<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1 =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.17107" name=GENERATOR><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
o\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
w\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
.shape {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"></o:SmartTagType><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>st1\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#ieooui)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
LI.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; FONT-SIZE: 12pt
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=blue link=blue bgColor=white>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I can't find anything to disagree with here.
Ultimately it's up to the agency, Commission Board and staff, and operators
alike to get serious about following established policy and rules consistently
and to make necessary changes in the above according to procedure and protocol
when it becomes obvious that existing policy and rules are ineffective or
destructive.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=terrydeagle@yahoo.com href="mailto:terrydeagle@yahoo.com">Terry
Eagle</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=suncat0@gmail.com
href="mailto:suncat0@gmail.com">'Joe Sontag'</A> ; <A
title=vendorsmi@nfbnet.org href="mailto:vendorsmi@nfbnet.org">'NFB of Michigan
Vendors List'</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 14, 2012
9:34</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Vendorsmi] do the BEP
promulgated rules really matter?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Right on Joe and dave! Joe has
pointed out a major factor when BEP licensees knowingly and willfully dchoose
to not meet there legal obligations with consequences.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>And yet, the lack of consequences is
derived from a lack of expectations by program management.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>But what can be expected from
incompetent management that has a poor attitude about blindness and what the
blind can actually do, as well as management that knows little about business,
and could not interpret a financial statement or BEP monthly report if their
job or life depended upon doing so with competence, and have only gotten their
jobs, advanced, and stay in their jobs through literally sleeping with the
right person(s), and as Larry so pointedly stated that they are just carrying
out Pat Cannon’s evil orders.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>They all can deny that fact all they can, as did James Hull, yet if it
were nor true, then why are they not standing with the majority of the blind,
fighting for improvement and survival of the BEP?<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>That question I extend to the blind
operators who also sleep in the very crowded bed with management, with full
knowledge and complicity that those operators do not meet there legal
obligations, are promoted while out-of-compliance of program rules and
policies, and manipulation of theirnmumbers and reports, while claiming to be
for blind people and survival of the program, and yet, advocating for such
things as “secondary priority” for blind persons who are indeed BLIND,
UNEMPLOYED, more QUALIFIED, COMPETENT, and have more INTEGRITY than any of
thoseso-called self-proclaimed advocates of the blind and BEP.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>And in their narcisstic way, they
believe the BEP and their top locations will always be there because they are
where where they want to be, and moreover, in their twisted minds, will be
able to pervert and control the program to preserve that which they now
have.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Dave is so right also.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I have seen first-hand, while
adbocating vigorously for the retention of the license of more than one blind
operator, where the BEP management “OBJECTS” to the introduction and argument
that the failure of BEP management to follow program rules and their mandated
obligations, while espousing the failure of operators’ to follow rules and
fulfill mandated obligations.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>BEP
management objection is grounded in RELEVANCE to the failure to perform up to
par.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>What am I missing in this
argument?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Is not an operator’s
expected performance stand or fail upon a mutually signed facility
agreement?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Does the agreement
demand mutual fulfillment of express obligations on the part of all parties to
the agreement?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Is it not quid pro
quo, something for something?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>How
can it be argued that one can allege violation of terms of the agreement, and
it it not be relevant whether the other party fulfilled tgeir
obligations?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>If the counter-claim
or defense is not revelant, then why the need for an agreement in the first
place.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>It is a well recognized
legal doctrine in basic contract law that certain obligations of one party
must be fukfilled in order to trigger the responsibility to fulfill
obligations of the other party.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>For example, to trigger an operator’s obligation to make a certain
profit percentage and pay a certain set-aside fee, is it not reasonable, and
even legally mandated that the other party, the MCB-BEP, first provide
appropriate and adequate training, provide an adequate facility, provide
appropriate and adequate equipment, supply an appropriate and adequate
inventory, and provide appropriate and adequate on-going support and training,
and on and on?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I need not give
true examples of where each of those examples and unnamed others have failed
to be provided, as we all know and can cite numerous examples involving
different operators, and yet, such examples are not revelent to the
fulfillment of obligations by an operator?<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Has BEP management and the EOC not
heard of the theory of cause and effect?<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>Perhaps if the BEP management and EOC look in the mirror and do an
honest assessment of their legally mandated roles, we would not be either
facing breaking the law for an illegal interview process and stringent
business plan, and selling out to the sighted business world.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I believe that if those operators and
BEP management supporting such a process should demonstrate their leadership
by first fulfilling the State Plate business proposal requirements and publish
them to the blind community.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>After all, how else are we the blind to know that those indiuals are
truly QUALIFIED to EVALUATE and SELECT<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>the most qualified operator for the State Plate.<SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>In addition, those in support of the
of the interview and business plan process, in good faith, do the same for
their current facility, as a demonstration of their allegence to, and faith
in, such a brilliant idea. <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>I
official make that a challenge to all of those in support of protecting the
“blind” and “Secondary blind” priority, as the law allegedly and arguably
provides. <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN><SPAN
style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">It is my sad prediction that
were the BEP to be lost for the blind, it will be actually because of the
revelation that through manipulation, greed, and failure of blind persons BEP
and MCB management are not achieving the MISSION and SPIRIT of the
Randolph-Sheppard Act and P.A. 260—to be financially independent and be
financial contributors to society.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes">
</SPAN>When others, the disabled, politicians, and public policy-makers can
demonstrate such failure, then in fact, BEP for the blind will be
history.<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>And the so-called
advocates, blind and sighted alike, will be sitting on their butts enjoying
their handsome inflated retirement pensions.</P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">What is it going to take to
wake-up the sleeping blind to the ultimate threat to the survival of BEP for
the blind?? <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>Like the tale of Rip
VanWinkle, by the time the blind wake-up, much time and many things will have
passed them by, and the difference between Rip VanWinkle and blind sleeping
experience is that the blind will be in the world of reality.</P></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> vendorsmi-bounces@nfbnet.org
[mailto:vendorsmi-bounces@nfbnet.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Joe
Sontag<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, February 14, 2012 6:02 AM<BR><B>To:</B> David
Robinson<BR><B>Cc:</B> VENDORSMI List<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vendorsmi] do
the BEP promulgated rules really matter?<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I reject the claim that the training is the
problem where operator compliance is concerned. Most of the serious
violations are happening at the hands of experienced operators in the employer
responsibility area, they are willful and they happen mostly because there are
no consequences unless the operator in question has done things to anger BEP
administration, such as help protect another operator's rights. I have
been penalized for operating a business properly and for showing the
financials as they were, not as I always wished they could be, and I have seen
operators receive promotion points for "training" based on nothing more than
their word and I am sick and tired of sitting on my ass and telling myself
that it will all just work out somehow. The PAs have a job that is
defined by both the Civil Service and by our promulgated rules, yet Cannon,
Zanger, Hull and god knows who else work harder at getting their
responsibilities reduced than they do at strengthening and growing our
program. Remember, the topic includes both operators and the agency and,
in my opinion, there's more than enough blame to go around. As free as
certain highly regarded operators are free to break the law and rip off the
program, the BEP administration is even more free to ignore or break the rules
and sell the program down the river, at no risk to themselves.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>This is not a sheltered rehab shop, this is not a
blindy pity party, this is an employment program, one that gives blind adults
the opportunity to provide real service in exchange for real financial
compensation, consistent with applicable laws, all of which they agree to as a
condition of participation in the program. If the BEP dies, it will be
hard to distinguish between the effects of operator exploitation and BEP staff
indifference and incompetence when trying to determine the cause of
death.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=drob1946@gmail.com href="mailto:drob1946@gmail.com">David
Robinson</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=suncat0@gmail.com
href="mailto:suncat0@gmail.com">'Joe Sontag'</A> ; <A
title=vendorsmi@nfbnet.org href="mailto:vendorsmi@nfbnet.org">'NFB of
Michigan Vendors List'</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 13, 2012
10:50</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [Vendorsmi] do the BEP
promulgated rules really matter?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Dear Joe,
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"> This
is an excellent example of the problem throughout the program. Larry
does a good job of pointing out that part of the agency’s role is to help
the operator to stay in full compliance. This is not a one sided issue
however. The agency has an obligation to adhere to the rules as
well. To carry out their responsibility as the <st1:place
w:st="on">SLA</st1:place> and to move a blind person from rehabilitation to
employment. In today’s BEP, I suspect that the problem does not mean
an unwillingness to follow the rules, but the training or lack of training,
that operators have been given. I also contend that some of the rules are
outdated and lacking any understanding of how the business world
works. If the training was good then many of the rules would not be
necessary. Finally, why is the discussion of rules only about the
operator? The agency is willing to break them when they need to do
so.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Dave
Robinson<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">
vendorsmi-bounces@nfbnet.org [mailto:vendorsmi-bounces@nfbnet.org] <B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">On Behalf Of </SPAN></B>Joe Sontag<BR><B><SPAN
style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Monday, February 13, 2012 9:18
AM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> VENDORSMI
List<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B> Steve
Arwood<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> [Vendorsmi]
do the BEP promulgated rules really
matter?</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I now offer you a clue as to why
the Business Enterprise Program is so fouled up. Listen carefully to
the following discussion on the topic "Operators/Agency Staff consistently
following rules as they are<BR>written," which is one of the issues before
the ad hoc. Mr. Hull's remarks are extremely revealing, as is the vote
that was taken near the end of the
session.</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">This may be downloaded at the
link below:</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><A
href="http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22266576/Ad%20hoc%20%2002032012%20excerpt1.MP3">http://dl.dropbox.com/u/22266576/Ad%20hoc%20%2002032012%20excerpt1.MP3</A></SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>