[nfbmi-talk] jan 17 bsbp commission meeting

[joe harcz Comcast]

Precisely and he is no longer ignorent of the OMA requirements, or shouldn't 
be for I've informed him directly of them, as well as ADA and 504 
obligations in e-mails that are archived upon this very list. Also Arwood 
and Zimmer.

Thus they act at a minimum with deliberate indifference to our known rights 
in stark violation of these laws. And I contend they act with malice of 
forethough, and with malicious intention to deprive me, you, and indeed our 
entire class of our known civil rights.

Thus Rodgers et al are not all that different that say Bull Conner. Only 
they simply don't use water hoses and dogs to keep us in a segregated state. 
They have other more subtl, or less obvious weapons to the public which they 
employ to keep us in our place, so-to-speak.

Joe
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Terry D. Eagle" <terrydeagle at yahoo.com>
To: "'NFB of Michigan Internet Mailing List'" <nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:55 AM
Subject: Re: [nfbmi-talk] jan 17 bsbp commission meeting


> Mr. Rodgers statement about the Open Meetings Act and the Advisory
> Commission, not only shows more ignorance of the law, his premise violates
> P.A. 260 of 1978, requiring compliance with the OMA.  Does not P.A. 260 of
> 1978 still exist?
>
> Also, Mr. Rodgers as you strive to fulfill the "spirit" of a law, how 
> about
> first fulfilling the "letter" of laws?  So, in the "spirit" of the FOIA, 
> do
> we the blind of Michigan a small free favor, and provide us with an
> accessible  copy, without delay and charge, the Attorney General opinion, 
> by
> which you stand by your opinion statement.  And since it is an opinion 
> about
> a provision of law, it is NOT able to vbe kept secret and just your 
> unworthy
> word, as attorney-client confidential. Privilege.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nfbmi-talk [mailto:nfbmi-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of joe
> harcz Comcast
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 2:29 PM
> To: nfbmi-talk at nfbnet.org
> Subject: [nfbmi-talk] jan 17 bsbp commission meeting
>
> Seems Mr. Lawyer Rodgers doesn't know the PA 260 requirements for OMA on
> these meetings and the Rehabilitation Act requirements for same....I quote
> this legal beagle from the record here:
>
> "
> 5                        MR. RODGERS:   Let me jump in for a second,
>
>
>
> 6        Mike.   Twice now Mike has gotten the hair on the back of my
>
>
>
> 7        head to stand up by indicating that the Commission is bound by
>
>
>
> 8        the Open Meetings Act.   It's my legal opinion, and I have an
>
>
>
> 9        informal opinion from the attorney generals office, that in
>
>
>
> 10        fact while we adhere to the spirit of the Open Meetings Act,
>
>
>
> 11        because this is an advisory Commission and does not have final
>
>
>
> 12        order, power to direct anything to happen, that based on those
>
>
>
> 13        rules which is different from the Commission for the Blind,
>
>
>
> 14        the Open Meetings Act per se does not apply.
>
>
>
> 15                        And I mention that because one of the issues
>
>
>
> 16        that usually rises up at these type of meetings is that
>
>
>
> 17        individuals want to use a lot of time and public comment
>
>
>
> 18        beyond whatever perimeters that the Chair has set for public
>
>
>
> 19        comment, and she'll explain that when we get to that.     And
>
>
>
> 20        that's to keep the meetings running in an orderly basis.
>
>
>
> 21        Unfortunately, some of our history was that commission
>
>
>
> 22        meetings ran on for a very long time with long dialogues
>
>
>
> 23        between commissioners and the public, which certainly dragged
>
>
>
> 24        the meetings out to a certain extent.
>
>
>
> 25                        While we will adhere to the spirit of the Open
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 1        Meetings Act, we are not legally per se bound by it.     But I do
>
>
>
> 2        encourage you to look at it.    Because it clearly gives us some
>
>
>
> 3        guide posts on the things we ought to be doing such as giving
>
>
>
> 4        people notice of the hearings, allowing the people to
>
>
>
> 5        participate in the hearings through public comment, et cetera.
>
>
>
> 6        Thank you.
>
>
>
> 7                        MR. PEMBLE:   Thank you for clarification."
> _______________________________________________
> 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/terrydeagle%40yahoo.
> com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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