[Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
Michael Peterson
its_mike at sbcglobal.net
Fri Mar 27 23:02:18 PDT 2009
Hi Jonathan.
I wanted to respond to you, Ken and Robert.
In reading both Robert and Ken's responses one thing stands out concerning this collection of funds and it's politically a hot issue right now. The NFBC wants "Transparency" as to what these funds are going to specifically be used for. Other issues there to but in the language getting transparency in to the response is a good Idea I think. One thin.
The Letter of response I saw by one of the ladies on this list also spells out very clearly why this legislation is not good. I can try to resend it if it passed you by those things happen in email sometimes.
Ken,
I wanted to point out for your benefit A PR or legisltive person working with a group often will want to get a good sense of the groups feelings on a subject even if he /she is aware of what they are. Maybe on the national level you won't notice it and sometimes in state affiliates you might not because it could be really esy for the administration to just promote legislation without input but Jonathan seems to be really trying to get input, he's not just asking the members to act as it's arms and legs.
and we should be careful when telling our leaders to "be a person." That's not uniting. United we stand divided we fall and had that remark been made to you from Jonathan I would have said the same thing.
We're on the same team.
God Bless:
Mike Peterson
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan Lyens
To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
Hi Ken,
Thank you for your comments. Your “PS Mr. Lynes, you know exactly what this is about so be a person.” I find troubling.
All my email was intended to do was to was to encourage some level of discussion. We can’t simply have this knee-jerk reaction of “anything government ran we don’t like”. We as an organization may have very legitimate issues with the Board and/or with this bill. If that is the case, let’s put those on the table. Let’s make our voices heard on a state-wide level.
I don’t know what the will of the affiliate is around this issue, but I think we have to have something a bit more articulated than “I don’t like it because they’re trying to divide and conquer”. Whatever our stance is, either in favor or otherwise, let’s articulate it well and back it up with facts. That should be the letter we send regarding this bill.
If we continue to say a simple no to anything we are confronted with, without any support for what we believe, guess what. Those in power, such as the board, will very soon stop coming to us asking for our opinion.
You can tell me to “be a person” as much as you want, but it doesn’t detract from the need for the NFBC to take a well crafted stance. I’m happy to help do that, but I need real factually based reasons for our stance.
Respectfully,
Jonathan Lyens
Jonathan T. Lyens MPA
Email: jonathan at lyens.com
Fax: (321) 256-8896
Skype: jlyens
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org [mailto:cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org] On Behalf Of Ken Volonte
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:19 PM
To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
The concern I have with the letter ostensibly from Mary is the confusion it was meant to cause. This is a strategy on the part of the guide dog board to divide and conquer.
If this were just a question of the licensing fee, I have no problem with that so long as the board understands that its jurisdiction is limited to California schools. This is more than that. This is funneling extorted money to a specific school. If this is something else, then the bill needs to be more clear. A fee by any other name is still a tax.
This next point may sound picky, but it's relevant to the argument. The language in the original charter for the Guide Dog Board is wrong. The board was not really set up to deal with "maverick schools", It was set up to deal with fly by night trainers who were charging returning veterans to train guide dogs for them. By the way, there are still trainers who are doing this and the board doesn't seem to care. I gotta go. PS Mr. Lynes, you know exactly what this is about so be a person.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan Lyens
To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 10:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
Hi All,
I’ve heard through this discussion that there are people that have “concerns” about the draft letter sent. I’m wondering if examples of where those concerns are in the letter can be pointed out. I think if we have examples of people’s concerns, we can have a more in depth discussion.
I am not saying how I feel about this letter, because I truly don’t know. I have not had a chance to read the legislation it is in support of. But, I’d like to hear colleagues tangible concerns in order to discuss.
Respectfully,
Jonathan
Jonathan T. Lyens MPA
Email: jonathan at lyens.com
Fax: (321) 256-8896
Skype: jlyens
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org [mailto:cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org] On Behalf Of Shannon L. Dillon
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 10:44 AM
To: CAGDU
Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
Sorry for the confusion.
SHANNON L. DILLON
> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 08:38:22 -0700
> From: rstigile at sbcglobal.net
> To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
> Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
> Hello Shannon,
> I appreciate you letting me know that.
> I was quite concerned when I saw that letter.
> Thanks,
>
> Robert Stigile
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Shannon L. Dillon" <shannonldillon at hotmail.com
> >To: CAGDU <cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >Date sent: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:48:09 -0700
> >Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
>
> >Hi Robert:
>
>
>
> >No, Mary did not write the letter. Antonette, or someone from
> the board, wrote a draft letter that they wanted the NFB to sign
> onto. They contacted Mary about signing onto the letter. I
> think they must have provided that draft letter like we provide
> draft letters sometimes to people to make it easier for them to
> support something. Like the draft letter we provided in support
> of Fred Schroeder this year. Anyway, Mary forwarded the letter
> onto to me to share with CAGDU and respond to. She did not
> support the letter. She said that she has told Antonette that
> she does not think we can support the Board. I don't know why
> Mary's name is on the letter. Maybe whoever wrote the draft
> included it on there. But Mary did not write the letter
> supporting the board.
>
>
>
> >SHANNON L. DILLON
>
>
>
> >> Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:49:12 -0700
> >> From: rstigile at sbcglobal.net
> >> To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
> >> Hello Shannon,
> >> Ok, I am confused, I saw a recent post that you sent, that
> showed
> >> a letter from Mary in support of this bill.
> >> Did Mary write that letter, it has her name on it from what I
> >> see.
> >> Thanks,
>
> >> Robert Stigile
>
>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>From: "Shannon L. Dillon" <shannonldillon at hotmail.com
> >>>To: CAGDU <cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >>>Date sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:44:59 -0700
> >>>Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
>
> >>>I do not support the letter. I think they make a lot of
> >> statements that they cannot back up in that letter. I think we
> >> definitely need to let Senator Padilla know that we do not
> >> support it.
>
> >>>SHANNON L. DILLON
>
>
>
> >>>> Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 15:12:27 -0700
> >>>> From: rstigile at sbcglobal.net
> >>>> To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>> I am not sure what gave them that idea, but I do not support
> >> this
> >>>> letter.
> >>>> I would like to know, what the rest of you think.
> >>>> Thanks,
>
> >>>> Robert Stigile
>
>
> >>>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>From: "tina thomas " <tinadt at sbcglobal.net
> >>>>>To: <cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >>>>>Date sent: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 14:44:59 -0700
> >>>>>Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
> >>>>>Hey Shannon- Thanks for the clarification. I wonder what gave
> >>>> the board the
> >>>>>idea that NFBC would support this bill.
> >>>>>Tina
>
>
> >>>>>"Trust your own instinct. Your mistakes might as well be your
> >>>> own instead of
> >>>>>someone else's."
> >>>>>- Billy Wilder
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> _____
>
> >>>>>From: cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org [mailto:cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org]
> >>>> On Behalf
> >>>>>Of Shannon L. Dillon
> >>>>>Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 2:41 PM
> >>>>>To: CAGDU
> >>>>>Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
>
> >>>>>No, Mary did not write this letter of support. It is a draft
> >>>> letter written
> >>>>>by the State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind. They were hoping
> >>>> we would
> >>>>>sign on to it.
>
> >>>>>SHANNON L. DILLON
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> _____
>
> >>>>>From: tinadt at sbcglobal.net
> >>>>>To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >>>>>Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 11:46:53 -0700
> >>>>>Subject: Re: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
>
> >>>>>Hi Shannon- I need some clarification on this letter of support
> >>>> by the NFBC.
> >>>>>Mary did not write this letter of support?
> >>>>>Tina
>
> >>>>>"Trust your own instinct. Your mistakes might as well be your
> >>>> own instead of
> >>>>>someone else's."
> >>>>>- Billy Wilder
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> _____
>
> >>>>>From: cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org [mailto:cagdu-bounces at nfbcal.org]
> >>>> On Behalf
> >>>>>Of Shannon L. Dillon
> >>>>>Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 11:25 AM
> >>>>>To: cagdu at nfbcal.org
> >>>>>Subject: [Cagdu] FW: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
>
> >>>>>Sorry, everyone, this time the e-mail includes the attachments I
> >>>> meant to be
> >>>>>included last time. Don't know what happened before....
>
> >>>>>SHANNON L. DILLON
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> _____
>
> >>>>>From: mwillows at sbcglobal.net
> >>>>>To: shannonldillon at hotmail.com
> >>>>>Subject: Fw: SB 475 (Padilla)
> >>>>>Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 23:39:34 -0700
>
>
>
> >>>>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>>>From: Antonette_Sorrick at dca.ca.gov
> >>>>>To: mwillows at sbcglobal.net
> >>>>>Cc: bbarragan at lif.org ; acandela at dor.ca.gov
> >>>>>Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 3:44 PM
> >>>>>Subject: SB 475 (Padilla)
>
>
> >>>>>Mary:
>
> >>>>>This e-mail is a follow up to the voicemail I left on your phone
> >>>> today. The
> >>>>>Board has a bill number for its annual school renewal payment
> >>>> legislation.
> >>>>>SB 475 (Padilla) will set the statutory limit on the Board's
> >>>> school renewal
> >>>>>payment while setting the exact rate via regulation. The bill
> >>>> can be
> >>>>>accessed online at
> >>>>>http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_475
> >>>>><http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_475&sess
> >>>> =CUR&house=
> >>>>>B&site=sen> &sess=CUR&house=B&site=sen
>
> >>>>>I have also attached a word document of the legislation along
> >>>> with an
> >>>>>amended draft letter of support from NFB, California. Thank you
> >>>> for your
> >>>>>consideration and have a wonderful weekend.
>
> >>>>>Antonette Sorrick
> >>>>>Executive Officer
> >>>>>State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind
> >>>>>1625 North Market Blvd., Suite S-202
> >>>>>Sacramento, CA 95834
> >>>>>(916) 574-7825 phone
> >>>>>(916) 574-7829 fax
> >>>>>Antonette_Sorrick at dca.ca.gov
> >>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
> >>>>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >>>>>Version: 8.5.283 / Virus Database: 270.11.29/2023 - Release Date:
> >>>> 03/26/09
> >>>>>07:12:00
>
>
>
>
> >>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
> >>>>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >>>>>Version: 8.5.283 / Virus Database: 270.11.29/2023 - Release Date:
> >>>> 03/26/09
> >>>>>07:12:00
>
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Cagdu mailing list
Cagdu at nfbcal.org
https://www.nfbcal.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/cagdu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Cagdu mailing list
Cagdu at nfbcal.org
https://www.nfbcal.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/cagdu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://nfbcal.org/pipermail/cagdu/attachments/20090327/f686e938/attachment.html
More information about the Cagdu
mailing list