[tabi] Fw: [fcb-l] Fw: Re: Fw: president's report at fcb convention

  • From: "Easy Talk" <Easytalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <tabi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 08:49:17 -0400

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Easy Talk 
To: fcb-l@xxxxxxx 
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 8:40 AM
Subject: Fw: [fcb-l] Fw: [tabi] Re: Fw: president's report at fcb convention

Wendy you are so on target.  To strengthen your point, out of over 730 clients 
that were sent to lighthouses last year only 12 were gainfully employed not to 
mention the millions in contracts it cost the state.   DBS could just give the 
money to the clients and not have to worry about them again. For the 12 who 
were employed the lighthouses receive an additional  $5,400 if the employment 
last 90 days above all the money they receive for actual training.  Sure wish I 
could get a contract like that.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Easy Talk 
To: fcb-l@xxxxxxx 
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2013 7:47 AM
Subject: [fcb-l] Fw: [tabi] Re: Fw: president's report at fcb convention

----- Original Message ----- 
From: wendy.hoss@xxxxxxxxxxx 
To: tabi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 6:31 PM
Subject: [tabi] Re: Fw: [fcb-l] president's report at fcb convention


Well said and I agree.  It is my personal opinion that FAASB and the 
Lighthouses be excluded from the hiring process altogether.  It is so unethical 
that those who stand gain financially from their friend getting hiring, should 
even participate.  Money, that is what this whole situation is all about, the 
Lighthouses want to continue their overthrow of DBS and continue to become 
wealthy from taxpayer dollars which are supposed to be used to assist citizens 
with blindness to become employed. As evidenced by the last FAASB cronie to 
become director FAASB and the Lighthouses do not care about the good of 
citizens with blindness, they just want a friend that will keep the fat 
contracts coming.   Is there a method for impeaching Mr. Edwards, if so I 
encourage the board to move forward with that option.  Also, I think we should 
all send letters to the governor denouncing his demands. Although, I must say 
that I would support a request that current DBS employees not be considered as 
most of those in the state office were promoted or brought on by Joyce and can 
therefore, not be trusted.  I would support Craig in his application for the 
job, while he may have been a supporter of NFB at least you knew where he was 
coming from, seemed to operate ethically,  and you knew he supported the 


From: "Easy Talk" <Easytalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: tabi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 6:18:19 PM
Subject: [tabi] Fw: [fcb-l] president's report at fcb convention

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Easy Talk 
To: fcb-l@xxxxxxx 
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 5:43 PM
Subject: [fcb-l] president's report at fcb convention

Let me start by saying my remarks are solely my opinion and that I am not 
currently a member of FCB and hopefully my remarks will help you all understand 
why I am not.

1.  In Paul's message this morning it is absolutely clear that Paul made a 
decision on his own with out consulting the Executive committee or board in 
regards to his demands to the governors office for the requirements for hiring 
a new director of DBS  To the best of my knowledge.  And since FCB is suppose 
to be a democratic organization     , he is promoting his own political agenda. 
In all my years of involvement with FCB I have never seen or never made such a 
decision with out approval from the board or at least the executive committee 
while I was president regarding such an important issue.  

Hopefully Paul's  demands outlined below will help you understand where I am 
coming from.

1. The new director can not be a former employ who held a higher level position 
in DBS.  As many of you know Craig Kiser has applied for the directors position 
and if this demand is implemented, it would exclude Craig and is intended  to 
do exactly that.   I am not sure if you all are aware but Craig has attempted 
to contact Paul via Email and phone to talk to him and ask for FCB's support of 
which Mr. Edwards has not responded.  What gives him the right to not bring 
Craig's request to FCB? Answer, his own political agenda. In the past this has 
never been a request of FCB.

2.  The new director can not be a current employ of DBS.  See number 3.  In all 
FCB's dealings with the hiring decision of a director, this demand has never 
been a requirement and I have no idea what the purpose of this demand means 
except it is designed to insure that a FAASB applicant has a better chance and 
is meant  to get the position.   I say this because roomer has it that a 
director of one of the larger Lighthouses has applied for the position and is 
supposedly being supported by FCB FAASB and NFBF leaders such as there 
presidents and not necessarily the majority  of what there members have decided 
or want.
Were you ask or did you have any input?  Why should Faasb be included in the 
final decision since they negotiate contracts between the Lighthouses and DBS, 
sounds like a conflict of interest to me. Why didn't mar. Edwards exclude 
current or former directors of Lighthouses since they are the reason we have 
the current mess we have, yet excludes DBS former and current employs of dbs 
since these individuals may be   some of the most experienced  applicants in 
the blindness field  For example Edward Hudson who did an excellent job during 
the town hall meeting.  I have no idea if he is interested in the job but if he 
is should not be excluded by Mr. Edwards own agenda.
Edward got right to the point and addressed the important issues and 
demonstrated his years of experience as director of the center in Daytona.  
3.  FCB will not except a general administrator as the new director and the 
successful applicant must have experience in serving the needs of the blind.
IN the past FCB has never required the director to be blind but has strongly 
encouraged this practice and personally I am for the most qualified person but 
this means FCB is willing to except a sighted director, and what better pool of 
applicants than directors of Lighthouses who are members of FAASB.  Here again, 
this is to open the door for Paul's own agenda with out consideration from FCB. 
 How does a organization of the blind exclude certain blind individuals yet 
opens the door for FAASB lighthouse directors?

4.  Later on in the business meeting, Mr. Edwards took grate pains to say how 
Florida was different than other states in the fact that major consumer 
organizations and FAASB were in agreement and wanted the same things,  My 
question to you all is, Do you know what FAASB's, FCB and NFBF's position 
really is, have you seen an official statement from any of these organizations? 
Has FCB really made an official statement and had proper input to represent the 
actual  majority of it's members. I don't think so. If we allow this to 
continue, Is FCB really affective?

I certainly hope the Governors office is more affective than to allow such 
ridiculous demands made by Mr. Edwards to govern there hiring practices and 
hope that FCB members stand up and not allow this political sabotage to occur. 
It is my intention as a blind citizen to send this message to the governor's 
office and under the current conditions, I encourage you if you agree to do the 

I joined The Florida Council OF The Blind not The Paul Edwards Council FOR The 
blind.  Now I am not a member of either. When are you members going to take 
back the organization you formed 60 years ago.

I am not at this time going to go in to other issues that affected my decision 
to no longer be a member of FCB and I know some of you and Mr. Edwards is aware 
of my concerns However they seem to still be his style of administration.
Very sad  Robert


fcb-l mailing list


fcb-l mailing list

Other related posts: