<!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 content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16440"><!--[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 name="place"
namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"></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 bgColor=white vLink=blue link=blue>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal>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 style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal>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 style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal>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 style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal>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 dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><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 size=2 face=Arial>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 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>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 size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; 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 color=navy size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Dear Joe,
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"> 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 color=navy size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Dave
Robinson<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: navy; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" class=MsoNormal align=center><FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman"><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center SIZE=2 width="100%">
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT
size=2 face=Tahoma><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
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 size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">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 size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">This may be downloaded at the link
below:</SPAN></FONT><o:p></o:p></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><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 size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT size=3 face="Times New Roman"><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"> <o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>