan Vendors List" 
<vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Vendorsmi] help save our highway jobs


> Done...
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Joe Sontag" <suncat0 at gmail.com>
> To: "VENDORSMI List" <vendorsmi at nfbnet.org>
> Cc: "James Hull" <hullj at michigan.gov>; "Connie Zanger" 
> <ZangerC at michigan.gov>; "James Chaney" <resolutioncomm at sbcglobal.net>; 
> "Patrick Cannon" <CannonP at michigan.gov>
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 2:47 PM
> Subject: [Vendorsmi] help save our highway jobs
>
>
>> Today and Monday may be your last chance to call Senators Carl Levin and 
>> Debbie Stabenow and urge them to vote against amendment 1742 which, if 
>> adopted, will permit the commercialization of federal highway rest areas 
>> and put many blind people out of work.  A vote on this dangerous 
>> amendment is expected early next week.
>>
>> You can reach the Capitol switchboard and be connected to your Senators'
>> offices by calling (202) 225-3121.  Senator Levin's office has not heard 
>> from many blind people so far, so it is crucial that we make our wishes 
>> known.  Some of the best jobs in our program depend on it.
>>
>> Joe Sontag
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Vendorsmi mailing list
>> Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> Vendorsmi:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Vendorsmi mailing list
> Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> Vendorsmi:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/brightsmile1953%40comcast.net
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4860 - Release Date: 03/09/12
> 




From suncat0 at gmail.com  Sat Mar 10 07:29:04 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:29:04 -0500
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [Nfbnet-members-list] Legislative Update
Message-ID: <D40FFFD7B4474BCBA8F6190880ED97DE@Reputercat>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Andrews" <dandrews at visi.com>
To: <nfbnet-members-list at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2012 23:30
Subject: [Nfbnet-members-list] Legislative Update


>
> Fellow Federationists:
>
> I am writing to update you on the latest developments on Senator Portman's 
> amendment 1742 to the Senate surface transportation bill, S. 1813.
>
> Senator Portman's amendment would allow states to enter into commercial 
> ventures at rest areas on federal highways and interstates, and would 
> dramatically
> impact Randolph-Sheppard vendors that are currently operating at those 
> locations.
>
> The Senate began debating on S. 1813 yesterday, but adjourned until next 
> Tuesday, March 13, before Senator Portman's amendment could be considered. 
> We
> must use this extra time to work to ensure that we get the votes to defeat 
> Senator Portman's amendment next Tuesday.
>
> Please continue to call your senators, and urge them to vote against 
> Senator Portman's Amendment 1742.  You may be connected to your senator's 
> offices by
> calling the Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121.  I appreciate the work 
> that we have done to this point, and I am asking you to see it through to 
> the
> finish next Tuesday.  Please contact me with any questions.
>
> Jesse
>
>
> Jesse Hartle
> Government Programs Specialist
> National Federation of the Blind
> Phone:  (410) 659-9314, Ext. 2233
> Email:  jhartle at nfb.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfbnet-members-list mailing list
> Nfbnet-members-list at nfbnet.org 




From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar 13 15:30:01 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:30:01 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] columbus dispatch on rs issue
Message-ID: <4675A3AE4F4F4786BE3F875999E86795@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Deborah Kendrick: Blind vendors fear effort to commercialize highways | The Columbus

 

 

Jeff Tolle is living a version of the American dream. He has his own business and loves his job. His wife, Michelle, is his No. 1 employee. Family time

consists of frequent trips to the Columbus Zoo, Kings Island and Cedar Point. Tolle takes his sons, ages 8 and 13, fishing whenever possible at one of

two ponds near the family?s Delaware home. They don?t spend much time worrying about the fact that both boys have inherited Tolle?s eye condition because

life is good, and Tolle always has provided the family with a more than respectable income.

 

Tolle is just one of thousands of blind Americans who have benefitted from the Randolph-Sheppard Act, a law whose 75th anniversary was recognized in January

by a memorandum from President Barack Obama, encouraging more federal agencies to participate.

 

If you?ve ever bought snacks or beverages in a post office, courthouse, military base or any other federal agency, chances are you?ve supported blind business

owners.

 

Tolle?s business, like hundreds of other entrepreneurs in the program called Business Enterprise, consists of vending machines adjacent to rest areas on

interstate and secondary highways.

 

Under the law, priority is given to blind entrepreneurs in food-service facilities on government properties and, since 1982, vending machines at highway

rest areas. About 40 enterprising individuals in Ohio service the machines that dispense coffee, beverages, snacks and ice cream at rest areas up and down

our major and minor corridors. They buy the supplies, fill the machines, buy their own vehicles to transport goods and equipment, hire others to drive

those vehicles, pay all the necessary taxes for self-employment and balance their own books.

 

I spoke with several of those Ohio business owners last week, and there were definite refrains in every conversation. They love the work they do. They take

pride in providing a service to the public. And they are terrified that an amendment to the surface-transportation bill, Senate Bill 1813, proposed by

Sen. Rob Portman could have devastating consequences.

 

If approved, the amendment would render the highways open country for commerce. Historically, commerce on interstate and secondary highways has been permitted

only in the form of the vending machines operated by blind and visually impaired merchants.

 

The National Federation of the Blind, the National Restaurant Association and the National Association of Truck Stop Operators are just a few of the many

organizations representing both business and disability sectors who are vehemently opposed to any change in the law.

 

Brendan Flanagan, a spokesman for the National Restaurant Association, said, ?This legislation threatens private businesses of all sizes and their employees

who rely on drivers exiting the highway in order to purchase food and conveniences. .?.?. It is anti-competitive and will kill jobs.?

 

Julie Russell, president of the Ohio Blind Vendors, says that even though her own business is a bank of machines at the Ohio Department of Job and Family

Services, the proposed legislation would have a negative impact on her and others whose businesses are not on the highways.

 

Everyone in the program pays a percentage of profit into the statewide fund, operated by the Bureau of Services for the Visually Impaired, which is used

for training, maintenance and repair.

 

Because the rest-area businesses are among the most profitable, those operators pay a much larger share into the statewide pool, thus enabling smaller businesses

such as Russell?s to stay in operation.

 

?It sounds like we?re just a small number of people,? Tolle said, ?but many of the vendors have other employees, both with and without disabilities, and

then there are all those people who are hired on a different contract to clean and empty the trash.?

 

He is referring to the scores of people, many with developmental disabilities, who are hired for cleaning and general maintenance in the rest areas, whose

jobs depend on the status quo.

 

An unemployment rate of nearly 70 percent among people with disabilities is something of a national disgrace. The Randolph-Sheppard Act was a big step forward

75 years ago and is one of the smartest things we?re doing to alter that reality. To create any law with the potential to displace hundreds of gainfully

employed people with disabilities ? people who are providing a service and taking pride in the work they do ? well, it just doesn?t make sense.

 

Deborah Kendrick is a Cincinnati writer and advocate for people with disabilities.

 

dkkendrick at earthlink.net

List of 2 items

 

 

The Columbus Dispatch

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120313/b97db3db/attachment.html>

From suncat0 at gmail.com  Wed Mar 14 07:36:22 2012
From: suncat0 at gmail.com (Joe Sontag)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 03:36:22 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [Nfbnet-members-list] Legislative Alert - Senate
	Votes Down PortmanAmendment
Message-ID: <F2D5322BCFD947D98880248AF58EDBC7@Reputercat>

To those who helped get out the word about Portman, I say thank you!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Andrews" <dandrews at visi.com>
To: <nfbnet-members-list at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 21:56
Subject: [Nfbnet-members-list] Legislative Alert - Senate Votes Down 
PortmanAmendment


>A message from Jesse Hartle
>
> Fellow Federationists:
>
> Today the United States Senate allowed Senator Portman's Amendment 1742 to 
> the surface transportation bill, S. 1813, to be considered on the floor. 
> Senator
> Portman's amendment sought to allow states to open commercial ventures on 
> federal highways and interstates.  This policy would have dramatically 
> impacted
> the livelihood of blind entrepreneurs in the Randolph-Sheppard program who 
> operate vending facilities along the federal highways and interstates 
> across
> our country.
>
> I am pleased to tell you that, due to the advocacy of the National 
> Federation of the Blind, Senator Portman's Amendment 1742 was voted down 
> by a count of
> 86 to 12 by the United States Senate.  I appreciate the hard work that you 
> put into protecting the interest of blind vendors.  I will continue to 
> keep
> you posted on this issue, as this bill will soon be sent to the House of 
> Representatives for consideration.
>
> Jesse
>
> Jesse Hartle
> Government Programs Specialist
> National Federation of the Blind
> Phone:  (410) 659-9314, Ext. 2233
> Email:  jhartle at nfb.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nfbnet-members-list mailing list
> Nfbnet-members-list at nfbnet.org 




From joeharcz at comcast.net  Fri Mar 16 20:09:02 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 16:09:02 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] Fw: [nfbmi-talk] mcb report as enclosure
Message-ID: <BCD63D167F74484E8FB171D6CCEA1744@YOUR7C60552B9E>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe harcz Comcast" <joeharcz at comcast.net>
To: <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2012 3:49 PM
Subject: [nfbmi-talk] mcb report as enclosure


MCB REPORT



March 15, 2012







GOVERNOR?S ORDER MERGES MCB & MRS



Governor Rick Snyder announced, in a February 24 news release, his executive 
order intended to enhance services for blind and visually impaired residents 
across the state: ?Executive Order 2012-2 transfers the duties of the 
Michigan Commission for the Blind and Michigan Rehabilitation Services to 
other state departments, which better leverages the expertise and resources 
of these departments.?



?We?re reshaping state government so it offers a more intuitive, effective 
and efficient system of services,? Snyder said. ?This executive order is an 
important step in that ongoing process. As a result, our blind and visually 
impaired residents will have better access to comprehensive information and 
resources.?



The Michigan Commission for the Blind (MCB) and Michigan Rehabilitation 
Services (MRS) currently are under the Department of Licensing and 
Regulatory Affairs (LARA).  Under the executive order, the MCB Business 
Enterprise Program (BEP) is transferred from the Commission for the Blind to 
the Department of Technology, Management and Budget (DTMB).  BEP is the 
program which oversees statutes that give the blind preference in state 
vending and food operations. The release states that BEP is ?a 
responsibility that is more in line with the facility management expertise 
of DTMB.?



The release further states: ?The remainder of the commission?s duties will 
move to the Department of Human Services (DHS).  A new panel, the Blind and 
Visually Impaired Services Advisory Board, will replace the Michigan 
Commission for the Blind and advise DHS on the administration of state 
programs for the blind and recommend policy changes. The board will be 
comprised of five people with interest and expertise in the needs of the 
blind.?



?Michigan Rehabilitation Services also moves to DHS. In addition, the 
executive order creates the Michigan Council for Rehabilitation Services 
within DHS. The council will advise on state functions that affect the 
ability of people with disabilities to gain employment.?



The Executive Order will have the affect of law within 60 days from its date 
of issue, unless it is rejected by the State Legislature.  The full text of 
E.O. 2012-2 is attached to this report and is also available online at 
www.michigan.gov/snyder.



As a result of the Governor?s Executive Order, State Plans for MCB, MRS and 
the Statewide Independent Living Council (SILC) must be amended to reflect 
changes called for in the Governor?s order.  As such, plans are underway to 
conduct public hearings in several cities throughout the state, tentatively 
being planned in late March, to gather consumer input on the draft 
amendments.



In the meantime, rehabilitation services will be delivered by both MCB and 
MRS as they have been and customers receiving services from the two agencies 
should notice no change in how they are being served.  Any consumer who has 
questions about how the Governor?s Executive Order will impact their support 
and service from the Commission should contact their counselor or teacher 
for clarification and reassurance.





MINI ADJUSTMENT PROGRAM IN KALAMAZOO



MCB conducted its first Mini Adjustment Program Workshop of 2012, March 4-9, 
at the Clarion Hotel and Conference Center in Kalamazoo, with 20 MCB 
consumers participating.  Commission clients attending the week-long 
Mini-Adjustment Program workshop are introduced to a variety of skills of 
blindness, such as cane travel, Braille, managing time and money, adaptive 
kitchen skills and other skills to enhance independence.



In conjunction with the workshop, the Commission also conducted an 
Employment Readiness Seminar, March 8, for ten Commission clients who have 
advanced to the job-readiness stage of their rehabilitation program. 
Consumers attending the seminars learn about various approaches to job 
searching, Michigan Works!, the Talent Bank, interview preparation and 
resume development.  They also participate in mock interviews and hear from 
local employers on their workforce needs.  Additionally, consumers receive 
information about social security benefits and work incentives, as well as 
information about the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and how it 
relates to employment of persons with disabilities.  Plans are also underway 
for three more 2012 Mini Adjustment Program and Employment Readiness 
Seminar, with likely locations being planned for Big Rapids, Pontiac and in 
the Port Huron/Lapeer area.





CONSUMER SERVICES REPORT



The Consumer Services staff continues to provide quality services to blind 
and visually impaired consumers.  This quarter, staff participated in 
various activities that enhanced options for their consumers to gain 
independence and employment.



Training



System 7 training was provided in December for counselors and teachers to 
familiarize them with changes in the system, as well as to improve data 
collection and reporting.  In January, the agency provided training for the 
teachers focusing on aspects of the 7OB report.  Areas included case 
management and program expectations.  This was a day long training that 
provided the staff with information regarding data needed to reflect the 
requirements of the 7OB report.



Additionally, the managers participated in Leadership training with MRS 
during the month of January where information was provided regarding third 
party agreements.  At this training, managers were able to obtain clear and 
concise information pertaining to the proper term for cash match agreements. 
Third party cooperative arrangements were discussed so that managers will be 
able to develop appropriate agreements.



Employment



MCB?s liaison to the National Employment Network participated in a training 
session where CSAVR representative, Kathy West-Evans, presented on the 
process of single point of contact for agencies that work with employers. 
The objective of the training was to help agencies understand the importance 
of having a single point of contact to work with the national employers, as 
well as the federal government.



MCB Consumer Services Division worked collaboratively with Community Mental 
Health to explore ways to increase referrals from CMH and to improve 
communications with CMH to identify individuals who are blind and visually 
impaired.  MCB discussed the criteria for services and the various 
technologies to assist individuals with various types of employment.  These 
trainings were held in Oakland County, Detroit and Grand Rapids.  At the 
trainings, national consultants from the Boston area analyzed the referral 
process and the employment objectives of the three sites as well as best 
practices to see how they could be shared among the groups to improve 
employment outcomes.  MCB will continue to follow up with CMH to provide 
vocational services to recipients of CMH services.  The East Region manager 
met with Carmen Totten from Macomb-Oakland Regional Center (MORC) in order 
to begin to identify codes in the CMH system that may help in identifying 
potential referrals for MCB.  The West Region manager is working with the 
Grand Rapids CMH to include a definition of legal blindness in their 
referral process so that they can refer them to MCB when appropriate.



The Central Region provided one-day training for counselors.  This training 
included a review of the standards and indicators, eligibility information, 
interagency cash transfers, as well as discussions on best practices on 
problem case management.



Summer Transition



The staff continues to work with the intermediate school districts to 
promote summer transition opportunities for blind and visually impaired 
youth.   Several transition programs are establishing goals and objectives 
for the summer.  Each of the programs will provide students with 
opportunities to gain vocational information as well as pre-employment 
skills.  Some of the programs will provide opportunities for youth to obtain 
paid employment.  The Business Enterprise Program will continue to provide 
internships for students at various locations this summer providing an 
opportunity for nine transition youth to gain work experience in the food 
service industry.  Discussion continues around the expansion of this 
internship program throughout the year.



The East Region managers met with Bill Ross of Booker T Washington Business 
Association. The purpose was to enlist his help in teaching a soft skills 
class for Detroit Public Schools summer programs from a business/employer 
prospective and to begin the discussion about the possibilities for 
assistance with placement of MCB?s consumers with small and medium sized 
businesses that may belong to his organization. We are also networking for 
placements for MCB?s youth this summer with new businesses such as 
McDonalds. MCB?s Detroit office continues to work with Detroit?s Workforce 
Board in their Education and Youth, Disability, Contracts and Finance 
committees.  The East Region manager?s role in working with these committees 
is to assure their programs are accessible to persons with disabilities, 
especially individuals who are blind and visually impaired.  This has 
increased their awareness about the need for inclusion of persons with 
disabilities.



The West Region is facilitating three interagency cash transfer agreements 
with Ionia, Ottawa and Kent Counties in cooperation with the Association for 
the Blind and Visually Impaired to provide transition programming by way of 
STEPS and Summer in the City.  College Prep 2012 is gearing up and staff are 
planning and preparing for this programming.  The flier has been dispensed 
to MCB?s website and the TCVI website and we are welcoming referrals.



Personnel



The Consumer Services Division continues to work with the personnel liaison 
to fill vacancies that occurred within the division.  During this quarter, 
the rehabilitation teacher in Escanaba accepted a position at the Wisconsin 
Division of Vocational Rehabilitation Services.



The rehabilitation teacher vacancy in Kalamazoo is being covered by a recent 
VRT graduate from WMU on a fee for service arrangement through Goodwill 
Industries.  This relationship enabled MCB to provide rehabilitation teacher 
services for consumers in Southwest Michigan. This vacancy has been posted 
and candidates are being screened.  The West Region Manager position was 
posted and interviews were conducted in January.  Lisa Kisiel was selected 
for this position.  MCB congratulates Lisa on her promotion.



The Central Region has filled two vacant rehabilitation teacher positions 
this quarter with Leah Williams and Leanne Ford.  Leah Williams works in the 
Lansing Regional office and Leanne Ford works in the Gaylord office.  Leanne 
Ford has worked with MCB through the SVRC, Inc and is now a state employee. 
This region has established interview dates for the Employment Interviewer. 
This person will provide job development and job placement services for the 
region, as well as assist counselors with job ready consumers in their 
employment search.







BRAILLE AND TALKING BOOK LIBRARY REPORT (BTBL)



Circulation Statistics



BTBL circulated 20,988 items during the month of February. Digital books 
account for 78 percent, cassette books for 22 percent and Braille books for 
2 percent.



Braille and Audio Recording Download (BARD)



February 2012 statistics show that 618 individuals and 41 institutions are 
using BARD to download books, which is a combined increase of 76 BARD 
accounts since December.  During the month of February, this group 
downloaded 2,666 books and 97magazine issues.



Patron Survey



BTBL received 467 responses to the patron survey sent out last fall, 
representing 12 percent of those who are directly served by Lansing staff. 
Of those, 60 percent indicated that they were always very satisfied with 
service, 20 percent were usually very satisfied, 7 percent were always 
satisfied, 8 percent were usually satisfied, 3 percent were usually not 
satisfied and 1 percent did not answer this question. Of the 3 percent not 
satisfied, three are inmates of the Department of Corrections and two are 
residents of the Upper Peninsula who began getting direct service from BTBL 
after the subregional library in Marquette closed in 2010.





TRAINING CENTER REPORT



Return to Oakland Drive



The Training Center staff reported to the Training Center at 1541 Oakland 
Drive on Tuesday, February 22, 2012.  Everyone was pleased to be back in the 
Center after 14 months spent at the Clarion although the premises on Oakland 
Drive were not 100% completed.



Most staff offices were fairly clean, enabling staff to settle into their 
offices during the first week.  Classrooms and public areas required 
considerable cleaning before equipment and supplies could be arranged and 
put away.  The training kitchen was not available to the staff for cleaning 
until March 8, and the wood shop has been furnished but still requires 
replacement of the power boxes in the floor in order for all of the power 
woodworking equipment to be made operational.



Center management continues to work closely with LARA Office Services staff 
and staff from DTMB, as well as with the architect from M.C. Smith to bring 
this construction project to a successful conclusion.  The contractor 
continues to complete the work which still needs to be done.



Clarion, Residence Inn and Warehouse



The Clarion hotel, where staff offices and classrooms were housed, was 
vacated on Monday February 21, and left in good condition.  The Residence 
Inn which housed the training kitchen was also vacated on February 21, and 
the contract has been successfully closed out.  The warehouse was also 
emptied, but several items became infested with mold during the 14 months 
spent there.  These included:  the slate topped pool table, an antique 
upright piano, a sectional couch that was to have partially furnished the 
student lounge that is located behind the cafeteria, and the 30 dorm room 
mattresses that had just been replaced in 2008.  New mattresses have been 
ordered and should be delivered on or before Friday March 16.



Center Opening



The Center was originally scheduled to open to students on Sunday March 4th 
but with the amount of work remaining for the contractor to complete, and 
staff prevented from having access to portions of the building meant that 
all of the classrooms could not be arranged in time for that opening date. 
When the mold was discovered in the mattresses, a 2 week delay was required 
in order to allow time for new ones to be bid, approved, ordered and 
delivered.  It was also necessary to order new window treatments for the 
dormitories.  These have been selected, bid and ordered, though the date for 
delivery and installation is not yet certain.  Cellular shades were chosen, 
as these are easy to clean, durable and fairly effective in blocking extreme 
cold and heat.  This plan allows the Center to open on the 18th of March.



Security Computer



A new security computer will allow the TC staff to provide access cards to 
staff and students alike, and these cards will be immediately deprogrammed 
in the event that they are ever lost or stolen.  The computer will also 
contain an advanced security system that will protect the building and set 
off an alarm at any intrusion.  The paging system is built into this 
computer, and is reported to be accessible from each of the telephones in 
the building.



Classes will begin at 8:00 a.m. on Monday morning March 19th..  Because the 
Center is staffed 24/7 once students have arrived, and because the fire 
suppression system is operable, we will be able to have students reside 
safely inside the building even prior to arrival of the security computer. 
In addition, there is a paging system connected with the fire alarm system 
which is on site and working well.  Though it can only be accessed by a 
person standing in front of the fire alarm access panel which is located in 
Support Services, this does permit paging in an emergency and will enable 
Center staff to make the morning report to all students and staff, beginning 
immediately.



Student Census



There will be 12 students returning to the TC who left the Clarion on 
February 3.  In addition, 4 new students will arrive on Sunday March 18 to 
begin their training.  The TC plans to have 3 support services staff on hand 
for the returning students, since none of them will be familiar with the new 
Center.  This should allow enough staff to check everyone into their rooms 
and to give them tours.



Staffing



In mid-December Center instructor Karen DeVera left the TC staff to begin 
teaching in the Kalamazoo Regional office.  Karen had taught the VECP, 
vocational exploration and career planning course, which is the cornerstone 
of the TC?s employment preparation program.  She developed the curriculum 
herself, and the class is still in its infancy.  It is a pleasure to report 
that Karen DeVera returned to the Center staff in mid-January.  She has 
ordered several new kinds of assessment tools which are designed to assist 
students in learning about their aptitudes for certain career fields.  Plans 
are underway to increase the number and level of internship and volunteer 
options that will be available to students.



Congratulations go out to Mary (Aggie) Carter, who was promoted to the 
position of TC Executive Secretary on February 20, 2012, vacating her former 
position as secretary, receptionist and support staff person to the entire 
remaining Center staff.



Mini Adjustment



During the week of March 5, many Center staff took advantage of the absence 
of students, and volunteered their time at the Kalamazoo Mini.  That Mini 
program was attended by 20 participants and, from all reports came off 
without a hitch.  Appreciation goes to Bonnie Betz, Shig Toda, Pam Crooks, 
Hertha Klimp and the many TC and field staff who provided teaching services 
to the students.



Open house/Grand Opening



The MCB will be planning the Grand opening of the renovated Training Center 
some time prior to the 24th of April.  Though all of the construction finish 
work will not yet be completed, it is believed that this timely grand 
opening will be more appropriate than if it were postponed until all of the 
renovation issues are resolved.  Invitations will be going out during the 
next 2 weeks.  If you have anyone in mind who should specifically receive an 
invitation, please e-mail that person?s contact information to Aggie Carter 
at: carterm1 at michigan.gov.





ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES REPORT



The MCB Operating Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 has been developed and 
distributed to the Executive Management Team as well as the Board.  In 
addition, with MCB?s lean projected match analysis, the Commission is in 
good shape for having enough state funds to draw down all of the federal 
money.



MCB is currently in the middle of the second quarter of the Fiscal Year, and 
expenditures are right on track with a little over 41% of the budget spent. 
MCB?s goal is to spend 100% of the budget this year by having a spending 
plan that identifies how much to spend each month.  Closely monitoring 
expenditures quarterly will ensure the spending plan is followed.



With regard to Technology at MCB, an order has been placed for 80 new 
computers that will be equipped with the new version of Microsoft Office 
2010.  All JAWs users were recently upgraded to the latest version tested 
with System 7, and all users upgraded to Internet Explorer 8.  Staff is 
looking at expanding the use of Microsoft Outlook to include the scheduling 
and calendar features during this year, and the Technology Committee has 
developed just-in-time training for Microsoft Office 2010 for all JAWs users 
to coincide with the delivery of the new computers.



The Independent Living program has been a big focus over the last 3 months 
as it relates to the data in System 7.  The two RSA IL reports (IL Older 
Blind and IL Part B) that were due on December 31 shed light on areas that 
were in need of improvement.  There have been two training sessions held 
that were not as successful as staff had hoped.  However, adhoc committees 
and user groups are continuing to work to help define the issues and assist 
in developing solutions.  Training is planned for System 7 users throughout 
the remainder of this fiscal year.



The Administrative Services Section has processed over 35 Freedom of 
Information Act (FOIA) requests since the beginning of this fiscal year.



CIC Update



The MCB Consumer Involvement Council met on January 12, 2012.  Terms of 
current council members were confirmed, and there was discussion of two 
vacancies (parent representative and current MCB consumer representative) to 
be filled.  A number of motions were made regarding matters to be presented 
to the MCB Board, and the CIC chair has since contacted the board regarding 
these.  The next meeting of the CIC will be in Lansing on Thursday, April 
12, and guest Richard Bernstein has been invited to discuss transportation 
issues in the Detroit area related to individuals who are blind and visually 
impaired.



Publications Update



The Winter edition of In Focus has been mailed to library patrons and posted 
on the MCB website, and the MCB 2011 Annual Report is being distributed by 
email and posted on the MCB website this month.  As usual with all MCB 
publications, at least two formats are posted on the MCB website, and 
additional alternative formats are available upon request.









Outreach to Future Optometrists



On January 27, MCB State Director Pat Cannon gave his annual two-hour 
presentation on MCB programs and services as well as blindness awareness to 
senior optometry students at the Michigan College of Optometry at Ferris 
State University in Big Rapids.  He covered topics including an overview of 
what MCB can provide, how eye doctors can refer their patients to MCB, a 
discussion of what blindness is and what it is not, and his own experiences 
as a blind person.  Attitudes about blindness, including myths and 
stereotypes, were also discussed.  The students were very receptive to the 
information and had many questions following the presentation.



MCB Supports Michigan Braille Challenge



Once again, MCB was one of several co-sponsors of the Michigan Braille 
Challenge in Grand Rapids, held on February 18 this year.  This event, held 
every other year, was supported with a donation of $600 to the Association 
for the Blind and Visually Impaired, who organize and host the competition. 
This funding provided for the room rental, Braille paper, and Braille 
writers.



The purpose of this event is to promote Braille reading and writing skills 
among blind and visually impaired students in grades 1 through 12.  The 
students compete in the areas of Braille Speed and Accuracy, Chart and Graph 
Reading, Reading Comprehension, Proofreading, and Braille Spelling.



The Grand Rapids competition is Michigan?s only regional event, and the only 
opportunity for students to compete in Michigan for the Braille Institute of 
America?s national competition.  This year, there were 11 Michigan 
participants.  The top competitors received Meijer gift cards as prizes and 
will attend the national competition in Los Angeles June 22-23.  At the 
national competition, students compete for awards of up to $5,000 plus 
electronic Braille equipment worth up to $4,000.









VISIONS 2012



The Michigan Commission for the Blind is once again partnering with the Ann 
Arbor District Library Service for the Blind and Visually Impaired to 
present the VISIONS adaptive technology fair, held every other year. 
VISIONS 2012 will be held Wednesday, May 9, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Vendors 
from across the state will present and demonstrate their products, which 
include both adaptive devices and software for individuals who cannot read 
print due to visual or physical disabilities. This event will be held at 
Washtenaw Community College in the Morris Lawrence Building at 4800 East 
Huron River Drive in Ann Arbor.  Admission is free.



Training



The MAER Annual Conference is set for April 26-27 in Livonia. The theme of 
this year?s event is ?Expanding Boundaries? and includes sessions focusing 
on topics such as autism and visual impairments, Functional Vision 
Evaluations, and ways to use an iPhone, iPad, or iTouch. Several MCB staff 
will be attending the program.



The initial ?new employee survey? has been completed by MCB staff hired 
going back to mid-2010, including those individuals hired in the past couple 
months since the survey was first sent out. The results of the survey are 
currently being compiled and will be shared with the management team and the 
in-house training committee. The primary purpose of sending it to those 
hired awhile back is to determine if the content and/or format of the survey 
needs to be tweaked. Feedback received so far indicates the survey is clear 
and asking the right questions, however this will continue to be evaluated 
as time goes on.



The survey was developed with the understanding it would be given to new 
employees at the time they are first hired and again after about 60-90 days. 
The real test of the new employee orientation will be to evaluate the second 
survey completed by the new employees to determine if they are receiving the 
information they need to do their jobs. A basic principle is that of 
continuous improvement so this process will be continually evaluated as time 
goes on and changes to the orientation process will most likely be made over 
the coming months.



The Michigan Rehabilitation Conference is scheduled for November 7-9 in 
Traverse City. Coming soon will be the ?call for presentations? from the 
conference program committee so anyone having an idea for a break-out 
session at the conference is encouraged to submit it for possible inclusion 
on the conference agenda.



HR



In the past 3 months, five new employees have joined the staff of MCB. They 
include Angela DeBacker, a secretary in Escanaba; Leah Williams, a rehab 
teacher in Lansing; Jessica Goodrich, a librarian at the BTBL; Ronda Martin, 
a receptionist in the Central Office; and Leanne Ford, a rehab teacher in 
Gaylord who was previously employed with MCB through SVRC.  In addition to 
these new employees, Lisa Kisiel has been promoted to the West Region 
manager, Mary Carter was promoted to the executive secretary at the Training 
Center, Cathy Cove has been promoted to the secretary 9 position in the 
Detroit Regional office, and Shannon McVoy has been promoted to the 
assistant manager in the West Region. Congratulations to all of these 
individuals.



Several other positions are currently in some stage of the hiring process. 
Those positions include an employment specialist in the Central Region, a 
secretary in the Detroit office, a rehab teacher in Kalamazoo, a BEP 
vacancy, and several student assistants in Central Office, the Training 
Center, BEP, and the library.



SAFETY



The MCB Safety Team has scheduled 3 sessions of ?safety awareness? training 
for MCB staff. Two of those sessions occurred in early March ? one in 
Detroit and one in Lansing. The third session is set for April 20 at MCBTC. 
The facilitators for these programs are Michigan State Police troopers. The 
feedback from the first two sessions was overwhelmingly positive. Many good 
ideas and tips were provided by the troopers on how to identify risky 
situations, how to avoid them in the first place, and what to do should a 
counselor or teacher find themselves in such a situation.



The Safety Team also continues to learn more about the risks associated with 
blood borne pathogens and what steps the agency must take to make sure that 
staff are not at risk when working with consumers. Recommendations from the 
safety team will be presented to the Director in the coming months.



A series of safety videos are available online covering a variety of subject 
matters and that information was shared with all staff so they could view 
them and learn more about particular areas of concern including blood borne 
pathogens, ergonomics, and slips, trips, and falls. These videos have been 
produced and posted by the staff at MARO and are very good.





BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM REPORT



Training



B E P Manager Training

The 5 students who began their B E P manager training in September 2012 
successfully completed training in mid-February.  As of this writing, one of 
those students has successfully bid on a B E P facility and is slated to 
assume responsibility for it in early March.



If there is sufficient interest and if circumstances warrant, B E P 
anticipates conducting two B E P manager training classes in calendar year 
2012.  As of this writing, it is expected 5 students will participate in the 
April class.  And if possible, a second class will be conducted in October.



Alternate B E P Manager Training

Some months ago, the Elected Committee forwarded a P E V S T proposal.  As 
this new initiative was inconsistent with the Program Rules, the proposal 
was forwarded to the Attorney General (A G) for review and comment.  As of 
this writing, the A G has not yet commented on the proposal.



Sagebrush

B E P was able to secure permission for 2 staff and 2 E O C members to 
travel to the 2012 Sagebrush National Training Conference in February. The 
conference was presented by the Randolph-Sheppard Vendors of America.  The 
theme of the conference was ?Merging the Present and the Future ? Moving 
Forward?.  The conference, attended by about 250 people from around the 
nation, included presentations from Dan Frye, Management and Program 
Specialist for Randolph-Sheppard Program at the Rehabilitation Services 
Administration, Catriona MacDonald of Linchpin Strategies, updates from 
various S L As,  reports from various licensees, reports from teaming 
partners as well as a large and well attended product and services exhibit. 
Of particular interest during the conference were amendments to H R 7 
regarding commercialization in highway rest areas.  Amendments proposed were 
detrimental to Randolph-Sheppard highway vending locations.  With up to the 
minute reports from Ms. MacDonald, conference attendees were able to contact 
their senators and representatives to educate them about the impact of the 
proposed amendments.  Licensees as well as both consumer groups successfully 
rallied around this issue and that amendment was withdrawn.



2012 BLAST

While the Program has been excited about the prospect of participation in 
the National Association of Blind Merchants 2012 BLAST, it was also recently 
learned BLAST will not be held in 2012.  While it is rumored that is not the 
case, as of this writing, the National Association of Blind Merchants web 
site does not mention plans for BLAST 2012.  Should it be discovered BLAST 
2012 will indeed take place, at that time every effort will be made to 
provide this training to both B E P staff as well as an increased number of 
licensees.



Facilities



New Operator

B E P is happy to announce Henry Mosley, a graduate of the June 2011 class, 
has been inventoried into the Hannah Building facility in downtown Lansing.



Facility Remodeling

Each quarter, the Program has kept the Board abreast of the progress of 
several remodeling projects.  The Secretary of State remodel was completed 
ahead of time and the new caf? opened in mid-January.  The existing 
cafeteria remains in operation under the management of a temporary operator. 
As no other potential operator has bid on the facility, the Program 
fervently hopes one of the September 2011 class graduates will bid on the 
facility very soon.



During the temporary closing of the House of Representatives cafeteria, much 
has been accomplished.  The facility has been deep cleaned, literally from 
top to bottom.  Walls have been repainted and doors refinished.  Service 
counters have been repaired and in some cases new countertops installed. 
All food service equipment has been evaluated and, if faulty, either been 
repaired or replaced.  House Administrative Staff have been willing and 
creative partners in helping the Program update this facility in a 
compressed period.  The operator selection process is proceeding as 
recommended by the Committee and as approved by the Board with bids to have 
been submitted by March 9th. The team evaluating the bids has been named and 
will meet as soon as possible to evaluate the bids and identify the most 
qualified bidder to manage the facility.



B E P continues to wait for the approval of the County Board of 
Commissioners prior to commencing a remodel at the Ingham County Human 
Services snack bar in Lansing.  The county has contracted for a space 
utilization study and the Program hopes to learn of the County?s 
determination in the near future.  Upon securing County Board approval, the 
facility will go back on the bid line and the remodel will commence



Subsequent to the change in administration, talks with Department of Human 
Services management regarding the Grand Tower facility expansion resumed. 
The green light was recently given for this project and Program staff has 
already met with the food service designer to update current drawings which 
will accommodate the revised space for the expanded food service facility. 
This remodeled facility will include a conference room, similar in design to 
the Lewis Cass cafeteria conference room.



Plans are in progress for some updates to the Program?s only coffee house: 
Caf? deVille in Detroit.  Program staff is working with building management 
to update the paint, install new lighting fixtures and replace carpet.



Pending new department approval, the Program also hopes to commence 
remodeling projects at the General Office building and the State Library and 
Historical Center.



Other Information for the Board



2012 Budget

?                    Status of the business, FY 2012 as of 31 December 2012:

o       Gross sales:  $2,447,654

o       Merchandise purchases:  $1,348,645

o       Payroll expenses:  $311,982

o       Other operating expenses:  $238,613

o       Vending machine and other income:  $26,858

o       Net proceeds:  $575,272

o       Levied set-aside funds:  $61,228

o       Set-aside funds collected:  $61,696

o       Net profit to vendors (i.e., net income):  $514,044

o       Vendor earnings:  $514,044

o       Late set-aside fees by facility, as follows:

Facility 33, Detroit Main Post Office

10/2011 Late Payment         $496.00

11/2011 No Payment            $39.00

Facility 197, Fenton Swartz Creek Rest Area

10/2011 Late Payment         $117.00

Facility 72, Macomb County Public Service

11/2011 No Payment            $83.00

12/2011 No Payment            $50.00

Facility 27, Flint State Office Building

10/2011 No Payment            $6.00

11/2011 No Payment            $51.00

12/2011 No Payment            $53.00

Facility 201, Iron Mountain-Kingsford Vending Route

12/2011 No Payment            $30.00

Facility 193, House of Reps Cafeteria

10/2011 No Payment            $255.00

11/2011 No Payment            $30.00

12/2011 No Payment            $12.00

Facility 207, Hall of Justice

10/2011 No Payment            $5.00

Facility 95, Ottawa Street Cafeteria

11/2011 Late Payment         $383.00

Facility 105, Capital Building

11/2011 Late Payment         $104.00

Facility 222, Michigan State Police Headquarters

12/2011 Late Payment         $172.00

Facility 94, Hannah Building

10/2011 No Payment            $32.00

11/2011 No Payment            $36.00

12/2011 No Payment            $40.00

Facility 103, Secretary of State Cafeteria

10/2011 Late Payment         $12.00

11/2011 Late Payment         $124.00

12/2011 Late Payment         $124.00

Facility 7, Calhoun County Toeller Building

11/2011 No Payment            $8.00

Facility 58, John C Mackie Rest Area

12/2011 No Payment            $5.00

Facility 123, Muskegon-Grand Haven Vending Route

10/2011 Late Payment         $381.00

Facility 59, Justice Building

12/2011 No Payment            $9.00

Facility 64, Kent County FIA

                             11/2011 No VFMR, No Payment

                             12/2011 No VFMR, No Payment



Equipment Inventory

B E P is currently in the process of completing a full equipment inventory. 
Inventory data collected variously over the past 18 months is inconsistent 
to the point the equipment database cannot be properly reconciled. 
Consequently, the Program will enter, with departmental approval, into a 
contractual arrangement for the inventory to be completed by an independent 
contractor.  As of this writing, the BEP is in the process of soliciting 
preliminary proposals to ascertain potential cost and potential contractor 
interest.  Also as of this writing, as the BEP conducts incoming product 
inventories, it will also confirm the equipment inventory for that facility 
in preparation for the on-site contractual equipment inventory.



EOC Active Participation



The Committee continues to meet according to its established schedule, and 
several Subcommittees continue to meet.  The Workshop Subcommittee has been 
meeting with Program staff to develop the 2012 Workshop, scheduled to take 
place on March 30, 31 and April 1.  Consistent with the 2012 BEP Annual 
Workshop Theme of ?Looking from the Customer?s Perspective,? BEP will soon 
begin working with the EOC and operators to explore ways and resources to 
develop and enhance promotional and marketing opportunities for each 
facility.  Staff has been researching and formulating some proposed concepts 
for dialog with the Marketing and Promotions Subcommittee at its first 
meeting after the 2012 Workshop.







EXECUTIVE ORDER
No. 2012 -2



DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL RIGHTS
COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND
BLIND AND VISUALLY IMPAIRED SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD
MICHIGAN REHABILITATION COUNCIL
MICHIGAN COUNCIL FOR REHABILITATION SERVICES
DISABILITY CONCERNS COMMISSION



RESCISSION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 2007-48



EXECUTIVE REORGANIZATION



WHEREAS, Section 1 of Article V of the Michigan Constitution of 1963 vests 
the executive power in the Governor; and

WHEREAS, Section 2 of Article V of the Michigan Constitution of 1963 
empowers the Governor to make changes in the organization of the Executive 
Branch or in the assignment of functions among its units that the Governor 
considers necessary for efficient administration; and

WHEREAS, Section 8 of Article V of the Michigan Constitution of 1963 
provides that each principal department shall be under the supervision of 
the Governor, unless otherwise provided by the Constitution; and

WHEREAS, there is a continued need to reorganize functions among state 
departments to ensure efficient administration; and



WHEREAS, the rehabilitation needs of Michigan residents can be best served 
by consolidation of existing programs and services; and

WHEREAS, the management of vendor facility programs is most efficiently 
performed in conjunction with other state facility management services;



NOW, THEREFORE, I, Richard D. Snyder, Governor of the state of Michigan, by 
virtue of the powers and authority vested in the Governor by the Michigan 
Constitution of 1963 and Michigan law, order the following:





1. BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM

A. Except as specified in Section I.C. of this Order, any authority, powers, 
duties, functions, records, personnel, property, unexpended balances of 
appropriations, allocations or other funds, including the functions of 
budgeting and procurement, of the Commission for the Blind and the 
Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs relating to the Business 
Enterprise Program and other vendor licensing programs relating to the blind 
or visually impaired are transferred from the Commission for the Blind and 
the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to the Department of 
Technology, Management and Budget, including but not limited to the 
following:

1                   The Blind and Visually Disabled Persons Act, 1978 PA 
260, MCL 393.351 to 393.369.



2                   Section 7a of the Michigan Historical Commission Act, 
1913 PA 271, MCL 399.1 to 399.1 0.



3                   Section 2 of the Limited Access Highways Act, 1941 PA 
205, MCL 252.51 to 252.64.



4                   Section 4 of the Business Opportunity Act for Persons 
with Disabilities, 1988 PA 112, MCL 450.791 to MCL 450.795.



5                   Section 208 of the Michigan Museum Act, 1990 PA 325, MCL 
399.301 to MCL 399.51 0.



B. Any authority, powers, duties, functions, records, property, unexpended 
balances of appropriations, allocations or other funds, of the Director of 
the Commission for the Blind or the Director of the Department of Licensing 
and Regulatory Affairs relating to the Business Enterprise Program or other 
vendor facilities and licensing programs relating to the blind or visually 
impaired are transferred to the Director of the Department of Technology, 
Management and Budget.

C. Any authority, powers, duties, functions, records, property, unexpended 
balances of appropriations, allocations or other funds of the Commission for 
the Blind granted by 1999 AC, R 393.16(9, 393.34 and 393.56 are transferred 
to the Director of the Department of Technology, Management and Budget.

II. THE BLIND AND VISUALLY IMPAIRED SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD

A. The Blind and Visually Impaired Services Advisory Board ("Advisory 
Board") is created as an advisory board within the Department of Human 
Services.

B. The Advisory Board shall consist of five members appointed by, and 
serving at the pleasure of, the Governor.



C. The Advisory Board members shall have a particular interest or expertise 
in the concerns of the blind or visually impaired community.

D. The Governor shall designate a member of the Advisory Board to serve as 
its Chairperson. The Chairperson shall serve at the pleasure of the 
Governor.

E. The Director of the Department of Human Services shall perform all
budgeting, procurement, and related management functions of the Advisory 
Board.

F. The Advisory Board shall do the following:

1                   Study and review the needs of the blind and visually 
impaired community in this state.



2                   Advise the Department concerning the coordination and 
administration of state programs serving the blind and visually impaired 
community.



3                   Recommend changes in state programs, statutes, and 
policies that affect the blind and visually impaired community to the 
Department.



4                   Secure appropriate recognition of the accomplishments 
and contributions of blind and visually impaired residents of this state.



5                   Monitor, evaluate, investigate, and advocate programs 
for the betterment of blind and visually impaired residents of this state.



Ill. MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

A. Any authority, powers, duties, functions, records, personnel, property, 
unexpended balances of appropriations, allocations or other funds, including 
the functions of budgeting and procurement, of the Commission for the Blind 
not previously transferred to the Department of Technology, Management and 
Budget under Section I. of this Order are transferred from the Commission 
for the Blind and the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to the 
Department of Human Services.

B. Any authority, powers, duties, functions, records, property, unexpended 
balances of appropriations, allocations or other funds, including the 
functions of budgeting and procurement, of the Director of the Commission 
for the Blind or the Director of the Department of Licensing and Regulatory 
Affairs relative to services to the blind and visually impaired and not 
previously transferred to the Department of Technology, Management and 
Budget under Section I. of this Order are transferred to the Director of the 
Department of Human Services.

IV. MICHIGAN REHABILITATION SERVICES

Michigan Rehabilitation Services is transferred by a Type II transfer from 
the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to the Department of 
Human Services.

Any authority, powers, duties, functions, records, personnel, property, 
unexpended balances of appropriations, allocations or other funds, including 
the functions of budgeting and procurement, of Michigan Rehabilitation 
Services are transferred from the Department of Licensing and Regulatory 
Affairs to the Department of Human Services.

V. IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFERS

A. Any authority, powers, duties, functions, records, personnel, property, 
unexpended balances of appropriations, allocations or other funds, including 
the functions of budgeting and procurement, used, held, employed, available, 
or to be made available to the Department of Licensing and Regulatory 
Affairs for the activities, powers, duties, functions, and responsibilities 
transferred by this Order are transferred to the receiving department.

B. The director of the department receiving the transfer, after consultation 
with the Director of the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs, 
shall provide executive direction and supervision for the implementation of 
the transfers. The assigned functions shall be administered under the 
direction and supervision of the director of the receiving department.

C. The directors of the departments impacted by this Order shall immediately 
initiate coordination to facilitate the transfers and shall develop a 
memorandum of record identifying any pending settlements, issues of 
compliance with applicable federal and state laws and regulations, or other 
obligations to be resolved.

D. The directors of the departments impacted by this Order shall administer 
the functions transferred in such ways as to promote efficient 
administration and shall make internal organizational changes as may be 
administratively necessary to complete the realignment of responsibilities 
under this Order.

VI. CREATION OF MICHIGAN COUNCIL FOR REHABILITATION SERVICES

A. The Michigan Council for Rehabilitation Services ("Council") is 
established within the Department of Human Services.

B. The Council shall include the following sixteen (16) voting members:

1. The following members are appointed by the Governor, after soliciting 
recommendations from representatives of organizations representing a broad 
range of individuals with disabilities and organizations interested in 
individuals with disabilities:

a.      One individual representing the Statewide Independent Living Council 
established under Executive Order 2007-49.



b.      One individual representing a parent training and information center 
established under Section 67 1 of the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act, Public Law 91-30, as amended, 20 USC 1471.



c.       One individual representing the client assistance program 
established under Section 112 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 
93- 112, as amended, 29 USC 732.



d.      One individual representing qualified vocational rehabilitation 
counselors with knowledge of, and experience with, vocational rehabilitation 
programs. The individual appointed under this paragraph shall not be an 
employee of Michigan Rehabilitation Services.



e.      One individual representing community rehabilitation program service 
providers.



f.       Four individuals representing business, industry, or labor, 
including at least one individual representing the Talent Investment Board 
created by Executive Order 201 1-1 3.



1                   g.      Four individuals representing disability 
advocacy groups,        including a cross-section of all of the following:

2

i.                    Disability advocacy groups representing individuals 
with physical, cognitive, sensory, and mental disabilities.

ii.                  Disability groups representing representatives of 
individuals with disabilities who have difficulty in representing themselves 
or are unable due to their disabilities to represent themselves.



h.      One individual representing current or former applicants for, or 
recipients of, vocational rehabilitation services.



i.        One individual representing the director of a project carried out 
under Section 121 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-1 12, as 
amended, 29 USC 741, providing vocational rehabilitation services grants to 
the governing bodies of an Indian tribe or to a consortium of tribal 
governing bodies.



2. The Superintendent of Public Instruction, or his or her designee, from 
within the Department of Education.

C. The Bureau Director of Michigan Rehabilitation Services shall serve as a 
non-voting ex officio member of the Council.

D. A majority of the members of the Council shall be individuals with 
disabilities and shall not be employed by the Department of Human Services. 
When appointing members of the Council, the Governor shall consider, to the 
greatest extent practicable, the extent to which minority populations are 
represented on the Council.

E. Of the members of the Council initially appointed by the Governor under 
Section VI.B., six (6) members shall be appointed for a term expiring on 
December 31, 2012, five (5) members shall be appointed for a term expiring 
on December 31, 201 3, and five (5) members shall be appointed for a term 
expiring on December 31, 2014. After the initial appointments, members shall 
be appointed for a term of three (3) years.

F. A vacancy on the Council occurring other than by expiration of a term 
shall be filled by the Governor in the same manner as the original 
appointment for the balance of the unexpired term. A vacancy shall not 
affect the power of the remaining members to exercise the duties of the 
Council.

G. Except for a member appointed under Section VI.B.1 .c. or Section 
VI.B.1.i., a member of the Council shall not serve more than two consecutive 
full terms.

VII. CHARGE TO THE COUNCIL

A. After consulting with the Talent Investment Board, the Council shall do 
all of the following:

1. Review, analyze, and advise Michigan Rehabilitation Services regarding 
the performance of the responsibilities of Michigan Rehabilitation Services 
under Sections 100 to 141 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-1 
12, as amended, 29 USC 720 to 753a, particularly responsibilities relating 
to all of the following:

a.      Eligibility, including order of selection.

b. The extent, scope, and effectiveness of services provided.

c.       Functions performed by state departments and agencies that affect 
or that potentially affect the ability of individuals with disabilities in 
achieving employment outcomes under Sections 100 to 141 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-1 12, as amended, 29 USC 720 to 
753a.



2. In partnership with Michigan Rehabilitation Services, do all of the 
following:

a.       Develop, agree to, and review the goals and priorities of this 
state in accordance with Section 101 (a)(15)(C) of the Rehabilitation Act of 
1973, Public Law 93-1 12, as amended, 29 USC 721 (a)(15)(C).

b.       Evaluate the effectiveness of the vocational rehabilitation program 
and submit reports of progress to the federal government in accordance with 
Section 101 (a)(15)(E) of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 Public Law 93-1 12, 
as amended, 29 USC 721 (a)(15)(E).



3                   Advise the Department of Human Services and Michigan 
Rehabilitation Services regarding activities authorized to be carried out 
under Sections 100 to 141 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93-1 
12, as amended, 29 USC 720 to 753a, and assist in the preparation of the 
State Plan and amendments to the State Plan, applications, reports, needs 
assessments, and evaluations required by Sections 100 to 141 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Public Law 93- 112, as amended, 29 USC 720 to 
753a.

4                   Perform all other functions required by 29 USC 
725(c)(4)-(8).

5                   Perform other functions related to the Council's 
responsibilities as requested by the Governor.



VIII. OPERATIONS OF THE COUNCIL

A. The Council shall select from among its voting members a Chairperson of 
the Council and may select other officers as it deems necessary.

B. The Council shall adopt procedures consistent with federal law, Michigan 
law, and this Order governing its organization and operations.

C. A majority of the voting members of the Council serving constitutes a 
quorum for the transaction of the Council's business. The Council shall act 
by a majority vote of the voting members of the Council serving.

D. The Council shall meet at least four times per year in a place that the 
Council determines necessary to conduct Council business and conduct forums 
or hearings as the Council determines appropriate.

E. The Council shall conduct all business at public meetings held in 
compliance with the Open Meetings Act, 1976 PA 267, MCL 15.261 to 15.275. 
Public notice of the time, date, and place of each meeting shall be given in 
the manner required by the Open Meetings Act, 1976 PA 267, MCL 15.261 to 
15.275.

F. The Council shall carry out its functions as required by 29 USC 
725(d)-(e) and 29 USC 725(g).

IX. DISABILITY CONCERNS COMMISSION

All the authority, powers, duties, functions, records, personnel, property, 
unexpended balances of appropriations, and allocations or other funds, 
including the functions of budgeting and procurement, of the Disability 
Concerns Commission, created by Executive Order 2009-40, previously 
transferred by Executive Order 201 1-4 from the Department of Licensing and 
Regulatory Affairs to the Department of Civil Rights by a Type I transfer, 
are hereby transferred to the Department of Civil Rights by Type Ill 
transfer as defined by Section 3 of Act No. 380 of the Public Acts of 1965, 
as amended, being Section 16.1 03 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

X. ABOLISHED ENTITIES

A. The Michigan Rehabilitation Council, created by Executive Order 2007-48, 
is abolished, and Executive Order 2007-48 is rescinded.

B. The Commission for the Blind, created by MCL 393.352, and the Commission 
Board, created by 1999 AC, R 391 .I et seq, are abolished.

C. The position of Director of the Commission for the Blind created by MCL 
393.352(1) is abolished.

D. The Disability Concerns Commission, created by Executive Order 2009-40, 
is abolished.

XI. MISCELLANEOUS

A. All rules, orders, contracts, plans, and agreements relating to the 
functions transferred to the Department of Technology, Management and Budget 
and Department of Human Services by this Order lawfully adopted prior to the 
effective date of this Order by the responsible state agency shall continue 
to be effective until revised, amended, or rescinded.

B. Any suit, action, or other proceeding lawfully commenced by, against, or 
before any entity transferred to the Department of Technology, Management 
and Budget and Department of Human Services by this Order shall not abate by 
reason of the taking effect of this Order. Any lawfully commenced suit, 
action, or other proceeding may be maintained by, against, or before the 
appropriate successor of any entity affected by this Order.

C. The invalidity of any portion of this Order shall not affect the validity 
of the remainder of the Order, which may be given effect without any invalid 
portion. Any portion of this Order found invalid by a court or other entity 
with proper jurisdiction shall be severable from the remaining portions of 
this Order.



In fulfillment of the requirements of Section 2 of Article V of the Michigan 
Constitution of 1963, the provisions of this Order shall be effective 60 
days after the filing of this Order.

Given under my hand and the Great Seal of the state of Michigan this 24th 
day of February, in the Year of our Lord Two Thousand Twelve.

GOVERNOR

BY THE GOVERNOR:

SECRETARY OF STATE

FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE



On 2-24-2012 at 11:00 a.m.
_______________________________________________
nfbmi-talk mailing list
nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
nfbmi-talk:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net 




From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar 27 13:22:01 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:22:01 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] case where damages were affirmed 9th circuit
Message-ID: <91F4C8EA4F584D6EB514D1C9039736BE@YOUR7C60552B9E>

No. 96-55456. - PREMO v. MARTIN - US 9th Circuit
FindLaw For Legal Professionals
Not a Legal Professional? Visit our consumer site
Register |
Login
Search FindLaw
Search
List of 6 items
Cases & Codes
Practice Management
Jobs & Careers
Legal News
Blogs
Service Providers
list end
List of 8 items
Forms
Law Technology
Lawyer Marketing
Corporate Counsel
Law Students
Thomson Legal Record
JusticeMail
Newsletters
list end
Click here to find out more!
FindLaw
List of 5 items
FindLaw
Caselaw
United States
US 9th Cir.
PREMO v. MARTIN
list end

United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit.
Reset
A
A Font size:
Print
ShareThis

PREMO v. MARTIN

Brenda PREMO, Director of the Department of Rehabilitation, State of California, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeana MARTIN; ?The United States Department of
Education; ?Richard W. Riley, Secretary of the United States Department of Education, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 96-55456.

Argued and Submitted June 9, 1997. -- July 11, 1997
Before: ?GOODWIN, D.W. NELSON, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

James F. Ahern, Deputy Attorney General of the State of California, for plaintiff-appellant.John F. Daly, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for defendants-appellees
the United States Department of Education and Secretary of Education Richard Riley.Janice A. Jenkins, Yturbide & Jenkins, San Francisco, CA, for defendant-appellee
Jeana Martin.

Brenda Premo, in her official capacity as the Director of the California Department of Rehabilitation (the ?State?), appeals the district court's grant
of summary judgment to Jeana Martin, the United States Department of Education, and Secretary of Education Richard Riley.   Martin, formerly a blind vendor
licensed under the Randolph-Sheppard Vending Stand Act (the ?Act?), 20 U.S.C. ?? 107-107f, invoked the arbitration provisions of the Act in order to resolve
a dispute between herself and the Department of Rehabilitation.   An arbitration panel convened by the United States Department of Education awarded Martin
damages, injunctive relief, and attorney's fees.   The State subsequently brought suit in federal district court, claiming that the Eleventh Amendment
prohibits Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels from awarding compensatory relief.   In the alternative, the State argued that the arbitration proceedings
violated due process.   Martin counterclaimed, seeking judicial enforcement of the award.   The State responded that the Eleventh Amendment bars the enforcement
of such awards in federal court.   The district court granted Martin's motion for summary judgment.   We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. ? 1291, and
we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The Randolph-Sheppard Vending Stand Act, 20 U.S.C. ?? 107-107f, establishes a cooperative federal-state program that provides employment opportunities for
the blind.   The Act grants priority to blind persons who desire to operate vending facilities on federal property.  20 U.S.C. ? 107(b).   At the federal
level, the Secretary of Education is charged with the overall responsibility for administering the Act. 20 U.S.C. ?? 107(b), 107a(a).

At the state level, state licensing agencies (?SLAs?) designated by the Secretary of Education implement the program.  20 U.S.C. ? 107a(a)(5).   State participation
in the program is voluntary, and a state agency seeking to be designated as a Randolph-Sheppard SLA must apply to the Secretary of Education and agree
to a number of conditions.   For example, the Act requires SLAs to give preferences to blind persons in need of employment, 20 U.S.C. ? 107a(b), to negotiate
with federal agencies for the operation of vending facilities on federal sites, 20 U.S.C. ? 107a(c), and to equip the facilities, 20 U.S.C. ? 107b(2).
  In addition, the state agency must:

make application to the Secretary and agree-

?

(6) to provide to any blind licensee dissatisfied with any action arising from the operation or administration of the vending facility program an opportunity
for a fair hearing, and to agree to submit the grievances of any blind licensee not otherwise resolved by such hearing to arbitration as provided in section
107d-1 of this title.

20 U.S.C. ? 107b(6).

The facts relevant to this case are not in dispute.   In 1985, the California Department of Rehabilitation, the designated SLA for the State of California,
issued a license to Jeana Martin.   The license permitted her to operate a snack bar and lunch room at the General Mail Facility of the United States Post
Office in Santa Ana, California.   Martin left the position in 1991 when she experienced financial losses and other difficulties.   Although she relocated
to other sites, her financial condition worsened, and the State revoked her license in 1992.

During this period, Martin twice requested a state hearing.   In 1990, she filed a complaint alleging that the State had violated the Act by failing to
take adequate steps to ensure compliance by the Postal Service.   In 1992, she challenged the State's termination of her vendor's license.   In both cases,
Martin was denied relief.

To contest these decisions, Martin invoked her right to arbitration by a panel convened by the Secretary of Education under 20 U.S.C. ?? 107d-1, 107d-2.
  Pursuant to the terms of the statute, Martin selected one panel member, the State selected another, and the panel members designated by Martin and the
State agreed to a third person who chaired the panel.

During the course of the proceedings, the panel refused a number of the State's requests.   First, the panel declined to grant a continuance to the State's
attorney.   When the State objected to Martin's selection of Robert Humphreys as a panel member because Humphreys previously had expressed a view about
one of the legal issues affecting Martin, the panel chair overruled the objection.   During the hearing, the panel admitted, over the State's objection,
the testimony of Durward McDaniel, an attorney who had previously advised Martin.

In August of 1994, the panel ruled in favor of Martin.   The panel determined that the State had violated the Act by refusing to secure the renovation of
the vending facilities at Santa Ana, by failing to insist on assignment of income from competing vending machines to Martin, and by declining to take effective
steps to prevent the Postal Service from renewing a contract with another vendor.   Reasoning that these lapses were the cause of Martin's financial difficulties,
the panel also concluded that the State had improperly terminated her license.   In December 1994 the panel awarded Martin $379,025.05 in lost income and
$70,898.65 in attorney's fees and costs.   The panel also ordered the State to reinstate Martin's license, to restore her to a comparable vending facility,
and to pay her at a rate of $5,731.94 per month until she is restored.

The State then filed this federal action, naming the Secretary of Education, the United States Department of Education (?federal defendants?), and Martin
as defendants.   The State claimed that the Eleventh Amendment prohibits Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels from awarding compensatory relief and bars
the enforcement of such awards in federal court.   In the alternative, the State alleged that the denial of the continuance, Humphreys' participation as
a panel member, and the admission of McDaniel's testimony amounted to a violation of due process.   Martin counterclaimed, seeking enforcement of the arbitral
award.   Both the State and Martin filed motions for summary judgment.   The federal defendants did not oppose the State's motion for summary judgment
on Eleventh Amendment grounds but filed a motion for partial summary judgment on all other issues.

The district court granted summary judgment to Martin, concluding that the State had waived its sovereign immunity.   The court further concluded that no
violation of due process had occurred because the State is not a ?person? within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment, and that the award was not arbitrary
and capricious.   Following this decision, the State filed a motion to amend its complaint, which the district court denied.   This timely appeal followed.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

 The question of Eleventh Amendment immunity is a purely legal issue that we review de novo.  Micomonaco v. Washington, 45 F.3d 316, 319 (9th Cir.1995).

 An arbitral award under the Randolph-Sheppard Act is reviewed as an agency action under the standards set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act (?APA?),
5 U.S.C. ? 706.   See 20 U.S.C. ? 107d-2.   Under the APA, agency action may be set aside only if ?arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise
not in accordance with law.?  5 U.S.C. ? 706(2)(A); ?In re Transcon Lines, 89 F.3d 559, 563 (9th Cir.1996).

 We review a district court's denial of a motion to amend a complaint for an abuse of discretion.  Janicki Logging Co. v. Mateer, 42 F.3d 561, 563 (9th
Cir.1994).

DISCUSSION

I. Eleventh Amendment

The Eleventh Amendment provides:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United
States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

U.S. Const. amend.   XI. Although the Amendment does not explicitly prohibit an action against a state by one of the state's own citizens, the Supreme Court
has construed the Amendment as barring such suits.   See Welch v. Texas Dept. of Highways & Pub. Transp., 483 U.S. 468, 472, 107 S.Ct. 2941, 2945, 97 L.Ed.2d
389 (1987) (citing Hans v. Louisiana, 134 U.S. 1, 10, 10 S.Ct. 504, 505, 33 L.Ed. 842 (1890)).   Even when a state is not a named party, as is the case
here, the Eleventh Amendment may bar a suit by private parties seeking to impose a liability which must be paid from public funds in the state treasury.
 Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651, 663, 94 S.Ct. 1347, 1355-56, 39 L.Ed.2d 662 (1974).   However, there are two well-recognized exceptions to the Eleventh
Amendment protection from suits for damages.   Congress can abrogate a state's Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity without the consent of the state in
certain instances, or a state can waive its immunity by consenting to suit in federal court.   See Atascadero State Hosp. v. Scanlon, 473 U.S. 234, 238,
105 S.Ct. 3142, 3145, 87 L.Ed.2d 171 (1985).

 We have not as yet had occasion to consider the intersection of the Eleventh Amendment and the Randolph-Sheppard Act. Three other circuit courts have addressed
the issue, with varying results.   See Tennessee Dep't of Human Serv. v. United States Dep't of Educ., 979 F.2d 1162, 1166-68 (6th Cir.1992) (holding that
Eleventh Amendment does not apply to arbitration proceedings under Randolph-Sheppard Act but that it does bar proceedings in federal court to enforce arbitral
awards of compensatory relief); ?McNabb v. United States Dep't of Educ., 862 F.2d 681, 683-84 (8th Cir.1988) (refusing to enforce compensatory damages
awarded by Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panel, in per curiam judgment with each judge writing separately); ?Delaware Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs. v.
United States Dep't of Educ., 772 F.2d 1123, 1137-38 (3d Cir.1985) (concluding that states participating in Randolph-Sheppard program have waived their
sovereign immunity to both arbitration proceedings and federal judicial enforcement of arbitral awards).   As these decisions make clear, a case such as
this one presents two central questions.   First, does the Eleventh Amendment prevent Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels from awarding compensatory relief?
  Second, does the Amendment bar the federal courts from enforcing such awards?

The district court relied on Delaware to conclude that by participating in the Randolph-Sheppard program, the State has waived its sovereign immunity to
both arbitral awards and federal actions to enforce such awards.   Martin agrees.   Citing Tennessee, the federal defendants take the position that the
Eleventh Amendment does not limit the authority of Randolph-Sheppard arbitral panels to award compensatory relief but does bar federal courts from enforcing
such awards.   The State maintains that the Eleventh Amendment limits the authority of both the arbitral panels and the federal courts to fashion compensatory
relief.

We affirm the decision of the district court.   We conclude that the Eleventh Amendment does not apply to Randolph-Sheppard arbitration proceedings and
thus does not limit the authority of arbitration panels convened under the Act to award compensatory relief.   In addition, we believe that the overwhelming
implication of the Act is that participating states have waived their sovereign immunity to suit in federal court for the enforcement of such awards.
1

A. Authority of the Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panel to award compensatory relief

 The State's position that the Eleventh Amendment deprives Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels of the authority to award compensatory relief is wholly
unsupported.   The text of the Amendment clearly indicates that it does not apply to arbitration proceedings.   In referring to the ?Judicial power of
the United States,? the Amendment on its face limits only the authority of Article III courts.   See Pennhurst State School & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S.
89, 98, 104 S.Ct. 900, 906-07, 79 L.Ed.2d 67 (noting that ?the fundamental principle of sovereign immunity? embodied in the Amendment ?limits the grant
of judicial authority in Art. III??) (emphasis added).   The Amendment does not purport to affect proceedings in tribunals established by statute.   See
Ellis Fischel State Cancer Hosp. v. Marshall, 629 F.2d 563, 567 (8th Cir.1980) (?[A]dministrative action against states pursuant to individual complaints
does not run afoul of the eleventh amendment?).

Of the three circuits to consider the effect of the Eleventh Amendment on Randolph-Sheppard arbitral proceedings, one has held that the Amendment does not
apply, and another has clearly indicated its support for this view.   See Tennessee, 979 F.2d at 1167 (?[T]he Eleventh Amendment does not apply to such
an arbitration panel.?); ?Delaware, 772 F.2d at 1138 (noting that position that Eleventh Amendment applies to Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels is ?hardly
supportable by the text?).   The third court that addressed the matter did not decide the question.   See McNabb, 862 F.2d at 683.   We follow the opinion
in Tennessee and conclude that the Eleventh Amendment does not apply to proceedings before Randolph-Sheppard arbitration panels.

We note that the parties do not dispute that, as a matter of statutory construction, the Randolph-Sheppard Act gives arbitration panels the authority to
award compensatory relief.   The Act provides that states must agree to provide blind licensees ?dissatisfied with any action arising from the operation
or administration of the vending facility program? with a hearing and to ?submit the grievances of any blind licensee not otherwise resolved by such hearing
to arbitration as provided in section 107d-1.?  20 U.S.C. ? 107b(6) (emphasis added).  Section 107d-1(a) further provides that an arbitration panel convened
to resolve a dispute between a state and a blind vendor ?shall be final and binding on the parties?? (emphasis added).

It has been widely recognized that this language permits arbitration panels to award compensatory relief.   See, e.g., Tennessee, 979 F.2d at 1165 (?The
natural reading of these provisions is that the arbitration panel may consider and resolve any complaint of a vendor arising out of the program, including
a complaint that the state agency has taken money to which the vendor is entitled.?); ?Delaware, 772 F.2d at 1137 (noting that ?the statutory language
is unambiguous? in allowing compensatory relief).   In drawing this conclusion, courts have emphasized that the prevailing conception at the time the Act
was passed was that arbitral resolution of disputes involved awards of back pay and other forms of compensatory relief.   See, e.g., Tennessee, 979 F.2d
at 1165; ?Delaware, 772 F.2d at 1136.

Thus, while it is true that the Act does not refer expressly to compensatory relief and one circuit judge has concluded that the Act does not permit such
relief, see McNabb, 862 F.2d at 687, this view has been largely discredited.   Indeed, the federal defendants, who in the past have argued that the Act
did not permit such relief, now concede that their prior position was incorrect.   Accordingly, we conclude that the arbitration panel had the authority
to award compensatory relief to Martin.

B. Enforcement of compensatory Randolph-Sheppard arbitral awards in federal court

 Consent by a state to be subject to judicial enforcement of a damages award has long been recognized as an exception to Eleventh Amendment immunity.  
See, e.g., Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp. v. Feeney, 495 U.S. 299, 304, 308-09, 110 S.Ct. 1868, 1872, 1874-75, 109 L.Ed.2d 264 (1990); ?Atascadero,
473 U.S. at 238, 105 S.Ct. at 3145.   A state will be deemed to have waived its sovereign immunity when (1) the state expressly consents to suit; ?(2)
a state statute or constitution so provides; ?or (3) Congress clearly intended to condition the state's participation in a program or activity on the state's
waiver of immunity.  Micomonaco, 45 F.3d at 319.   However, waiver will be found ?only where stated by the most express language or by such overwhelming
implication from the text as [will] leave no room for any other reasonable construction.?  Port Authority, 495 U.S. at 305, 110 S.Ct. at 1873 (alteration
in original) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
2

In this case, the State of California has not expressly consented to suit.   Nor has California enacted a statute that provides for waiver.   The California
statute establishing the state counterpart to the federal Randolph-Sheppard program does provide that the decision of an arbitration panel ?shall be final
and binding on the parties except as otherwise provided in the act.?   Cal. Welf. & Inst.Code ? 19635 (West 1991).   While this statute clearly reflects
California's intent to be bound by Randolph-Sheppard arbitral awards, it does not provide clear enough consent to suit in federal court to amount to an
express statutory waiver of sovereign immunity.   See Atascadero, 473 U.S. at 241, 105 S.Ct. at 3146-47.

However, the evidence that Congress conditioned state participation in the Randolph-Sheppard program on consent to federal judicial enforcement of compensatory
awards is overwhelming.   The statute explicitly requires participating states to agree to a number of conditions.   Specifically, each state agency ?shall
? agree? to provide any dissatisfied blind vendor with the opportunity for a fair hearing and ?to submit the grievances of any blind licensee not otherwise
resolved by such hearing to arbitration.?  20 U.S.C. ? 107b.   The statute further provides that arbitration ?shall be final and binding on the parties.?
 20 U.S.C. ? 107d-1(a) (emphasis added).   In addition, the arbitration decision ?shall be subject to appeal and review as a final agency action for purposes
of chapter 7 of such title 5 [5 U.S.C. ?? 701-706 of the APA].? See 20 U.S.C. ? 107d-2.   The APA provides that ?agency action is subject to judicial review
in civil or criminal proceedings for judicial enforcement.?  5 U.S.C. ? 703.   Thus, by requiring the states to submit to ?binding? arbitration, and by
providing for appeal and review under the APA, the Randolph-Sheppard Act unequivocally guarantees that arbitration awards will be judicially enforceable.

We believe that these statutory provisions also reflect participating states' consent to the enforcement of arbitration awards in federal court.   The Randolph-Sheppard
Act is federal, and an agency of the federal government, the Department of Education, is charged with the responsibility of convening arbitration panels
under the Act. It is true, as the federal defendants point out, that the Act does not specifically designate federal courts as the proper tribunals for
the enforcement of such awards.   Blind vendors might be able to bring suit in state court to enforce arbitration awards.   Yet the fate of such suits
is uncertain, as state doctrines of immunity may apply.   See Tennessee, 979 F.2d at 1169 n. 4. We do not think that the mere possibility of state court
enforcement satisfies the statute's command that arbitration must be binding.

Under these circumstances, there is no ?room for any other reasonable construction? of the statute.  Port Authority, 495 U.S. at 305, 110 S.Ct. at 1873.
  The overwhelming implication of the statute is that by agreeing to participate in the Randolph-Sheppard program, states have waived their sovereign immunity
to enforcement of such awards in federal court.

II. Arbitral Award

The State contests the arbitral award on a number of grounds.   All of these arguments are without merit.

A. Due process and judicial review under the APA

 In its federal complaint, the State alleged that the arbitral proceedings violated due process in several respects.   Because the State is not a ?person?
for the purposes of the Fifth Amendment, the State's reliance on the Due Process Clause was misplaced.   See South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301,
323-24, 86 S.Ct. 803, 815-16, 15 L.Ed.2d 769 (1966).   The State should have invoked the judicial review provisions of the APA, which the Randolph-Sheppard
Act designates as imposing the proper standard for evaluating an arbitral award.  20 U.S.C. 107d-2(a).   Under the APA, an agency action may be set aside
only if it is ?arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.?  5 U.S.C. ? 706(2); ?see In re Transcon Lines,
89 F.3d at 563.   The district court evaluated the State's claims under the APA standard and rejected each in turn.   We affirm the district court's decision.

 First, the State contends that the selection of Humphreys as a panel member was inappropriate because he had written a letter to State officials in 1990,
at the request of Martin's former attorney.   The State maintains that Humphreys's presence on the panel created ?evident partiality,? in violation of
the Federal Arbitration Act (?FAA?), 9 U.S.C. ? 10(a)(2).   Even if the FAA were applicable here, because Humphreys's prior involvement with Martin was
fully disclosed, the State has not made the required showing of ?actual bias? by ?specific facts which indicate improper motives.?  Woods v. Saturn Distribution
Corp., 78 F.3d 424, 427 (9th Cir.) (quotations and citation omitted) (upholding award of arbitration panel consisting entirely of employees and authorized
dealers of one party), cert. dismissed, 518 U.S. 1051, 117 S.Ct. 30, 135 L.Ed.2d 1123 (1996).   Moreover, the Randolph-Sheppard Act itself permits at least
a minimal degree of partiality by allowing each party to select a panel member.  20 U.S.C. ? 107d-2(b)(1).   Rather than prohibiting individuals with pre-existing
relationships from becoming panel members, the Act instead seeks to neutralize any bias by requiring the parties to agree on a third panel member, the
chair.   Id. Viewed in light of these provisions, the panel's refusal to disqualify Humphreys was not arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion.

 Second, the State argues that the panel abused its discretion by denying the State's request for a 60-day continuance.   Yet there is no evidence that
the denial was improper.   The parties had agreed to the hearing date five months in advance.   In addition, the panel denied the continuance a full two
months before the scheduled date, leaving the State ample time to prepare.   Accordingly, we conclude that the panel's decision was not arbitrary, capricious,
or an abuse of discretion.

 The State's third contention, that the panel improperly admitted the expert testimony of McDaniel, Martin's former lawyer, is also without merit.   McDaniel's
testimony, which concerned the legal requirements of the Randolph-Sheppard Act, was relevant.   The State had the opportunity to demonstrate any bias McDaniel
may have had on cross-examination.   It was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion for the panel to admit McDaniel's testimony.

We affirm the district court's decision that the arbitration proceedings complied with the APA.

B. The State's post-judgment motion to amend its complaint

 The State moved to amend its complaint under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure after the district court issued a final judgment in this
case.   Because it had improperly framed its procedural objections to the arbitration as due process challenges, the State sought to restate its claims
under the APA. In addition, the proposed amended complaint contained new allegations forming the basis for additional claims.

While Rule 15(a) establishes that leave to amend should be ?freely given,? post-judgment motions to amend are treated with greater skepticism than pre-judgment
motions.   See Charles Alan Wright & Arthur Miller, 6 Federal Practice and Procedure ? 1489 (1990).   The likelihood that amendment will cause undue delay
in the proceedings is a legitimate rationale for denying a motion to amend.   See Janicki, 42 F.3d at 566.   After a judgment has been issued, the conclusion
that amendment will cause undue delay is particularly justified.   See id. at 566-67.   Here, the district court treated the State generously, analyzing
its claims under the proper legal standard even though that standard was not articulated in the complaint.   Moreover, the State had ample opportunity
to file an amended complaint with new allegations before the court issued its final judgment.   Under these circumstances, it was not an abuse of discretion
for the court to refuse to allow the State to expand its case after a final decision had been made.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.
The parties do not argue, and we do not consider, the question of whether Congress abrogated the sovereign immunity of states participating in the Randolph-Sheppard
program.

2.
While the Supreme Court recently has narrowed the circumstances in which Congress has the authority to abrogate sovereign immunity, even when Congress's
intent to do so is explicit, the Court's ruling does not affect the ?unremarkable, and completely unrelated? matter of state waiver.   See Seminole Tribe
v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, ----, 116 S.Ct. 1114, 1128, 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996).

D.W. NELSON, Circuit Judge.

Latest Blog Posts
List of 5 items
How to Know if You Are Too Old for Law School
Financial Adviser Tried to Sell $500B in Fake Securities via LinkedIn
A Live Call-In Show Could be a Boon for Your Law Firm
'Deleted' Facebook Photos Still Online 3 Years Later
Product Spotlight: Conversion Solutions
View More ?
list end

google_ads_frame1 frame
simgad/8933340273433323656
(i)
AdChoices
google_ads_frame1 frame end

FindLaw Career Center
 

Search Jobs
Post a Job  |
View More Jobs
View More

google_ads_frame2 frame
simgad/6268018728778830882
(i)
AdChoices
google_ads_frame2 frame end
Contract Management Software
www.blueridgesoftware.bz/default
Manage all types of contracts and agreements with confidence.
www.contractassistant.com
AbacusLaw Software
There's a reason we can offer a 100-day money-back guarantee.
www.abacuslaw.com
Tabs3 and PracticeMaster
www.tabs3.com/fl2
Reliable billing and practice management software for law firms.
www.tabs3.com
List of 7 items
Research the law
Manage your practice
Manage your career
News and commentary
Get Legal Forms
About us
Find Us On
list end
List of 7 items
Cases & Codes /
Opinion Summaries /
Sample Business Contracts /
Research An Attorney or Law Firm
Law Technology /
Law Practice Management /
Law Firm Marketing Services /
Corporate Counsel Center
Legal Career Job Search /
Online CLE /
Law Student Resources
Legal News Headlines /
Law Commentary /
Featured Documents /
Newsletters /
Blogs /
RSS Feeds
Legal Forms for Your Practice
Company History /
Media Relations /
Contact Us /
Privacy /
Advertising /
Jobs
images/facebook
images/twitter
list end
Copyright ? 2012 FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business. All rights reserved.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120327/b04f10a6/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar 27 20:40:20 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 16:40:20 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] rb's arbitration panel
Message-ID: <0B38B71FCAC14F84BB96EB2CB3734A0D@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Rutherford Beard Arbitration Panel

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312 [2012-5411] :: Department Of Education :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia

List of 6 items

Justia.com

Lawyer Directory

Legal Answers

Law Blogs

Regulations

more ?

list end

List of 1 items

Sign In

list end

Justia Regulation Tracker

Enter Search Terms

Enter Search Terms

Search Regulations

Justia >

Regulation Tracker >

Department Of Education >

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312 [2012-5411]

 

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312 [2012-5411]

Share

|

Download as PDF

 

Agencies

List of 1 items

? DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

list end

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2012)]

[Notices]

[Pages 13311-13312]

>From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [

www.gpo.gov]

 

[FR Doc No: 2012-5411]

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

 

 

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act

 

AGENCY: Department of Education.

 

ACTION: Notice of decision.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) gives notice that on

October 12, 2011, an arbitration panel rendered a decision in the

matter of the Rutherford Beard v. Michigan Commission for the Blind,

Case no. R-S/08-8.

 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You can obtain a copy of the full text

of the arbitration panel decision from Mary Yang, U.S. Department of

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5162, Potomac Center Plaza,

Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-6327. If you use a

telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY),

call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1-800-877-8339.

Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an

accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact

disc) by contacting the program contact person listed in this section.

 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This arbitration panel was convened by the

Department under 20 U.S.C. 107d-1(a), after receiving a complaint from

the complainant, Rutherford Beard. Under section 6(c) of the Randolph-

Sheppard Act (Act), 20 U.S.C. 107d-2(c), the

 

[[Page 13312]]

 

Secretary publishes in the Federal Register a synopsis of each

arbitration panel decision affecting the administration of vending

facilities on Federal and other property.

 

Background

 

Rutherford Beard (Complainant) alleged that the Michigan Commission

for the Blind, the State licensing agency (SLA), violated the Act and

implementing regulations in 34 CFR part 395. Specifically, Complainant

alleged that the SLA violated the Act and its implementing regulations

and State rules and regulations governing the Randolph-Sheppard Vending

Facility Program with respect to the closing of his vending facility at

the Lewis Cass Building for renovation and plumbing repairs, resulting

in loss of income for the Complainant's cafeteria.

Complainant further alleged that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria

was not a suitable location because the SLA was aware of a history of

plumbing problems in the building. Consequently, when the cafeteria was

closed for renovation and plumbing repairs, Complainant alleged that

this was proof of the lack of suitability for a cafeteria at the Lewis

Cass Building. Thus, the Complainant requested reimbursement from the

SLA for loss of income during the renovation period.

The SLA argued that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria was a

suitable vending location and opportunity for a blind vendor. The SLA

acknowledged that, while it was aware that the building had previous

plumbing problems, it was not aware of the severity of the plumbing

issue. Also, the SLA alleged that it had no responsibility to repair

the plumbing in the Lewis Cass Building because the building was under

the jurisdiction of the State's Department of Management and Budget.

The SLA further alleged that Complainant, as a small business operator,

had the responsibility for his own profitability. Moreover, the SLA

alleged that Complainant was unable to provide evidence showing the

amount of lost income during the renovation period.

Complainant filed a request with the SLA for lost income. The SLA

denied Complainant's request. Subsequently, Complainant appealed this

decision with the SLA by filing a request for a State fair hearing. A

hearing was held and the administrative law judge (ALJ) recommended

that Complainant's claim be denied. The SLA adopted the ALJ's

recommendation as a final administrative agency action and

Complainant's grievance was denied.

Complainant then filed a request for Federal arbitration with the

Department. A hearing on this matter was held on March 16, 2011. The

central issue, as determined by the arbitration panel, was whether the

SLA's failure to compensate Complainant for loss of income during the

renovation period of the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria violated the Act

and its implementing regulations, and State rules and regulations

governing the Randolph-Sheppard Vending Facility Program.

 

Synopsis of the Arbitration Panel Decision

 

After reviewing all of the testimony and evidence, the majority of

the panel found that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria was a suitable

opportunity for Complainant and as such, Complainant was responsible

for routine building maintenance. The panel majority concluded that,

although the SLA was aware of the previous building plumbing problems,

the SLA had no authority to repair the plumbing problems. Additionally,

the panel majority found that Complainant did not provide competent

evidence to support his allegation of lost income. Although Complainant

had anticipated larger profits from operating a cafeteria at this

location, this grievance was not substantiated by the evidence provided

to the panel. Thus, the panel majority found that Complainant's

estimate of $70,000 for lost profits was speculative and that it had no

basis to rule that Complainant actually lost income or, if so, how much

income Complainant lost.

One panel member concurred in part and dissented in part. This

panel member concurred with the panel majority's finding that there was

no evidence presented by Complainant to support reimbursement by the

SLA for his alleged loss of income during the renovation period of the

cafeteria. At the same time, this panel member dissented from the panel

majority's findings, suggesting that it was not reasonable to place the

entire burden of property-related losses or damages on operators and

suggested that the SLA undertake rulemaking to clarify such situations,

should they occur in the future.

The views and opinions expressed by the panel do not necessarily

represent the views and opinions of the Department.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this

document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free

Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the

Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System

at:

www.gpo.gov/fdsys.

At this site you can view this document, as well

as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal

Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF

you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this

site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the

Federal Register by using the article search feature at

www.federalregister.gov.

Specifically, through the advanced search

feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published

by the Department.

 

Dated: March 1, 2012.

Alexa Posny,

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

[FR Doc. 2012-5411 Filed 3-5-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

Justiaon

 

Like  frame

Like

 

Like

 

Confirm

 

You like Justia.

 ?

Admin Page ?

Insights ?

ErrorYou and 100,311 others like this.100311 likes.

Sign Up

to see what your friends like.

 ?

Admin Page ?

Insights ?

Error

Like  frame end

Today on Verdict

Can Employers Legally Ask You for Your Facebook Password When You Apply for a Job? Why Congress and the States Should Prohibit This Practice

Anita Ramasastry

 

Justia columnist and U. Washington law professor Anita Ramasastry discusses the emerging law relating to whether potential employers may ask job applicants

for their Facebook (and other social-media) passwords.

By

Anita Ramasastry

Ask a Lawyer

Question:

 Please Ask Your Question Here. e.g., Do I need a Bankruptcy Lawyer?

Add question details

Additional Details:

 If you have additional details about your question fill them here

Ask Question

About Legal Answers

Connect with Justia

justiacom on twitter

Follow @Justiacom on Twitter

Check out the latest @onwardjustia post from @

caminick "

The Law: Still Not Free"

http://t.co/wzBpQzHy

 

fc01497ddfbe92 frame

Given URL is not allowed by the Application configuration.: One or more of the given URLs is not allowed by the Application configuration. It must match

one of the Connect or Canvas URLs or domain must be the same as or a subdomain of one of the Application's base domains.

fc01497ddfbe92 frame end

 

Likebox  frame

Likebox

Login

Justia

Justia on Facebook

 

Like

 

Confirm

 

You like this.

 ?

Admin Page ?

Insights ?

ErrorYou like this.

 ?

Admin Page ?

Insights ?

Error

100,312 people like Justia.100,311 people like Justia.

r/UlIqmHJn-SK

Belizean

Cristina Beatriz

Hudajo

Aaron

John

plugins/?footer=1

Facebook social plugin

Likebox  frame end

Find a Lawyer

Legal Issue or Lawyer Name

Legal Issue or Lawyer Name

City, State

Mount Morris, MI

Search

Lawyers

near Mount Morris, Michigan

1490398-1206942251-l

Martin T. Lievois

Bankruptcy / Debt, Criminal Law, DUI / DWI

Clinton Township, MI

 

721762-1432321339-l

Laura L. Shirah

Bankruptcy / Debt

Flint, MI

 

618880-1007063966-l

Andrew D. Richards

Business Law, Elder Law, Estate Planning, Real Estate Law, Tax Law

Saginaw, MI

 

717796-1072021818-l

Rex Anderson

Bankruptcy / Debt, Car Accidents, Consumer Law, Criminal Law, DUI / DWI, Injury Law, Medical Malpractice, Workers' Compensation

Davison, MI

 

724682-353368740-l

Henry Sefcovic

Bankruptcy / Debt, Collections

Flint, MI

 

See More Lawyers

Lawyers - Get Listed Now!

Get a free full directory profile listing

Copyright ?

Justia ::

Company ::

Terms of Service ::

Privacy Policy ::

Contact Us
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120327/a1018cb8/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Tue Mar 27 23:17:55 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 19:17:55 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] does anyone have an exact count
Message-ID: <4552B0E42B7E4871A4364E8BD00441CA@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Say All,

does anyone have an exact count of all the ALJ, arbitrations and suits involving the BEP since Zanger took over from Fred?

There have to be dozens. Astounding though and I think it shows a pattern and practice of something gravely wrong with the program.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120327/4cb09e97/attachment.html>

From terrydeagle at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 28 04:26:50 2012
From: terrydeagle at yahoo.com (Terry Eagle)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:26:50 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] does anyone have an exact count
In-Reply-To: <4552B0E42B7E4871A4364E8BD00441CA@YOUR7C60552B9E>
References: <4552B0E42B7E4871A4364E8BD00441CA@YOUR7C60552B9E>
Message-ID: <53A7B70A471F4A7C90F239865A0B68C0@TerryPC>

 Since I have represented most of the operators, I would say about two dozen
or so, including the licensee suspensions and license revocations.  I lost
track at 17 hearings since March, 2007, when Zanger was appointed by Cannon
to be director and lawbreaker-in-Chief for MCB, and people wonder why so
much money has gone to settlements and litigations costs?  Take note Mr.
Zimmer And Mr Snyder, as you desire to place blame at the feet of blind
people, instead of incompentent, corrupt, and discriminatory MANAGEMENT
within MCB!  2012 is not the year the world will likely end, but it is the
year that fraud, corruption, and evil WILL BE revealed and exposed for that
which and to whom it applies!


  _____  

From: vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 7:18 PM
To: Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
Subject: [Vendorsmi] does anyone have an exact count


Say All,
 
does anyone have an exact count of all the ALJ, arbitrations and suits
involving the BEP since Zanger took over from Fred?
 
There have to be dozens. Astounding though and I think it shows a pattern
and practice of something gravely wrong with the program.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120328/35d25847/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Wed Mar 28 11:36:29 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:36:29 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] does anyone have an exact count
References: <4552B0E42B7E4871A4364E8BD00441CA@YOUR7C60552B9E>
	<53A7B70A471F4A7C90F239865A0B68C0@TerryPC>
Message-ID: <168AA10B54BD4C668CF47BE4DA6F2678@YOUR7C60552B9E>

At very least it shows incompetent tttraining and management of the program itself.

Moreovefr, aside from the corruption issues it looks to me that they'e been running the program at the pleasure of DTMB all along.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Terry Eagle 
  To: 'NFB of Michigan Vendors List' 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 12:26 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vendorsmi] does anyone have an exact count


   Since I have represented most of the operators, I would say about two dozen or so, including the licensee suspensions and license revocations.  I lost track at 17 hearings since March, 2007, when Zanger was appointed by Cannon to be director and lawbreaker-in-Chief for MCB, and people wonder why so much money has gone to settlements and litigations costs?  Take note Mr. Zimmer And Mr Snyder, as you desire to place blame at the feet of blind people, instead of incompentent, corrupt, and discriminatory MANAGEMENT within MCB!  2012 is not the year the world will likely end, but it is the year that fraud, corruption, and evil WILL BE revealed and exposed for that which and to whom it applies!




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
  Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 7:18 PM
  To: Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
  Subject: [Vendorsmi] does anyone have an exact count


  Say All,

  does anyone have an exact count of all the ALJ, arbitrations and suits involving the BEP since Zanger took over from Fred?

  There have to be dozens. Astounding though and I think it shows a pattern and practice of something gravely wrong with the program.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Vendorsmi mailing list
  Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Vendorsmi:
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120328/b643e718/attachment.html>

From terrydeagle at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 28 11:43:20 2012
From: terrydeagle at yahoo.com (Terry Eagle)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:43:20 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] rb's arbitration panel
In-Reply-To: <0B38B71FCAC14F84BB96EB2CB3734A0D@YOUR7C60552B9E>
References: <0B38B71FCAC14F84BB96EB2CB3734A0D@YOUR7C60552B9E>
Message-ID: <E55D3485C8294DDBAE68147909C9AE19@TerryPC>

Here is a classic example of incompetent BEP management and passing the buck
for their responsibility for facility maintainance, even if it was to work
with DTMB to get the problem resolved in the first place.  AND now BEP is
going to DTMB?  This is an indication of what is ahead for BEP and operators
and their facilities, with neither DTMB nor BEP taking care of their
responsibilities under the law and administrative rules.  Oh, excuse them
please, they are law-breakers, not the law-enforcers the law requires of
them!  They only follow and enforce the laws when it benefits BEP and MCB
management, and their cozy dedfellows!


  _____  

From: vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:40 PM
To: Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
Subject: [Vendorsmi] rb's arbitration panel



Rutherford Beard Arbitration Panel

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312
[2012-5411] :: Department Of Education :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia

List of 6 items

Justia.com

Lawyer Directory

Legal Answers

Law Blogs

Regulations

more ?

list end

List of 1 items

Sign In

list end

Justia Regulation Tracker

Enter Search Terms

Enter Search Terms

Search Regulations

Justia >

Regulation Tracker >

Department Of Education >

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312
[2012-5411]

 

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312
[2012-5411]

Share

|

Download as PDF

 

Agencies

List of 1 items

. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

list end

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2012)]

[Notices]

[Pages 13311-13312]

>From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [

www.gpo.gov]

 

[FR Doc No: 2012-5411]

 

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

 

 

Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act

 

AGENCY: Department of Education.

 

ACTION: Notice of decision.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) gives notice that on

October 12, 2011, an arbitration panel rendered a decision in the

matter of the Rutherford Beard v. Michigan Commission for the Blind,

Case no. R-S/08-8.

 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You can obtain a copy of the full text

of the arbitration panel decision from Mary Yang, U.S. Department of

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5162, Potomac Center Plaza,

Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-6327. If you use a

telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY),

call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1-800-877-8339.

Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an

accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact

disc) by contacting the program contact person listed in this section.

 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This arbitration panel was convened by the

Department under 20 U.S.C. 107d-1(a), after receiving a complaint from

the complainant, Rutherford Beard. Under section 6(c) of the Randolph-

Sheppard Act (Act), 20 U.S.C. 107d-2(c), the

 

[[Page 13312]]

 

Secretary publishes in the Federal Register a synopsis of each

arbitration panel decision affecting the administration of vending

facilities on Federal and other property.

 

Background

 

Rutherford Beard (Complainant) alleged that the Michigan Commission

for the Blind, the State licensing agency (SLA), violated the Act and

implementing regulations in 34 CFR part 395. Specifically, Complainant

alleged that the SLA violated the Act and its implementing regulations

and State rules and regulations governing the Randolph-Sheppard Vending

Facility Program with respect to the closing of his vending facility at

the Lewis Cass Building for renovation and plumbing repairs, resulting

in loss of income for the Complainant's cafeteria.

Complainant further alleged that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria

was not a suitable location because the SLA was aware of a history of

plumbing problems in the building. Consequently, when the cafeteria was

closed for renovation and plumbing repairs, Complainant alleged that

this was proof of the lack of suitability for a cafeteria at the Lewis

Cass Building. Thus, the Complainant requested reimbursement from the

SLA for loss of income during the renovation period.

The SLA argued that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria was a

suitable vending location and opportunity for a blind vendor. The SLA

acknowledged that, while it was aware that the building had previous

plumbing problems, it was not aware of the severity of the plumbing

issue. Also, the SLA alleged that it had no responsibility to repair

the plumbing in the Lewis Cass Building because the building was under

the jurisdiction of the State's Department of Management and Budget.

The SLA further alleged that Complainant, as a small business operator,

had the responsibility for his own profitability. Moreover, the SLA

alleged that Complainant was unable to provide evidence showing the

amount of lost income during the renovation period.

Complainant filed a request with the SLA for lost income. The SLA

denied Complainant's request. Subsequently, Complainant appealed this

decision with the SLA by filing a request for a State fair hearing. A

hearing was held and the administrative law judge (ALJ) recommended

that Complainant's claim be denied. The SLA adopted the ALJ's

recommendation as a final administrative agency action and

Complainant's grievance was denied.

Complainant then filed a request for Federal arbitration with the

Department. A hearing on this matter was held on March 16, 2011. The

central issue, as determined by the arbitration panel, was whether the

SLA's failure to compensate Complainant for loss of income during the

renovation period of the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria violated the Act

and its implementing regulations, and State rules and regulations

governing the Randolph-Sheppard Vending Facility Program.

 

Synopsis of the Arbitration Panel Decision

 

After reviewing all of the testimony and evidence, the majority of

the panel found that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria was a suitable

opportunity for Complainant and as such, Complainant was responsible

for routine building maintenance. The panel majority concluded that,

although the SLA was aware of the previous building plumbing problems,

the SLA had no authority to repair the plumbing problems. Additionally,

the panel majority found that Complainant did not provide competent

evidence to support his allegation of lost income. Although Complainant

had anticipated larger profits from operating a cafeteria at this

location, this grievance was not substantiated by the evidence provided

to the panel. Thus, the panel majority found that Complainant's

estimate of $70,000 for lost profits was speculative and that it had no

basis to rule that Complainant actually lost income or, if so, how much

income Complainant lost.

One panel member concurred in part and dissented in part. This

panel member concurred with the panel majority's finding that there was

no evidence presented by Complainant to support reimbursement by the

SLA for his alleged loss of income during the renovation period of the

cafeteria. At the same time, this panel member dissented from the panel

majority's findings, suggesting that it was not reasonable to place the

entire burden of property-related losses or damages on operators and

suggested that the SLA undertake rulemaking to clarify such situations,

should they occur in the future.

The views and opinions expressed by the panel do not necessarily

represent the views and opinions of the Department.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this

document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free

Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the

Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System

at:

www.gpo.gov/fdsys.

At this site you can view this document, as well

as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal

Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF

you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this

site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the

Federal Register by using the article search feature at

www.federalregister.gov.

Specifically, through the advanced search

feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published

by the Department.

 

Dated: March 1, 2012.

Alexa Posny,

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

[FR Doc. 2012-5411 Filed 3-5-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

Justiaon

 

Like  frame

Like

 

Like

 

Confirm

 

You like Justia.

 .

Admin Page .

Insights .

ErrorYou and 100,311 others like this.100311 likes.

Sign Up

to see what your friends like.

 .

Admin Page .

Insights .

Error

Like  frame end

Today on Verdict

Can Employers Legally Ask You for Your Facebook Password When You Apply for
a Job? Why Congress and the States Should Prohibit This Practice

Anita Ramasastry

 

Justia columnist and U. Washington law professor Anita Ramasastry discusses
the emerging law relating to whether potential employers may ask job
applicants

for their Facebook (and other social-media) passwords.

By

Anita Ramasastry

Ask a Lawyer

Question:

 Please Ask Your Question Here. e.g., Do I need a Bankruptcy Lawyer?

Add question details

Additional Details:

 If you have additional details about your question fill them here

Ask Question

About Legal Answers

Connect with Justia

justiacom on twitter

Follow @Justiacom on Twitter

Check out the latest @onwardjustia post from @

caminick "

The Law: Still Not Free"

http://t.co/wzBpQzHy

 

fc01497ddfbe92 frame

Given URL is not allowed by the Application configuration.: One or more of
the given URLs is not allowed by the Application configuration. It must
match

one of the Connect or Canvas URLs or domain must be the same as or a
subdomain of one of the Application's base domains.

fc01497ddfbe92 frame end

 

Likebox  frame

Likebox

Login

Justia

Justia on Facebook

 

Like

 

Confirm

 

You like this.

 .

Admin Page .

Insights .

ErrorYou like this.

 .

Admin Page .

Insights .

Error

100,312 people like Justia.100,311 people like Justia.

r/UlIqmHJn-SK

Belizean

Cristina Beatriz

Hudajo

Aaron

John

plugins/?footer=1

Facebook social plugin

Likebox  frame end

Find a Lawyer

Legal Issue or Lawyer Name

Legal Issue or Lawyer Name

City, State

Mount Morris, MI

Search

Lawyers

near Mount Morris, Michigan

1490398-1206942251-l

Martin T. Lievois

Bankruptcy / Debt, Criminal Law, DUI / DWI

Clinton Township, MI

 

721762-1432321339-l

Laura L. Shirah

Bankruptcy / Debt

Flint, MI

 

618880-1007063966-l

Andrew D. Richards

Business Law, Elder Law, Estate Planning, Real Estate Law, Tax Law

Saginaw, MI

 

717796-1072021818-l

Rex Anderson

Bankruptcy / Debt, Car Accidents, Consumer Law, Criminal Law, DUI / DWI,
Injury Law, Medical Malpractice, Workers' Compensation

Davison, MI

 

724682-353368740-l

Henry Sefcovic

Bankruptcy / Debt, Collections

Flint, MI

 

See More Lawyers

Lawyers - Get Listed Now!

Get a free full directory profile listing

Copyright C

Justia ::

Company ::

Terms of Service ::

Privacy Policy ::

Contact Us

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120328/cfc90368/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Wed Mar 28 12:16:23 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:16:23 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] rb's arbitration panel
References: <0B38B71FCAC14F84BB96EB2CB3734A0D@YOUR7C60552B9E>
	<E55D3485C8294DDBAE68147909C9AE19@TerryPC>
Message-ID: <64D9BD1033114515B9564C558C9F0D81@YOUR7C60552B9E>

I'll tell you this Terry and all if this went out to a franchise in the private sector like say a McDonald's and they paid rent to DTMB and this happened DTMB would be sued for all the resulting damages and would lose, lose, lose.


Joe
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Terry Eagle 
  To: 'NFB of Michigan Vendors List' 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 7:43 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vendorsmi] rb's arbitration panel


  Here is a classic example of incompetent BEP management and passing the buck for their responsibility for facility maintainance, even if it was to work with DTMB to get the problem resolved in the first place.  AND now BEP is going to DTMB?  This is an indication of what is ahead for BEP and operators and their facilities, with neither DTMB nor BEP taking care of their responsibilities under the law and administrative rules.  Oh, excuse them please, they are law-breakers, not the law-enforcers the law requires of them!  They only follow and enforce the laws when it benefits BEP and MCB management, and their cozy dedfellows!




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
  Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 4:40 PM
  To: Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
  Subject: [Vendorsmi] rb's arbitration panel


  Rutherford Beard Arbitration Panel

  Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312 [2012-5411] :: Department Of Education :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia

  List of 6 items

  Justia.com

  Lawyer Directory

  Legal Answers

  Law Blogs

  Regulations

  more ?

  list end

  List of 1 items

  Sign In

  list end

  Justia Regulation Tracker

  Enter Search Terms

  Enter Search Terms

  Search Regulations

  Justia >

  Regulation Tracker >

  Department Of Education >

  Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312 [2012-5411]

   

  Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act, 13311-13312 [2012-5411]

  Share

  |

  Download as PDF

   

  Agencies

  List of 1 items

  . DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

  list end

  [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2012)]

  [Notices]

  [Pages 13311-13312]

  From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [

  www.gpo.gov]

   

  [FR Doc No: 2012-5411]

   

   

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

   

  DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

   

   

  Arbitration Panel Decision Under the Randolph-Sheppard Act

   

  AGENCY: Department of Education.

   

  ACTION: Notice of decision.

   

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

   

  SUMMARY: The Department of Education (Department) gives notice that on

  October 12, 2011, an arbitration panel rendered a decision in the

  matter of the Rutherford Beard v. Michigan Commission for the Blind,

  Case no. R-S/08-8.

   

  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: You can obtain a copy of the full text

  of the arbitration panel decision from Mary Yang, U.S. Department of

  Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., room 5162, Potomac Center Plaza,

  Washington, DC 20202-2800. Telephone: (202) 245-6327. If you use a

  telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY),

  call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll-free, at 1-800-877-8339.

  Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an

  accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact

  disc) by contacting the program contact person listed in this section.

   

  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This arbitration panel was convened by the

  Department under 20 U.S.C. 107d-1(a), after receiving a complaint from

  the complainant, Rutherford Beard. Under section 6(c) of the Randolph-

  Sheppard Act (Act), 20 U.S.C. 107d-2(c), the

   

  [[Page 13312]]

   

  Secretary publishes in the Federal Register a synopsis of each

  arbitration panel decision affecting the administration of vending

  facilities on Federal and other property.

   

  Background

   

  Rutherford Beard (Complainant) alleged that the Michigan Commission

  for the Blind, the State licensing agency (SLA), violated the Act and

  implementing regulations in 34 CFR part 395. Specifically, Complainant

  alleged that the SLA violated the Act and its implementing regulations

  and State rules and regulations governing the Randolph-Sheppard Vending

  Facility Program with respect to the closing of his vending facility at

  the Lewis Cass Building for renovation and plumbing repairs, resulting

  in loss of income for the Complainant's cafeteria.

  Complainant further alleged that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria

  was not a suitable location because the SLA was aware of a history of

  plumbing problems in the building. Consequently, when the cafeteria was

  closed for renovation and plumbing repairs, Complainant alleged that

  this was proof of the lack of suitability for a cafeteria at the Lewis

  Cass Building. Thus, the Complainant requested reimbursement from the

  SLA for loss of income during the renovation period.

  The SLA argued that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria was a

  suitable vending location and opportunity for a blind vendor. The SLA

  acknowledged that, while it was aware that the building had previous

  plumbing problems, it was not aware of the severity of the plumbing

  issue. Also, the SLA alleged that it had no responsibility to repair

  the plumbing in the Lewis Cass Building because the building was under

  the jurisdiction of the State's Department of Management and Budget.

  The SLA further alleged that Complainant, as a small business operator,

  had the responsibility for his own profitability. Moreover, the SLA

  alleged that Complainant was unable to provide evidence showing the

  amount of lost income during the renovation period.

  Complainant filed a request with the SLA for lost income. The SLA

  denied Complainant's request. Subsequently, Complainant appealed this

  decision with the SLA by filing a request for a State fair hearing. A

  hearing was held and the administrative law judge (ALJ) recommended

  that Complainant's claim be denied. The SLA adopted the ALJ's

  recommendation as a final administrative agency action and

  Complainant's grievance was denied.

  Complainant then filed a request for Federal arbitration with the

  Department. A hearing on this matter was held on March 16, 2011. The

  central issue, as determined by the arbitration panel, was whether the

  SLA's failure to compensate Complainant for loss of income during the

  renovation period of the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria violated the Act

  and its implementing regulations, and State rules and regulations

  governing the Randolph-Sheppard Vending Facility Program.

   

  Synopsis of the Arbitration Panel Decision

   

  After reviewing all of the testimony and evidence, the majority of

  the panel found that the Lewis Cass Building Cafeteria was a suitable

  opportunity for Complainant and as such, Complainant was responsible

  for routine building maintenance. The panel majority concluded that,

  although the SLA was aware of the previous building plumbing problems,

  the SLA had no authority to repair the plumbing problems. Additionally,

  the panel majority found that Complainant did not provide competent

  evidence to support his allegation of lost income. Although Complainant

  had anticipated larger profits from operating a cafeteria at this

  location, this grievance was not substantiated by the evidence provided

  to the panel. Thus, the panel majority found that Complainant's

  estimate of $70,000 for lost profits was speculative and that it had no

  basis to rule that Complainant actually lost income or, if so, how much

  income Complainant lost.

  One panel member concurred in part and dissented in part. This

  panel member concurred with the panel majority's finding that there was

  no evidence presented by Complainant to support reimbursement by the

  SLA for his alleged loss of income during the renovation period of the

  cafeteria. At the same time, this panel member dissented from the panel

  majority's findings, suggesting that it was not reasonable to place the

  entire burden of property-related losses or damages on operators and

  suggested that the SLA undertake rulemaking to clarify such situations,

  should they occur in the future.

  The views and opinions expressed by the panel do not necessarily

  represent the views and opinions of the Department.

  Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this

  document is the document published in the Federal Register. Free

  Internet access to the official edition of the Federal Register and the

  Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System

  at:

  www.gpo.gov/fdsys.

  At this site you can view this document, as well

  as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal

  Register, in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF

  you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this

  site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the

  Federal Register by using the article search feature at

  www.federalregister.gov.

  Specifically, through the advanced search

  feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published

  by the Department.

   

  Dated: March 1, 2012.

  Alexa Posny,

  Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.

  [FR Doc. 2012-5411 Filed 3-5-12; 8:45 am]

  BILLING CODE 4000-01-P

  Justiaon

   

  Like  frame

  Like

   

  Like

   

  Confirm

   

  You like Justia.

   ?

  Admin Page ?

  Insights ?

  ErrorYou and 100,311 others like this.100311 likes.

  Sign Up

  to see what your friends like.

   ?

  Admin Page ?

  Insights ?

  Error

  Like  frame end

  Today on Verdict

  Can Employers Legally Ask You for Your Facebook Password When You Apply for a Job? Why Congress and the States Should Prohibit This Practice

  Anita Ramasastry

   

  Justia columnist and U. Washington law professor Anita Ramasastry discusses the emerging law relating to whether potential employers may ask job applicants

  for their Facebook (and other social-media) passwords.

  By

  Anita Ramasastry

  Ask a Lawyer

  Question:

   Please Ask Your Question Here. e.g., Do I need a Bankruptcy Lawyer?

  Add question details

  Additional Details:

   If you have additional details about your question fill them here

  Ask Question

  About Legal Answers

  Connect with Justia

  justiacom on twitter

  Follow @Justiacom on Twitter

  Check out the latest @onwardjustia post from @

  caminick "

  The Law: Still Not Free"

  http://t.co/wzBpQzHy

   

  fc01497ddfbe92 frame

  Given URL is not allowed by the Application configuration.: One or more of the given URLs is not allowed by the Application configuration. It must match

  one of the Connect or Canvas URLs or domain must be the same as or a subdomain of one of the Application's base domains.

  fc01497ddfbe92 frame end

   

  Likebox  frame

  Likebox

  Login

  Justia

  Justia on Facebook

   

  Like

   

  Confirm

   

  You like this.

   ?

  Admin Page ?

  Insights ?

  ErrorYou like this.

   ?

  Admin Page ?

  Insights ?

  Error

  100,312 people like Justia.100,311 people like Justia.

  r/UlIqmHJn-SK

  Belizean

  Cristina Beatriz

  Hudajo

  Aaron

  John

  plugins/?footer=1

  Facebook social plugin

  Likebox  frame end

  Find a Lawyer

  Legal Issue or Lawyer Name

  Legal Issue or Lawyer Name

  City, State

  Mount Morris, MI

  Search

  Lawyers

  near Mount Morris, Michigan

  1490398-1206942251-l

  Martin T. Lievois

  Bankruptcy / Debt, Criminal Law, DUI / DWI

  Clinton Township, MI

   

  721762-1432321339-l

  Laura L. Shirah

  Bankruptcy / Debt

  Flint, MI

   

  618880-1007063966-l

  Andrew D. Richards

  Business Law, Elder Law, Estate Planning, Real Estate Law, Tax Law

  Saginaw, MI

   

  717796-1072021818-l

  Rex Anderson

  Bankruptcy / Debt, Car Accidents, Consumer Law, Criminal Law, DUI / DWI, Injury Law, Medical Malpractice, Workers' Compensation

  Davison, MI

   

  724682-353368740-l

  Henry Sefcovic

  Bankruptcy / Debt, Collections

  Flint, MI

   

  See More Lawyers

  Lawyers - Get Listed Now!

  Get a free full directory profile listing

  Copyright ?

  Justia ::

  Company ::

  Terms of Service ::

  Privacy Policy ::

  Contact Us



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  Vendorsmi mailing list
  Vendorsmi at nfbnet.org
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org
  To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Vendorsmi:
  http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/joeharcz%40comcast.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120328/0273b410/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Sat Mar 31 13:02:24 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:02:24 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] finallly the meeting minutes
Message-ID: <DEEA2B62170545D998FDCC4FA1A54322@YOUR7C60552B9E>

Finally here are the so-called approved meeting minutes where PA 260 was violated. I think this laid the basis in part for the DTMB component in the Executive Order....

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

APPROVED

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING

201 N. Washington Square

Victor Center Building

2nd Floor Conference Room

Lansing, MI

February 8, 2012

9:00 a.m. ? 9:30 a.m.

VIA Conference Call

MINUTES

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT VIA TELEPHONE

Mr. Larry Posont                              Ms. Lydia Schuck

Mr. John Scott

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT

None (2 Commissioner vacancies currently exist)

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND STAFF PRESENT

Mr. Pat Cannon                                Ms. Sue Luzenski

Ms. Constance Zanger                             Mr. James Hull (via telephone)

Mr. Josh Hoskins (via telephone)

GUESTS/ATTENDEES

Mr. Joe Sontag

GUESTS/ATTENDEES VIA TELEPHONE

Mr. Joe Sibley                                  Mr. Joe Harcz

Mr. Fred Wurtzel                              Mr. Terry Eagle

Mr. Rob Essenberg                         Mr. Greg Keathley

CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL AND DETERMINATION OF QUORUM

Commissioner Larry Posont called the special meeting to order at 9:04 a.m. Roll call was taken and a quorum was present.

Discussion of State House of Representatives Cafeteria Proposal

          Commissioner Posont asked for a report of the Elected Operators Committee meeting from Monday evening, February 6.  Mr. Rob Essenberg, Elected
Operator Committee Chair, reported that the solicitation proposal was read to the nine members present at the meeting and there was discussion and questions
about how it will be ensured that a blind operator would be running or be a presence in the facility, the legality of this arrangement in relation to Public
Act 260, concerns about a precedent being set and about management of the building where the cafeteria is located being involved in the process.  Mr. Essenberg
shared that the EOC made some motions and some language in the proposal was amended.

          Commissioner Posont asked if the amendments could be read as adopted.  Ms. Zanger read the EOC amendments to the solicitation proposal as they
were added.  Commissioner Posont asked if this process follows the Promulgated Rules.  Commissioner Scott stated he had the same concern, that going contrary
to the Promulgated Rules is going contrary to law.  Commissioner Schuck expressed a concern about opening up this cafeteria opportunity to sighted people
and questioned if there was a chance that a blind vendor may not be awarded the facility.  Mr. Essenberg clarified that a qualified blind vendor will be
given first priority.  There was discussion about what the timeline would be if this proposal was passed by motion at this meeting.

          Commissioner Posont expressed concern over a possible violation of the Promulgated Rules and asked that Rule 47 (1) (e) be read.  While waiting
for the rule to be referenced, Commissioner Schuck asked Mr. Essenberg to clarify that the EOC is comfortable with the process being presented.  Mr. Essenberg
indicated that he felt the EOC would be well represented on the selection panel.  Commissioner Schuck also asked for clarification of the cafeteria certification
rule and whether that certification rule would apply here.

Ms. Zanger read the rule and there was discussion about whether this rule was being violated by potentially not being applied evenly to all operators and
whether there needed to be a change to the Promulgated Rules.  Ms. Zanger reviewed the other two times that there had been a temporary change request of
the Promulgated Rules.

          Director Cannon answered a question from Commissioner Scott about P.A. 260 and the building managers? right to reject having a cafeteria in a
State building.  Commissioner Scott also asked what the process will be for selecting the operator for the House of Representatives cafeteria.  Mr. Essenberg
reviewed the process, including that a blind operator will be given preference for this facility and will be running the facility for 2 years.

          Commissioner Schuck referenced an email that she had just received that gave reasons why the proposal is illegal.  She then reviewed the contents
of the email and there was discussion about the validity of the information.

          Director Cannon thanked the Elected Operator Committee for their hard work on developing this process and working through an awkward situation.

COMMISSIONER SCHUCK MOVED TO ADOPT THE SOLICITATION PROPOSAL; SCOTT SECONDED

Discussion:           Commissioner Schuck asked if the Board was comfortable with the proposal not having any written mention of a two year commitment or
a commitment to hire a blind person.  Commissioner Posont stated that he wasn?t happy that legal counsel from the Attorney General?s office wasn?t available
to be at this meeting and part of the discussion, shared that he is against it as it is written and if a change needs to be made to the Promulgated Rules
then the proper channels need to be followed.  Commissioner Scott  said that he is against the proposal as it is written but would consider passing it
with the added amendments that Commissioner Schuck mentioned.  Mr. Essenberg stated no objections on adding the amendments as suggested.

          Commissioner Posont summed up the four options to qualify for this facility:

1.    A licensed vendor that is qualified;

2.    A vendor in the program;

3.    A person who is blind who could make it who is outside the program;

4.    A teaming partner which would hire blind people and would team up for up to two years;

          The added amendments are:

?        Second preference would be given to any other individuals who are blind (added to the fourth paragraph)

?        For a minimum of 2 years (added to the first paragraph)

THE MOTION PASSED BY ROLL CALL VOTE WITH SCHUCK AND SCOTT VOTING AYE AND POSONT VOTING NAY.

          The Commissioners asked that when dates are set to begin the interviewing process if they could be advised and an update provided at the March
Quarterly Commission meeting.

PUBLIC COMMENT

          Mr. Dave Robinson:  First of all I would like to inform the Commissioners about some information that was conveniently deleted from the discussion
today by the Agency.  One of the things under the rules in the bid process, if there?s a cafeteria on the bid line and nobody bids on it that?s cafeteria
certified and it?s open to all licensed operators for bidding therefore after two weeks on the bid line they are considered qualified to bid on that facility.
That?s a part that was conveniently left out.  The other thing was that the Commission for the Blind built this facility.  They built it with rehab money
for the purpose of employing a blind person, that?s their mandate.  They knew what type of facility it was.  They knew what type of training it would take
to run that operation successfully, ok, so it was their facility.  Now when you talk about requiring operators to have a teaming partner, what does that
mean?  The Teaming partner comes in to work with the operator but they also take some part of the profit from that operator.  It could be a 50/50 split,
it could be 49/51 it could be whatever which results in the operator paying for their training and the training which was supposed to be the responsibility
of the BEP program.  Now remember the BEP facility, they knew what it would take to train somebody in that facility and they didn?t train the people in
the program to run that facility successfully.  Now, now they?re going back and putting the burden of the training on the operator because the operator
is basically paying for their own training.  Now you can put this and mix it anyway you want to but the reality is the agency is negating their responsibility
to train a person successfully for this employment opportunity and yet there?s lots of times when the Commission for the Blind spends thousands of dollars
training people for their particular employment.  Job coaches, trainers whatever and now we?re telling a blind person that they have to pay for their own
training.  So it?s a sham that the agency is purveying and you guys just voted for the illegal procedure.  It?s illegal no matter how you twist and turn
it and provisions, recommendations, won?t undo that.  So I just want to let you know where you stand in terms of what you did.

          Mr. Joe Harcz:  In the 1930?s Adolf Hitler had his brown shirts set fire to the Reichstag and then used that as an excuse for violating the rule
of the law.  Tierney is always started when we put the rule of man over the rule of the law.  What we?ve had and this echoes somewhat what Dave just said
is we have fundamental violations by this agency, dereliction of duty, everybody goes ?oh we don?t have enough cafeteria certified people to handle this?,
 well whose responsibility was that to begin with?  And abdicating and violating and reversing the rule of law, oh on this so called one time basis it
is more than a slippery slope ladies and gentlemen.  The other issue that was never discussed was that we, the Michigan Commission for the Blind are the
State Licensing Agency and not building management.  Even if this interview process was legal to begin with we?re basically putting a building manager
outside this program in the position of granting a license.  Period.  The license is the contract, the priority and the mandate are clear.  Again and again
these go to fundamental violations that go on over and over again in this system because we are a general VR program and we are required to supply the
competent training of individuals in whatever their career choice is.  Constantly, in over a decade, I?ve seen this occur, the Agency is derelict in its
duties, violating the Rehab Act, violates Randolph Sheppard Act, violates Public Act 260, violates it?s charge and yet it goes to the Commission Board
or some subcommittee or the EOC in this case, you know to try and rubber stamp those violations.  These are substantial things Ladies and Gentlemen.  We
have lit a match, we have burnt the Reichstag, and when I say we I am talking about the Agency and now we?re claiming an emergency.  Where does the responsibility
go?  Thank you.

          Mr. Joe Sibley:  I heard great discussion here.  I?m not an expert here, I wasn?t an operator, I know many people who were but I thought I heard
great discussion this morning.  I thought I heard good scrutiny, good discussion.  The operators committee is on board with this, those that know the law
seemed to be on board with this, I think it was a good move.  I think this location is vital which is a showplace location and I think it needs to be scrutinized
and really have a first class operation.  I think you covered all the bases with this proposal and its changes so I salute the board and all participating.

SCHUCK MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING; SCOTT SECONDED.

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

The meeting adjourned at 10:36 a.m.

____________________________      ____________________

Larry Posont                                              Date
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120331/816c48cc/attachment.html>

From joeharcz at comcast.net  Sat Mar 31 13:13:14 2012
From: joeharcz at comcast.net (joe harcz Comcast)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:13:14 -0400
Subject: [Vendorsmi] approved mcb jan 31 2012 minutes
Message-ID: <A6852673BE904FCEAF2012D410FBC0CF@YOUR7C60552B9E>

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

APPROVED

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

SPECIAL COMMISSION MEETING

201 N. Washington Square

Victor Center Building

2nd Floor Conference Room

Lansing, MI

January 31, 2012

9:00 a.m. ? 10:00 a.m.

VIA Conference Call

MINUTES

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT VIA TELEPHONE

Mr. Larry Posont                              Ms. Lydia Schuck

Mr. John Scott

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT

None (2 Commissioner vacancy?s currently exist)

MICHIGAN COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND STAFF PRESENT

Mr. Pat Cannon                                Ms. Sue Luzenski

Ms. Constance Zanger                             Mr. James Hull (via telephone)

GUESTS/ATTENDEES

Mr. Mike DeRose                            Mr. Phil Kozachik

Ms. Elham Jahshan

GUESTS/ATTENDEES VIA TELEPHONE

Mr. Joe Sibley                                  Mr. Terry Eagle

Mr. Joe Harcz                                  Mr. Dave Robinson

Mr. Fred Wurtzel

CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL AND DETERMINATION OF QUORUM

Commissioner Larry Posont called the special meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. Roll call was taken and a quorum was present.

Discussion of 2012 Performance Objectives for Agency Director

Objective 5

          Commissioner Schuck read Objective 5 as proposed by Commissioners, stating that Pat?s proposed Objective was the same.

SCHUCK MOVED TO ADOPT OBJECTIVE FIVE AS WRITTEN; SCOTT SECONDED.

Discussion:  There was no discussion.

THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

Final Objective 5:

Objective 5:  Continue support of the Business Enterprise Program (BEP)/Elected Operators Committee (EOC) Ad Hoc Committee into 2012 as it concludes its
work and presents its recommendations to the BEP/EOC.  Work with these entities to help support attainable goals to help advance the mission of the BEP
and its operators.

?        Explore potential funding sources to enable more B E P licensees to attend the popular national training called BLAST (Business Leadership and
Superior Training) as a way to broaden access to vital training for new and veteran BEP operators.  Progress on this initiative to secure additional funding
for the conference will be reported to commissioners in March and June.

?        Consistent with the 2012 BEP Annual Workshop Theme of ?Looking from the Customer?s Perspective,? BEP will work with EOC and operators to explore
ways and resources to develop and enhance promotional and marketing opportunities for each facility to promote customer satisfaction, quality and earnings
for BEP operators.  Report progress to commissioners in March, June and September.

Objective 6

          Commissioner Schuck read Objective 6 as proposed by the Commissioners.

SCHUCK MOVED TO APPROVE OBJECTIVE SIX AS IT WAS READ; SCOTT SECONDED.

Discussion:  Director Cannon pointed Commissioners to the objective staff drafted, which incorporates all of the reports Commissioners requested.  Ms. Zanger
added that the requested information is data that is provided to the Rehabilitation Services Administration and asked for clarification of some of the
data requested.  There was discussion about the listing for the programmatic data.  Staff and Commissioners discussed the process of completing the BEP
inventory project of equipment, the time frame for completing this and securing a vendor to complete the job efficiently and accurately.

Final Objective 6:

Objective 6:  BEP financial reporting and equipment inventory

a.    Quarterly, commencing April 2012, the BEP will provide the Elected Committee with the following programmatic data:  gross sales, merchandise purchases,
payroll expenses, other operating expenses, vending machine and other income, net proceeds, levied set-aside funds, set-aside funds collected to date,
late set aside fees by facility, net profit to vendors, vendor earnings and net income for the whole BEP program by facility type.  The Agency will provide
reports to the EOC on a quarterly basis and to individual operators in an accessible format upon request.

     b.    B E P is currently in the process of completing a full equipment inventory and upon completion will continue to monitor the inventory, providing
a report to the Elected Committee and the Commission Board in March and June with a target completion date of September 2012.

                   THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

Objective 7

SCHUCK MOVED TO APPROVE OBJECTIVE SEVEN AS WRITTEN BY THE COMMISSIONERS; SCOTT SECONDED.

Discussion:  Commissioner Posont stated that there is a need for a BEP trainer and for that trainer to be housed at the Training Center.  Director Cannon
responded that several years ago the BEP training was removed at the request of the Training Center Director, Christine Boone because of a space issue.
 He went on to state that objectives are not meant to state an official work station or what official duties are for any given position, civil service
does that.  Commissioner Posont stressed that being at the Training Center for this would assist potential BEP vendors in being successful by having access
to necessary training as needed while at the Training Center.  Director Cannon concurred that he wants the best possible training also and that his Objective
7 as written reflects this.  Ms. Zanger commented on the history of BEP vendor training since 2010 including staff issues, surveying participants for the
purposes of training evaluation and the ongoing assessment process during the on the job training experiences.  Commissioner Scott commented on the length
of the vending stand training now and what the length of this training used to be.  Commissioner Schuck stated that Objective 7, as written by Pat, adequately
covered the intent of the objective.

Final Objective 7:

Objective 7:  BEP Training

a.    Continue to provide B E P Manager Training using the enriched curriculum developed in 2011, and continuously seek student and O J E trainer and the
E O C input for curriculum enhancement.

b.    Continue to work with the Elected Committee and the BEP/EOC Ad Hoc Committee and based on their recommendation, develop and implement training for
current licensees.

c.     Reports will be provided to the Elected Committee and the Commission reflecting the current status of Program training.

d.  Report to commissioners quarterly a summary of the various assessments of new trainee?s progress on the BEP operators training.  Assessment of training
quality will come from host OJE operators, EOC, EOC training subcommittee and the trainee.

THE MOTION PASSED WITH SCOTT AND SCHUCK VOTING AYE AND POSONT VOTING NAY.

           Objectives eight and nine, which are LARA Department mandated objectives will be automatically included with the Directors objectives.

PUBLIC COMMENT

          Mr. Joe Harcz:  I find it remarkable that we?re working on an evaluation for next year and we had a failure in the evaluation last year which
is still not up on the website.  I?d kind of like to know what happened to that.  But also, we have, overall with the program and not just BEP, a total
lack of accountability on where the money is and where it?s going.  We looked at, just the other day, some of the projections got put out which I circulated
around and you?ve got, oh, $250,000 for legal and we?re talking about today what programs and inventory control and that type of thing that were cited
all the way back in 2003 in a single audit and in 2004/2005 somewhere about with the general accounting office.  We?re already going through inventory
problems or accountability with the single audit being conducted by the Auditor General right now.  Nobody knows where anything is but this agency keeps
plowing in money into private vendors and that goes to the training.  We?ve already got as a public account more than $30,000 going into McVety and Associates
last year.  Where?s their expertise and how much did we spend on the hotel and then we?re told we don?t have the money to hire a trainer.  There?s no accountability,
general accountability going on with this agency.  None.  I would also like to know just who the vendors were that we contracted and how much we paid them
on the second inventory that Ms. Zanger talked about.  Those are supposed to be part of the public record.  They?re right up on the Department of Technology,
Management and Budget website.  The other thing that we need to look at, and we need to look at very strongly, and this goes to the Agency overall is to
take the Director up on the accountability of how the stimulus funding was developed and how many retentions we have.  I?ll tell you one thing this is
part of the public record, we hired a whole bunch of people with stimulus money to work part time and temporary at CVS and I?ll tell you that how many
people got retained at CVS.  None.  They also had job coaches paid for at roughly $35 an hour by who, oh I don?t know, New Horizons.  Why are we accounting
where the program dollars go and into rehabilitation of blind people and look at the numbers ladies and gentlemen.  Look at the number of people that are
not retained.  Look at the line item at $50,000 on social security because we aren?t putting people into competitive employment which is the number one
job of this agency.  Thank you.

          Mr. Dave Robinson:  I want to thank the Commissioners and the difficulty I know in dealing with this issue.  I know the BEP is a big image issue
with the Commission for the Blind and I believe over the last four years under the current management it?s slowly deteriorated to the point where there?s
nothing in the program you can count on.  First of all, the Commissioners, for you the Commissioners you rely on reports that are accurate and correct
and I know for a fact that much of the report that Zanger has given you are falsehoods.  Outright lies about what happened, what is happening.  You voted
to continue an enhanced training class when we know the very last class that was conducted, there are so many issues that have been created that we will
never depend on the training of the people who are just coming out here in September.  All the way from limited vending stand training to no training on
small appliances to readers who were giving answers to trainees in the serve safe tests just so they could pass.  Lots of different issues that are there
and are true but yet are not reported to you by the management of the BEP.  They?re hiding a lot of things.  They?re hiding an awful lot of things.  And
also I?d like to correct the fact that Christine Boone is on record as saying that she?s willing to and believes the enhanced recommendations of the Ad
Hoc Committee for the training are good ones and are willing to have the Training Center as the vehicle to make things better for BEP trainees and it?s
not correct that she just doesn?t want them there at all.  And I believe that one of the big issues with the training is the fact that people coming out
of the training center and into the BEP class do not have the blindness skills like Commissioner Posont said, that?s the only way you can detect those
shortcomings.  If we don?t do something and do it immediately this entire program is going to be made up of people that do not have the blindness skills
and do not have the business training that is needed to run a facility in today?s market.  And it?s going to get worse, way worse before it ever gets better
if we just go along with the current management strategy.  And don?t forget, the management of the BEP believes that the EOC is only an advisory committee
and they can ignore them any time they please.

          Mr. Joe Sibley:  I just wanted to say for the process again today, this time and last time, I appreciate that there was discussion on both sides
of the table.  There was discussion and sometimes there was debate and that?s great.  I don?t expect everyone to sing Kumbaya all the time.  But there
was discussion, there was compromise and things were actually worked out so I want to compliment the Commissioners and staff and everybody involved that
there was actually proactive discussion to actually accomplish the goals today.  Thank you.

          Mr. Joe Sontag:  I will definitely be brief because a lot of what I was going to say has already been said.  I agree strongly with the comments
of Dave Robinson and with Joe Harcz about the Commission in general and about the BEP deliberations today particularly.  I would just hasten to add that
things are not going to get better in terms of the amount of friction that exists currently between clients, between BEP operators and the program.  Some
of these difficult discussions are never going to go away until everybody starts doing a better job telling the truth and doing what needs to be done as
opposed to doing what they like to get away with doing or not doing.  With regard to training, follow up on things Dave was speaking of how in the world
do you ever expect to have a competent operator who can submit an accurate and true report as required by our promulgated rules when we have one known
situation where an individual has failed the business math component of the training twice and who has been alleged that the individual, the people who
are responsible for administering the business math portion were ordered to pass the individual.  The same individual claimed a personal emergency and
as a reason for not being able to attend a portion of the training only to find out that the individual was right there in the hotel and had celebrated
something a little too vigorously with some of his friends from home and was in his room the next morning seriously incapacitated to the point where he
didn?t feel like he could attend class.  It was only because Ms. Zanger was willing to take him out for breakfast to get some food into him so that he
might be functional that he was able to attend class that day.  Back in the bad old days when the training was substandard and it was producing such lousy
operators such as old duffers, that would never have been tolerated.  Tardiness, failure to attend without a reasonable excuse, that was grounds for termination
of the training right there.  We just don?t have it and if we don?t have, that?s just one of many.  I?ll just close by saying if we don?t have standards
and if we don?t insist that those standards be met then we might as well just admit that we?re wasting time and money and just call it what it is.  A free
for all at this point and just get ready for the serious fall out because it will, in fact happen.  Our promulgated rules were put there in all seriousness,
not because people like to become heavy weights, not because people like to monitor, not because people like to call people on the carpet but because the
vast majority of the rules and policies are found to be necessary and yet with every passing months we are finding more and more reasons to pretend we
have them yet avoid implementing them.  Thank you.

          Mr. Terry Eagle:  I?d like to speak as a former operator and as a member of the ad hoc committee.  I?m really pleased that the commission has
taken the steps to at least try to get the information that is required under the law and has not been forthcoming to the operators committee especially
and any operator that wants it.  This information has been asked for repeatedly, and repeatedly and repeatedly at operators committee meetings and it never
shows up for whatever reason.  Somebody has to be held accountable for following the law and rule of law.  Secondly, I?d like to say that as a member of
the Ad Hoc Committee we put a lot of time and effort and a lot of input into looking at the program and trying to make recommendations that will improve
it.  We have a meeting on Friday and very soon we will be wrapping up our recommendations and sending it to the EOC and the Commission Board as well as
the operators in general and I really hope that the Commission Board will really stay on top of this and help us achieve what we believe can be a number
one program in the country.  You may or may not know that back in September at the BLAST conference Michigan was laughed at repeatedly because of our lack
of training and lack of achievement within this nation which one time was a number one program and was used as a model.  And finally, I?d like to say that
the problem of training needs to be addressed and I don?t care what you call it whether it?s a trainer or a teacher, whatever, this position has to be
formulated whether it?s from inside or outside.   Whether it?s a training coordinator or whatever, this has to be done because without the right resources
to get the right people assessed and into the right program and trained properly this programs gonna die and there?s too many vultures out there now already
looking to get their hands on the program.  And I know for a fact that if this Commission doesn?t move very soon other people in the disability community
plan to do legislative action to take it away from the blind people.  Thank you.

          Mr. Fred Wurtzel:  I just want to say, speak to one issue and that?s the training issue.  We got to have goals for the program administrator,
for the Director that are measurable, achievable and realistic and time driven, all that stuff.  The counter proposal to the proposal that the Commissioners
put forth were not any of those things.  It was vague, basically unmeasurable as far as results go.  The resistance to putting the training program in
the Training Center where there?s access to assessments in Braille and mobility and all the other skills of blindness and access to remedial training if
necessary, those things only make good sense.  The idea of putting people in apartments and having them find transportation to and from training programs
would be an outstanding idea.  By putting the trainer position as a Promotional Agent requires a college degree.  We need to keep the position available
to existing operators if possible.  I don?t know of any existing operators who might be interested or qualified to be a trainer but the very best resource
for a good BEP training is BEP operators.  And so I think that you ought to consider that job classification.  The reason it was a maintenance mechanic
was because we couldn?t figure out another position that didn?t require a college degree that would mainly fit the job duties of the trainer.  So that?s
one of the things, if you want the job to be open to blind people and open to people with valid experience, relevant experience then I think that putting
it as a Promotional Agent will run counter to that.  It may, if you found a person who was qualified for that, there?s no reason you couldn?t later on
expand that into an upward mobility situation for the person, a career ladder position and help them move into that and increase their pay grade.  Those
are the things, but the main thing again remains and continues to be a pattern or behavior here is to try to change the job duties and change the objectives
so that they?re not measurable and no matter what happens you can claim success and I?m very happy with the way that things have been done so far to keep
everyone accountable.  Thank you again for your hard work Commissioners, I?m hoping that your work turns out to be valuable for the future of the Business
Enterprise Program.  Thank you.

Director Cannon requested that a meeting be set up for Commissioners to discuss the House of Representative Cafeteria.  Ms. Zanger gave a history of the
past operators in this cafeteria and informed Commissioners that a small EOC Ad Hoc committee had been created to write interview questions and develop
a process for interviewing potential candidates.

A meeting was set for Wednesday, February 8 at 9:00 a.m. via telephone.

SCOTT MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING; SCHUCK SECONDED.

MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY

The meeting adjourned at 11:09 a.m.

____________________________      ____________________

Larry Posont                                              Date
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/vendorsmi_nfbnet.org/attachments/20120331/7f31a36a/attachment.html>