Buckeye Bulletin

a publication of the
National Federation of the Blind of Ohio

Eric Duffy, Editor
575 E. Beechwold Blvd.
Columbus, OH 43214-1803
eduffy@pobox.com
http://www.nfbohio.org
1-800-396-NFBO

Sylvia Cooley, Production Editor
Barbara Pierce, President
237 Oak Street
Oberlin, OH 44074-1517
bbpierce@pobox.com
Phone/Fax: (440) 775-2216

From the President's Desk
by Barbara Pierce

Eye Openers
by Paul Dressell

2001 Director of Field Services Report
by Eric Duffy

2001 Resolutions
by Jason Ewell

The Federation and the Business Enterprise Program
by Eric Duffy

Of Flashlights and Comic Books
by Paul Dressell

Blind Travel to Washington in 2002
by Eric Duffy

Buckeye Briefs

Then came the downturn of the early part of this year and September 11 and its aftermath, and suddenly the warning lights went on and the sirens began to sound. Ohio's federal funding was no longer growing even as much as the cost of living. The governor was asking for budget cuts, and the legislature was trimming appropriations. All these things have meant cuts in the funding available to conduct rehabilitation in Ohio. In rapid succession the Business Enterprise Program has experienced draconian cuts. The Pathways Program is being eliminated. And the rehabilitation teachers, who work mostly with older blind people trying to adapt to managing their lives with diminishing vision, and the Vocational Development Specialists, charged with working with blind youngsters still in secondary school, are being phased out altogether. In short, the Bureau of Services for the Visually Impaired (BSVI) seems rapidly to be losing much of what has given it its unique service-delivery character.

As though this were not enough for blind consumers to worry about, now we face pressure to merge BSVI and BVR supervisory structures in various areas across the state. The arguments for doing so are strong and compelling. For reasons stretching back decades, in a few areas of the state BSVI supervisors have very few counselors to oversee. In some places Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation (BVR) counselors have much larger caseloads than their BSVI counterparts. Not surprisingly the suggested solution is shared supervision and BSVI counselors accepting BVR clients as part of their caseloads.

Difficult times require sacrifices, so why is the National Federation of the Blind expressing our anxiety and issuing warnings? Are blind people unwilling to shoulder our part of the burden? I hope that we would all say a resounding no to such suggestions. Yet we are acutely aware of the irretrievable dangers inherent in the current direction of change. Members of the Rehabilitation Services Commission and John Connelly, the RSC Administrator, have repeated time and time again that no one intends to merge the two bureaus. In fact, the legislation establishing BVR and BSVI clearly stipulates that the two bureaus shall remain separate. We are happy to hear the separate-bureau principle reiterated, but surely our skepticism should evoke little wonder among those with experience of the ways of bureaucracies.

Review with me for a moment why blind people have been adamant about the importance of separate, identifiable services for blind rehabilitation customers. Studies have conclusively demonstrated that blind customers achieve far greater rates of successful rehabilitation and higher incomes when they are served by separate agencies. Specialized counselors understand what services are actually necessary for their training. The access technology they need for jobs is more likely to be provided for them and installed correctly and quickly if the counselors know what they are doing. In fact counselors who know little about the abilities of blind consumers tend to find jobs for their clients with other disabilities far more readily than they do their blind clients. In short, when counselors have mixed caseloads, the blind consumers end up at the back of the line. This is not paranoia; statistics support our anecdotal evidence.

Yet no one has threatened to give BSVI consumers to BVR counselors, so what are we worried about? The short answer is that we recognize the straws in the wind. All of the steps that are now being taken or are being contemplated will dilute BSVI as we have known it. Even when BSVI counselors retain caseloads made up exclusively of blind clients, they may well in future have supervisors whose experience is with BVR cases. Newly blind consumers have emotional and mobility problems that most BVR clients never face. The services they need and the access technology they require to succeed are more extensive and more expensive than most other clients need, and they are certainly unique to blindness. The pressure from above will inevitably be to make BSVI services conform to those offered to other clients. The specialized services for blind retirees and blind students are disappearing, and it is hard to believe that the NFB can fill the gap. We care passionately about blind kids and retirees. We are willing to advocate for blind adults who know enough to ask us to fight for good services for them, but we cannot be everywhere at once, and there are limits to what volunteers can accomplish.

We are not deaf to the plight that the RSC finds itself in, and we are prepared to consider proposals of all sorts for conserving disappearing funding. But we know what constitutes good rehabilitation for blind people, and we hate to see Ohio taking steps that in other states have resulted in deteriorating services for those facing blindness. We must all become aware of what is happening and what we must do to protect the opportunities Ohioans have to deal effectively with their blindness.

While perusing the menu at the Zanesville Holiday Inn, I noticed an item for breakfast entitled ?Eye Openers.? Could this be an omen for the fifty-fifth annual NFB-O Convention? Might this be a foreshadowing of events to come during the next three days? It was! Read on.

Most convention attendees were familiar with the excellent facilities offered by the Holiday Inn since our 1997 gathering was held at the same location. The courteous and thoughtful treatment accorded by the staff provided a fine setting for our weekend.

Our two scholarship winners were introduced at our Thursday evening Board of Directors meeting, and Ramona Walhof, our National Representative and NFB Secretary, was made welcome.

The first eye-opening experience took place Friday morning, November 2, at 7 a.m. with the annual cane travel breakfast and walking workshop. Since our affiliate had met in Zanesville in 1997, we had expected that, since we have done this activity for a number of years now, very few people would be interested in this event. Contrary to those expectations, close to ten discussed good cane travel over breakfast and explored the hotel using their mapping skills.

One of the highlights of the convention took place two-and a-half hours later with the first Senior Seminar. The first of the five presenters was NFB-O President Barbara Pierce, who encouraged seniors with vision loss to focus on their remaining senses rather than using their fading vision. At first she suggested that people learn about low-tech solutions instead of buying high-priced items. Ramona Walhof, the second presenter, advised blind seniors to adjust to blindness one step at a time. She said that doctors, for the most part, could not offer substantive assistance in adjustment to blindness. She described a low-vision kit useful to many seniors, which has been assembled by the National Federation of the Blind. It contains twenty-two items such as a large-print deck of cards, a check-writing guide, large-print ruler, self-threading needle, Braille alphabet card, and talking clock key-chain--the kit sells for thirty dollars. Karen Barnett, the third speaker, who is a BSVI Senior specialist operating out of the Zanesville area, described her philosophy and techniques for working with newly blinded seniors. Rachel Powell, herself a blind senior and first-time convention attendee, recounted her travel experiences, which have taken her to almost all the Continents, including Antarctica, by simulator in New Zealand. She also discussed some of her early experiences with vision loss. Wendy Sherwood, the final speaker, demonstrated some low-tech equipment.

Friday afternoon was not only eye-opening but fast-paced as well. The Ohio Division of the National Association to Promote the Use of Braille hosted a class in Braille reading; three first-time conventioneers took advantage of this service. Closely following were seminars for parents of blind children and for those interested in learning more about NFB philosophy.

Friday evening saw no slackening of activity: following the 6 p.m. Italian buffet and technology discussion sponsored by the Parents of Blind Children Division, audience and participants alike enjoyed a talent show. Three groups also conducted meetings: the Resolutions and Nominating Committees and the NAPUB Division. The evening concluded with a hospitality reception for everyone.

'Twas 7 A.M., Saturday, November 3, and many creatures were stirring: the At-Large Chapter (Formerly Members-At-Large) held a breakfast meeting to revise their constitution, and the Parents of Blind Children Division hosted both a breakfast meeting for parents and a ?Cool Teens? breakfast conducted by college students for the older blind kids.

By 9 a.m. all creatures had stirred and were assembled in Cascade Rooms A and B for the opening of the first convention session. Jack Fenton, Mayor of Zanesville, brought greetings from his city and wished all attendees well. Tribute was then paid to Elizabeth Haag, who missed her first convention since 1967 because of a fall. Roll call showed all chapters to be present with all relevant documentation submitted.

In her national report Ramona Walhof--NFB Secretary--brought greetings from Dr. Maurer. She also described the October 19 groundbreaking ceremonies for the National Training and Research Institute. In addition she furnished the following figures for Ohio?s ranking in Money for the Movement: eighth in PAC, fourth in Associates recruitment, and second in SUN shares.

Next Ron Derry described his positive seminars, which he conducts for elementary-school students. Jake and the Secret Code, a video describing a boy?s learning about blindness by getting lost, was then shown. He meets Curtis Chong while walking around the National Center for the Blind and finds new perspectives on blindness.

The morning?s program continued with a four-member panel that discussed what consumers and counselors should expect of each other: Patti Burkhart, BSVI Vocational Development Specialist; Marilyn Perrin, BSVI Counselor; Karen Barnett, BSVI Rehabilitation Teacher serving seniors; and Barbara Corner, Staff Attorney for the Client Assistance Program, who discussed the steps in resolving disputes between counselors and consumers.

The time between 12 noon and 2 p.m. on convention day is commonly referred to as recess; with this convention that was a misnomer. Four groups held working lunch meetings: Parents of Blind Children Division, Students, Diabetics, and Guide Dog Committee met and transacted business.

Jeff Lytle, Vice President of Media Relations for Bank One, opened the afternoon session with his remarks. Ohio now has twenty-six talking ATM?s located in Cincinnati, Columbus, Akron, Newark, and Lancaster. To date Bank One has spent $1.5 million for talking ATM?s. For blind users operating these machines, information about individual accounts is conveyed through headsets to assure privacy.

David Kennedy, Director of Legislative Affairs, Office of the Ohio Secretary of State, discussed access to voting machines for blind Ohioans: the goal is to have one accessible voting machine in each county located at the Board of Elections, where blind voters will be able to cast absentee ballots independently during the thirty days before each election. This is not an ideal solution, but it is a start.

Bill Hafer, presently serving as Hearings Office Chief Administrative Law Judge for the Social Security Administration, described his very demanding job and then announced that, having proved to himself that blindness was not a bar to his doing it well, he has decided to step back from this job. He has been supervising forty-nine people and is now ready to go back to being simply a law judge again. He talked in detail about blindness simply being one of the characteristics he brings with him when he comes to work each morning.

The next segment of the program concerned different phases of rehabilitation. Jason Ewell described his experiences at the Louisiana Center for the Blind. Ben Green, Assistant Director of the Bureau of Services for the Visually Impaired Business Enterprise Program, said that there are currently 141 B.E. operators throughout Ohio. He also described pending changes in the program. RSC Commissioner Fred Alberini told the group that he was a good listener and emphasized that things in the BE Program would have to be done differently. Amplifying upon this concept, newly appointed ORSC Administrator John Connelly stressed that funding would get tighter and tighter. He went on to define insanity as doing the same things over and over and expecting change. He repeated his promise that there are no plans to combine BVR and BSVI, although of necessity there may be some cross-supervision.

The highlight of the convention--as with all conventions--was the annual banquet. Bob Eschbach was once again the master of ceremonies for this event. Cuyahoga County again won the Gavel Award for the strongest chapter, and Bob Eschbach was presented the Knall-Garwood Award for long and valuable service to the affiliate. In her banquet address Ramona Walhof related what it was like growing up in the Federation. She paid tribute to the many Federationists who have helped her along the way. Our two scholarship winners were introduced and made welcome: Kathleen Denicola, winner of the $1,500 Jennica Ferguson Memorial Scholarship, is majoring in psychology at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio. Rick Schefdore, also majoring in psychology at Lourdes College in Sylvania, Ohio, was awarded a $1,000 scholarship.

The final convention session on Sunday morning was just as spirited as the previous sessions: in his report Eric Duffy, Director of Field Services for NFB-O, reviewed his activities for the past year. These include helping parents to get maximum results from IEP?S, providing testimony about accessible voting machines for the blind, and much more. See his report printed elsewhere in this newsletter.

Six people were elected to the Board of Directors: Annette Anderson, Debbie Baker, Virginia Mann, Richard Payne, Mary Pool, and Ken Velkovich. These six join Crystal McClain and Bruce Peters as at-large-members of the Board.

Two resolutions were unanimously adopted by the convention: Resolution 2001-01 reaffirmed our strong desire that a separate and identifiable bureau serving the blind be maintained, and Resolution 2001-02 encouraged the State Consumer Advisory Council to reduce its membership from thirty-seven members to fifteen and to reduce the number of annual meetings from six to four. These resolutions are also included in this newsletter.

The Convention adjourned with a round of applause for the host chapter, the NFB of Muskingum County. All who attended the fifty-fifth annual convention of the NFB-O agreed that we had had many eye-opening experiences: the Seminar for Seniors, the many speeches concerning the changing face of rehabilitation, and the annual banquet.

During a brief Board of Directors meeting following adjournment, constitutions for the At-Large Chapter and Diabetes Division were approved. The next Board of Directors meetings will be January 26, 2002, and April 20, 2002. I hope to see all of you at the next convention if not before.

Shortly after our last convention I traveled to Canton to examine talking ATM machines at the Diebold Corporation. Curtis Chong and others worked with the company so that they thought they had a pretty good machine. Since Diebold is an Ohio-based company, Mr. Chong thought it might be useful to have an Ohioan provide feedback about the machines. I spent the day testing several machines and giving them my reactions and comments. Both Mr. Chong and the officials at Diebold appreciated the assistance our affiliate was able to provide.

In late November of 2000 we filed suit against the Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) for failure to accommodate blind passengers by calling bus stops. Consider the following quote from the November 30 edition of the Columbus Dispatch: "Buses are important for everyday travel by the blind, but public transit quickly loses its effectiveness when riders can't discern when to get off, say advocates for the blind.

"Most Central Ohio Transit Authority drivers don't announce the names of major intersections and stops along their routes, says the Ohio Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind, which filed a class-action lawsuit against COTA in U.S. District Court last week.

?Obviously, we can't drive cars,' said Eric Duffy, Director of Field Services for the organization in Ohio. The bus system in Columbus is the main reason I moved here from Newark.' But when drivers don't announce their stops, blind passengers can end up exiting at the wrong place, said Duffy, 38, of the North Side."

This action was brought by the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio, working with Ohio Legal Rights. I have participated in a number of telephone calls and a number of meetings trying to resolve this case before it goes to trial. One way or another we will resolve this matter satisfactorily for the blind. We will stay with it until we do. That is the way we always do it in the National Federation of the Blind.

At our last convention we passed a resolution dealing with the Consumer Advisory Council (CAC) of the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission (ORSC). We approved language critical of the Council's recent change to the organization?s bylaws with only a fraction of the body?s membership present and a bare majority in support of the proposed change. This came about as a result of the Council's voting to amend the bylaws so that the chairs of the advisory committees could be appointed by the chair of the Council, not elected by the committees. I also expressed strong doubts about the over-all effectiveness of the State CAC.

At the next CAC meeting I concluded that we were in for an interesting time when the immediate past Chair and the current Chair of the Council as well as the Chair of the Commission showed up for the meeting of the advisory committee for the Bureau of Services for the Visually Impaired. The Federation and I personally took a lot of heat that night. It was an unpleasant meeting, to say the least. But despite the unpleasantness we endured, the committees of the CAC once again elect their own chairs.

In my last report I talked about a meeting the previous summer of the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission which was held in Millersburg, Ohio, a small town deep in the heart of Amish country. This public meeting was interrupted numerous times so that the Commission could go into executive session. Members of the audience were not permitted to speak during the meeting, but we could speak with Commissioners during breaks or over lunch. It was at this meeting that critical decisions about RSC programs were being made.

Again this summer I attended a Commission meeting in Millersburg. But, oh what a different meeting it was. There were no interruptions for executive sessions. Consumers were actually encouraged to participate in the meeting. I believe it was one of the best Commission meetings I have attended. Now, when matters affecting the Business Enterprise or other programs for the blind are discussed by the Commission, it happens in Columbus rather than in an out-of-the-way location that blind people have a difficult time getting to. Did the Federation make this happen singlehandedly? Of course not. But I think this change shows a willingness on the part of the Commission and its chair to listen to our concerns and to work with us in partnership. Change doesn't often happen easily or quickly, but it can and does happen. In the National Federation of the Blind we know how to open new doors and break down old barriers. Sometimes it is done by force, and sometimes it is done by gentle persuasion. No matter the method, we stay focused on our goals until our objectives are met.

This report would not be complete without talking about NEWSLINE? for the Blind. In March 2002, NEWSLINE will become truly a nationwide service. Blind readers from around the country will be able to call a toll-free number and read any newspaper on the NEWSLINE system. This service will be available at no charge for one year. At the end of 2002 each state will be charged $100,000 for the NEWSLINE Service.

The way NEWSLINE is funded will vary among the states. Cheryl Fischer and I met with Jim Gashel, the chair of the State Library of Ohio's Board, library staff, and others to discuss funding options in Ohio. Although we do not have a funding method worked out, we did determine that the State Library of Ohio would be willing to serve as a fiscal agent should we need it to do so.

Jobline for the Blind continues to be available to Ohioans. This service allows blind people to access the job listings currently available through America?s Job Bank, the Internet site operated by the U.S. Department of Labor. Through it a blind person can use a touch-tone telephone to access new job listings every day. The user can create a personal profile which says: I am interested in jobs in blank category and that are within x miles of my home. The Jobline system will store the profile and bring it up for use each time he or she calls until the user changes it. This has made the job-search process considerably easier for blind people. We have said that we are serious about reducing the high unemployment rate faced by the blind, and Jobline is an excellent step in that direction. But the National Federation of the Blind is not prepared to stop there. Jobline is now available to everyone. Using a touch-tone telephone, anyone can now use Jobline. We must make sure that everyone who needs it knows about this service. The toll-free number is 800-414-5748.

The fruit of our labor is yet to be seen, but I have spent a considerable amount of time working on issues related to the Business Enterprise Program. I have worked to solve problems for individual vendors and to address problems that affect the entire program. Jason Ewell wrote an article for the last issue of the Buckeye Bulletin that described the state of the program as we see it. This is the single most important employment program for blind people, so more about it and its problems will be written in future issues of the newsletter.

In the spring of this year Shelbi Johnson and I helped Bank One debut its talking ATM machines to the public. I appeared on at least one Columbus television station while using and talking about the new machine. I also talked with a number of reporters about this new project for Bank One and its importance to blind people. A list of Bank One locations with talking ATMs appears elsewhere in this newsletter.

We are not yet finished with the subject of talking machines. In late August I began participating in meetings of the Election System Study Committee. This committee was chaired by the Ohio Secretary of State and was comprised of several members of the General Assembly and elected officials. Though they did not get our name right, here is what the final report said: "Eric Duffy of the Ohio Federation for the Blind testified to the particular challenge faced by blind voters when casting a secret ballot. Mr. Duffy explained that, when he was young, one of his teachers encouraged him to vote from an early age. `What she didn't say was that it wasn't possible for a blind person to cast a secret ballot,' explained Mr. Duffy.

"To address this issue and others surrounding accessibility, the Secretary of State should consider purchasing a limited number of DRE voting machines that are the most fully accessible devices on the market. These machines should be stationed at each county board of elections to provide voters with disabilities multiple accessibility options-including the ability to cast a secret ballot without assistance."

Though this doesn't give us all that we need or want in the way of voting technology, it is a beginning. We have begun our educational campaign for accessible voting machines. I don't know where it will go from here, but we can be proud of what we have accomplished thus far. As far as I can tell, we were the only organization to testify about the needs of the blind.

Shortly before the national convention in Philadelphia, Shelbi Johnson and I provided testimony for a blind father who was told by the court that he must have supervised visitations with his son because he is blind. Among other bizarre questions, the attorney for the mother asked this blind father how he would know the difference between a can of soda and a can of oil. Though the court has not made a final ruling, the blind father and his attorney were glad to have us on their side. The court had appointed a guardian adlitum whose opinion I know for a fact changed during the trial. He was the one who recommended supervised visitation in the beginning. By the end of our testimony he said that he no longer believed supervised visitation was necessary. This father was referred to us by the Vision Center of Central Ohio. He said that the Vision Center told him that, if anyone could help, the National Federation of the Blind could.

I continue to do what I can to be helpful to those using adaptive technology for the blind. Although this service must be limited, we can provide it better than any other organization in the state. We now get calls from school systems, government agencies at all levels, and of course individuals asking questions about adaptive technology for the blind. This did not happen overnight. We have earned the reputation of knowing what we are talking about and being willing to help.

Early this summer I spent two days with the staff of Universal Low Vision Aids and a Vice President of Freedom Scientific to discuss how to give customers better products and better support. Among other things I said I believed that the new Millennium Products from Freedom Scientific were too noisy for note-taking in classrooms or meetings. In late December Freedom Scientific will be coming out with a new case and new keys in order to solve this problem. Did we bring about this change of heart on our own? Of course not. But Dessie Page of Universal Low Vision Aids will be the first to tell you that our involvement was critical in accomplishing this and other changes.

This spring Misty and I attended the meeting of the Cincinnati Chapter and talked about a variety of issues with the new Director of the Clovernook Center for the Blind. How we are able to affect that organization as a whole depends in large measure on the work of the Cincinnati Chapter, but we did what we could to educate the new Director about the position of the National Federation of the Blind concerning NAC, video description, and other issues.

We also attended a spaghetti dinner sponsored by the National Federation of the Blind of Miami Valley and at least two meetings of the Muskingum County Chapter. The dinner was both a fund-raiser and educational opportunity for the Miami Valley Chapter.

The National Federation of the Blind of Ohio continues to operate a Web site, which provides an excellent opportunity to spread our positive message about blindness to the public. More Americans are jumping onto the information super highway all the time. Therefore it is important for us to have a presence on the Web. We are continually increasing the amount and variety of information about blindness available on our page, and Barbara and I steadily answer inquiries and pleas for help from around the world. It goes without saying that our page is completely accessible.

In addition to the ORSC Consumer Advisory Council, I continue to serve on the Advisory Committee for the Talking Book Program, the Advisory Network for the Ohio Client Assistance Program (CAP), and the Protection and Advocacy of Individual Rights Program (PAIR). I also work closely with the Ohio Legal Rights Service on a number of other issues.

This year I provided testimony in support of the RSC and Library budgets. Once again we were the only consumer organization of the blind that appeared at these hearings.

Crystal McClain and the Parents of Blind Children Division continue to make a substantial difference in the lives of blind children here in Ohio. In addition to the sound advice that Crystal and other members of the division offer to parents of blind children, we had a musical Easter egg hunt and a family camping weekend this year. The campout does seem to get bigger and better each year.

I cannot conclude this report without talking about the 2002 convention of this organization. Next year we will be at the Sheraton Suites of Cuyahoga Falls during the first full weekend of November. The room rates in this hotel begin at well over $100 per night. Yet we have them for $59 plus tax. This is the finest hotel we have ever had for a convention. Mary Pool will be writing more about this in an upcoming issue of the newsletter, but I couldn't resist mentioning it here. What other organization of our size could command such a room rate?

I have talked a great deal about our accomplishments during the past year. I now want to take a minute to talk about the challenges of the future. There are certainly many, but the rewards for all blind people can be great. If we all do our part, the future will find the organized blind movement stronger than any of us can now imagine.

We must find new and better ways of funding our programs. We must all make a concerted effort to make the best possible use of the resources we have available to us today. We must find a way to fund this new, expanded NEWSLINE for the Blind Program.

We have a technology bill that we must begin working on early in the coming year. Our effort to have accessible voting machines in every precinct must continue. There is much more to do in the General Assembly. If we are to be successful, we must have the help of every local chapter. I call upon all chapter presidents to invite elected officials to chapter meetings. Get to know them and help them to learn about the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio.

If we do all of these things and do them well, we will be true to each other and to future generations of the blind. I am confident that we will do all of this and much more in the years ahead. As I have said before, none of us can know what the future holds for us as an organization. We do know one thing for certain, however; if we continue to work together, we have a bright and prosperous future ahead of us. Join with me, and we can make it all come true.

Resolutions adopted by the Convention of the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio become the policy of the organization. These policies instruct the President and Board of Directors how to proceed in specific matters as they carry out the business of the organization between conventions. This year we considered two resolutions dealing with different programs and policies of the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission. Here they are:

Resolution 2001-01

WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind firmly believes in the importance of separate and identifiable service-delivery systems if blind people are to receive high-quality, meaningful rehabilitation enabling the greatest number of them to become gainfully employed; and WHEREAS, Mississippi State University's Center on Low Vision and Blindness has done research and gathered data supporting this contention; and WHEREAS, the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission (ORSC) has stated unequivocally to the public and to its own staff that the Bureau of Services for the Visually Impaired (BSVI) and the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation (BVR) will not merge; and WHEREAS, in an effort to cut costs during the current severe funding crisis, the Commission is beginning to make personnel decisions designating a single individual to supervise area personnel in both bureaus; and WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio expressed serious reservations about the implications of this pattern in the discussion of the Portsmouth office at the July Commission meeting--reservations which appear to have been ignored or dismissed by the Commission based on its recent comments and decisions: Now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, by the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio in convention assembled this fourth day of November, 2001, in the City of Zanesville, Ohio, that this organization again express its grave reservations about any action by the Commission which in either reality or appearance robs BSVI of its separate identity; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the President of this organization be instructed if necessary to send a letter to those involved expressing these concerns and urging that no additional supervisory staff consolidation occur; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NFB of Ohio chapters take seriously the looming threat to separate and identifiable services for blind Ohioans and do everything in their power to educate their members, other BSVI consumers, and agency staff about the importance of preserving and improving the quality of the specific services and advice blind people receive to achieve full rehabilitation and effective employment; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call upon the American Council of the Blind, the Ohio Blind Vendors, and all other advocacy organizations and agencies concerned about quality rehabilitation services for blind people to join with us in a strong and united effort to preserve identifiable services and knowledgeable, experienced supervision of those serving blind Ohioans.

Following the convention there seemed to be some confusion about what this resolution actually called for. In order to clarify our position on this matter, President Pierce sent the following letter to the ORSC Administrator:

November 20, 2001

John Connelly
Administrator
Rehabilitation Services Commission
400 E. Campus View Blvd.
Columbus, OH 43235-4604

Dear John:

Enclosed with this letter you will find a copy of Resolution 2001-01 passed by the convention of the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio on Sunday, November 4, 2001. This resolution was considered carefully and was intentionally written to give me a great deal of flexibility in determining what use the organization should make of it. The NFB of Ohio recognizes that in future the Commission must consider more carefully than ever the way rehabilitation and other services to blind people are provided since state and federal funding is now tighter than ever before. We also recognize that the Commission is planning for the future in order to act responsibly and to be sure that the maximum amount of money can be devoted to case services. We applaud these efforts, but we also encourage you to take serious steps to involve consumers in the actual decision-making process. We have not taken a stand against combining the Northwest Area managers' positions since we understand that this is a pilot project, and we are willing to observe how it goes. We do, however, still oppose consolidation of staff positions in general, particularly without direct consultation with and involvement of consumer organizations in the decisions. We recognize that changes must be made in the way BSVI personnel are supervised, but we think that we can play a constructive role in planning those changes. We would like to be invited to the table as new ideas are being discussed. When staff members come to us saying, "Here's what we plan to do; what do you think?" by then it is too late. In my opinion we do not have to take further action on this resolution except to publish it in our newsletter as an action of this convention and to educate our members about the importance of protecting separate and identifiable services for blind Ohioans. No matter what we do with it, the resolution serves as part of the record we are building trying to insure that separate bureaus are always maintained and to make it clear that we have asked the Commission and its staff for greater involvement for the NFB in planning and supporting good service delivery to the blind. I am very pleased to have received your invitation to take part in the upcoming discussions about the pilot program in the Northwest. I will begin, at least, as the NFB representative, though, if the time constraints are too great, I may have to pass the torch to Eric Duffy. I also hope to hear from you or Bill Casto about further NFB participation in broader discussions about alternatives to combining bureau positions and blending supervision lines and case loads. As always I look forward to working with you toward positive and constructive change to improve services to Ohio's blind and disabled citizens.

Cordially,

Barbara Pierce

Resolution 2001-02

WHEREAS, under federal law the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission (ORSC) is exempt from the requirement to maintain a state rehabilitation advisory council because of the structure of the Commission; and WHEREAS, despite this exemption we commend the Commission for its support of consumerism by maintaining a statewide Consumer Advisory Council (CAC); and WHEREAS, members of the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio who have served as CAC members have long maintained that the council is too large and meets too frequently and that bigger is not always better; and WHEREAS, in the current fiscal crisis facing ORSC, the CAC is the only agency program that appears not to have received a budget cut; and WHEREAS, the CAC has always had difficulty identifying and keeping thirty-seven truly qualified members: Now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, by the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio in convention assembled this fourth day of November, 2001, in the City of Zanesville, Ohio, that this organization call upon the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission to maintain the CAC at a membership of about fifteen rather than the current membership of thirty-seven; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization call upon the CAC to become more responsible with taxpayer funds by meeting no more than four times a year unless special circumstances make it necessary to do so; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the President of this organization be instructed to send a letter with a copy of this resolution to the ORSC Administrator, the members of the Commission, and the Chairperson of the CAC or take any other action she deems necessary.

October 26, 2001
Richard Bird
6991 York Road
Parma Heights, OH 44130

Dear Mr. Bird:

More than a year ago the National Federation of the Blind of Ohio worked closely with blind vendors and other organizations of the blind to preserve the Business Enterprise Program when its very existence appeared to be threatened. Together we were able to get the Commission to agree to spread funding cuts over a longer period of time. We also provided the Commission with a real education about the program and the commitment of blind Ohioans to protect this very valuable source of good jobs for blind people. At the August 2000 Commission meeting several operators pledged publicly to work cooperatively with the agency to find new ways to fund the program. Many operators also said that they believed all operators should and could meet general business expectations and abide by the standards applied to privately run businesses similarly situated. At the close of that meeting I was optimistic about the future of the BE Program. Over the past year I have become increasingly concerned about the working relationship between the OVRC and the Commission. Very few changes to protect the future of the program seem to have occurred. I understand that the OVRC has taken the position that the agency alone bears responsibility for funding the program and that the operators have no responsibility to generate new sources of funding or ways of cutting costs. Though it is true that neither Federal nor State law assigns this responsibility to the operators, it seems to me that refusing to participate in such efforts flies directly in the face of the concept of active participation. Active participation is a right granted by Federal regulation. With true and important rights come responsibilities. In order to keep and increase the right we have to control our own destinies, we must accept the responsibility that comes with such rights. Active participation must be a genuine give-and-take process. It cannot simply be used as a delaying tactic or a way of killing an undesirable but legal and necessary change. At the same time the agency may not deny active participation for the sake of expediency. I am sure that everyone struggling with this crisis would prefer that the BE Program be exempted from budget cuts. However, in today's political and economic climate we must all do some serious soul-searching in order to determine what sacrifices can be made without harming blind vendors or rehabilitation consumers. Failure to agree on an out-contracting policy and other programmatic changes will only hurt the program in the long-run. It seems to me that the OVRC has had more opportunity for active participation in the past two years than ever before. We should all rejoice in this fact and take advantage of the opportunity provided to demonstrate the sophistication and creativity of blind business people in working with staff to solve difficult and dangerous problems. If in fact my understanding of what is happening is accurate and the relationship between the Committee and the agency is not as collegial and constructive as it should be, we must all do what we can to remedy the situation. Both the Committee and the agency must consider seriously their motives for the actions they have taken thus far and determine whether or not they should chart a different course given all that is at stake for blind people. I believe that the agency has failed to pursue aggressively the priorities established under both Federal and State laws. However, thus far the Commission has held fast to its promise not to cut the BE budget any more deeply or quickly than agreed upon in August of 2000. This to me demonstrates trustworthiness on the part of the Commission and should be commended since the fiscal crisis is now more serious than it was a year ago. We are willing to work with the OVRC, the Ohio Blind Vendors, the Commission, and others to preserve and strengthen the program. But we must resign ourselves to the fact that funding cuts are inevitable no matter how undesirable they may be. I look forward to the opportunity for Eric Duffy to work with you and others to develop a serious plan for creating a brighter future for blind vendors.

Cordially,

Barbara Pierce

cc: Jim Cyrus
Ben Green
Eric Duffy

Why this letter generated a vitriolic reaction from vendors I do not understand. But for our part I can say that we are interested in preserving and strengthening the BE Program, and we are willing to work constructively with anyone else interested in doing so. Though we are willing to work together, we are not willing to engage in pointless actions. For example, I have been asked why we won't go to the legislature and demand that the cuts to the BE Program be restored. The Ohio General Assembly does not instruct a state agency specifically how to spend the state funds it is given, and never will it address how federal dollars are to be spent. In a time of deep budget cuts no additional money will be given to any program that is not necessary for public safety. Also we are not prepared to act on unsubstantiated accusations. We have been told that Commissioner Fred Alberini plans to give a large vending company (AVI) a part of the Business Enterprise Program and that Alberini and AVI are connected to the Mafia. We have been asked why we are not investigating this, but we have not been given a single piece of evidence to support the allegation. The personal attacks that Ben Green, Fred Alberini, Barbara Pierce, and I have endured over the past several months are quite astonishing. Vendors have said that I will not stand up for the rights of vendors because I aspire to be an RSC Commissioner. I have no such aspiration. I have been told that the NFB will not stand up to the Commission because we are in their pocket. But again I ask where are the facts to support such claims? The record will show that the NFB of Ohio has not received funding of any kind from the Rehabilitation Services Commission in the last two years. At one time the NFB of Ohio received funding for NEWSLINE? for the Blind. The grant for that service expired quite some time ago, and since then NEWSLINE in Columbus has been paid for by the Affiliate. Some time ago we received money from ORSC to help first-time convention attendees get to national and state conventions. We have not received those funds in at least two years. Jobline has always been funded through the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services. I can say unequivocally that we are currently receiving no funds from RSC. I repeat: we cannot be bought, and we will not sell out. I also believe that Fred Alberini and Ben Green came to the BE program with a sincere desire to make a real difference in the lives of blind people and in the most effective employment program for the blind in Ohio. Whether or not they are able to do that will depend on their own abilities and the willingness of operators to work with them for the good of the program. We are willing to take any reasonable proposal for change to the Commission and its staff. We are prepared to ask tough questions and demand answers when necessary. We look forward to working with operators and the agency to build a better program for blind vendors. But we cannot do this alone. When the very existence of the program was threatened in 2000, many groups and individuals joined forces to worked in cooperation and harmony. That must happen again if we are to emerge from these difficult times with a better program for blind vendors.

Most of us cringe when we hear about the in trends of today: body-piercing, tattoos, and eating or drinking bizarre substances. While the vast majority of us did not engage in such potentially self-destructive activities when we were young, many of the fads in which we participated had their ludicrous side. Those of us who attended the Ohio State School for the Blind during the forties and fifties were no exception. For several weeks we feverishly traded comic books. Never mind that many of us were totally blind and couldn?t read them; we just had to have one. I remember being the proud possessor of ?Blue Boy.? I never read it and didn?t know if he derived his name from being out in the cold too long or if it referred to his emotional state. The funny book was in mint condition. But nevertheless I eagerly exchanged it for a tattered Gene Autrey comic book. After all, he was the ?King of the Cowboys?--or at least CBS said that he was. Another fascinating fad was to own a flashlight. This applied to the totally blind students as well as those with some vision. ?Yeah man, gotta have a flashlight? swept OSSB shortly before Christmas in the late forties. Most of us could not afford a flashlight, so we ordered them from the Lions Club. Each year the Columbus Lions held a party for us, and the students were permitted two choices of what they would like for Christmas (within reason, of course). Since we were caught up in the flashlight frenzy, some of us used our first choice to order one of these coveted items. Naturally, not long after Christmas we wondered why we had done such a foolish thing. It just goes to show that fads sweep all strata of society; some are more foolish than others, and less life-threatening.

The following is a list of Bank One talking ATM locations. We must let blind people know that these machines are available and encourage them to use this new equipment. This is the only way we have to encourage Bank One and other banks to install more of these machines. Here is the list: Bank One talking ATM locations:
Akron--Akron Square, 1615 S Arlington St (2 ATMs)
Athens--Athens Main, 2 S Court St
Cincinnati--Cincinnati Downtown, 45 E 4th St
Cincinnati-- Mt Lookout, 822 Delta Ave
Columbus--Forest Park, 1325 E Dublin-Granville R
Columbus--Clintonville Big Bear, 2801 N High St
Columbus--Polaris Kroger, 1177 Polaris Parkway
Columbus--Great Southern Big Bear, 3811 S High St
Columbus--Lincoln Village Big Bear, 4870 W Broad St
Columbus--Short North, 677 N High St
Columbus--Northwest, 2700 Bethel Rd
Columbus--University, 1894 N High St
Columbus--Downtown, 65 E State St
Columbus--Downtown, 100 E Broad St
Columbus--West, 3100 W Broad Street
Columbus--German Village, 833 S High St
Columbus--Eastland Shopping Center, 2475 S Hamilton Road
Columbus--East, 3200 E Broad St
Gahanna--130 N Hamilton Rd
Heath--30th St and Hebron Rd
Hilliard--4056 E Main St
Lancaster--1730 E Main St
Newark--1212 N 21st St
Reynoldsburg--7112 E Main St
Westerville--77 Huber Village Blvd

Computer Consultant: We have been asked to carry the following announcement: Cory Jackson has a degree in Micro Computers and is very knowledgeable in the field of adaptive technology for the blind. Jackson is excellent at trouble-shooting and solving most computer-related problems. Phone him toll-free at 866-222-9046, or e-mail him at .