November 5th, 2019: Ann Arbor Schools' Bond proposal is on the ballot

Information from the AAPS Website: 

Voters in the Ann Arbor Public School District will be asked to consider a bond proposal to upgrade school facilities and sites, enhance existing building security, and provide upgraded and sustainable learning environments throughout our district. 

The bond program scope is based on a comprehensive facility assessment conducted by independent architects and engineers to assess the current and future building needs in our district. The $1 Billion Bond proposal will be used to improve the school district’s infrastructure and learning environments for the next 20 years. 

Here are Frequently Asked questions on the Bond Proposal.

This is an article from Mlive.com with a school-by-school assessment of needs:

Check the health of Ann Arbor Public Schools' 35 buildings ahead of $1B bond vote 
By Martin Slagter | mslagter@mlive.com 

What are school bonds and why do we need them? 

Not wanting to appear ignorant, I am reluctant to ask obvious questions about things that other people seem so confident in knowing. It did occur to me, however, that I had only a vague idea of what a school bond does and why we might need one.

First of all, Michigan is one of only 12 states in the country that does not provide state funding for school infrastructure. 

Our schools are funded primarily by local property taxes, called millages. A mill is 1/1000 of a dollar. Property taxes are computed by multiplying the taxable value of the property by the number of mills levied. 

Major infrastructure improvements to schools are funded by school bonds. A bond is like a mortgage that makes funding available now or in the near future. Bonds are sold as an investment and paid back with interest to bond holders with millage increases that are approved by voters in millage elections. 

I found this article on school bonds that gives a straightforward explanation on how they work and what they do: 

How Do School Bonds Work?
By: Nick Robinson
Reviewed by: Michelle Seidel, B.Sc., LL.B., MBA
Updated November 08, 2018

“School systems don't usually have a lot of extra cash on hand, so when they want to make large capital expenditures like building new facilities or making major repairs, they have to borrow money. School bonds are a way for school districts to borrow money. Investors buy promissory notes like school bonds. The school district gets cash in the short term and agrees to pay the investor back over a fixed period of time.” 

******************************

The AAPS website includes more information, including the estimated cost to homeowners and a schedule of events where the issue will be discussed.

******************************
FYI: Due to the passage of the statewide ballot proposal in November 2018, all eligible and registered voters in Michigan may now request an absent voter ballot without providing a reason. 

See the League of Women Voters "vote 411" Website for personalized voting information.

VOR opposes legislation that will lead to the closure of employment programs for severely disabled

VOR (a Voice Of Reason) “is a national organization that advocates for high quality care and human rights for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.” The organization is unique in supporting individuals who have severe and profound disabilities and their families, especially those who need an institutional level of care. Many of our I/DD family members live in Intermediate Care Facilities for people with I/DD (defined as institutions under Medicaid law) while others live with their families or in community homes. 

VOR is unusual, if not unique, as a national organization that does not receive or seek funding from the federal government. VOR is 100% privately funded and receives more than 95% of its financial support from families of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD). [See The Value of VOR Membership]

As a member of VOR for more than fifteen years, I found a home here for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that I have two adult sons with profound I/DD. With VOR, I am not obliged to follow an ideology that claims that all people with disabilities can live independent lives in their communities, dismissing mention of people like my sons who will never be independent or able to make their own decisions or work in competitive, integrated employment. I do not subscribe to the idea that the quality of my sons’ lives should be measured primarily in terms of how many non-disabled people they come in contact with in their daily lives. This is, in fact, what many federally supported disability organizations are obliged to espouse if they want those federal dollars.

Because VOR relies entirely on the generosity of families and friends, much of the work is done by family “volunteers” (or “draftees”, as is often the case). From time to time, I republish policy statements, commentary, and personal stories from VOR, mostly because they are consistently accurate and well-written and represent voices from the heartland of disability politics that are rarely heard, people with severe and profound disabilities and their families.

The following is a statement of VOR’s opposition to federal bills that include in them the elimination of sub-minimum wage certificates that would lead to the closure of employment programs that serve people with severe disabilities. 

*********************************

Please Oppose the Movement to Eliminate 
Work Centers and 14(c) Wage Certificates for 
Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 

The Raise the Wage Act:
H.R. 582 – Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) S. 150 - Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT)

The Transformation to Competitive Employment Act:
H.R. 873 - Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) S. 260 – Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) 

Thousands of individuals with intellectual disabilities enjoy the opportunity to work in a specialized environment that nurtures them and accommodates their mental, physical and behavioral challenges, while rewarding them with specialized wages that, while not equal to full minimum wages, are appropriate to their level of productivity and their capacity to work. These opportunities rely on specialized wage certificates as provided for under Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The employment usually takes place at facility-based work centers, sometimes referred to as sheltered workshops. These centers provide more than employment. They provide a protected atmosphere suited to the intellectual and behavioral challenges of the individuals who work there. They cater to a higher-needs population, which includes people who may have frequent seizures, who may act out physically, even violently, when stressed, or who may need help toileting or to have their adult diaper changed. This is a specialized environment for a special population.

In the first weeks of the 116th Congress, two bills have been introduced in the House and Senate that would eliminate these employment opportunities for individuals with intellectual disabilities. Proponents of these bills describe them as civil rights issues, asking:

“If a non-disabled person has the right to work for competitive wages, why should a person with intellectual disabilities be denied the right to work for full, competitive wages?”

This appears to be a perfectly reasonable question, until you think of the different forms of disability, and the severity of some intellectual disabilities. Then the matter becomes complicated, as not all disabilities are equal. 

A more accurate question would be:

“If a non-disabled person has the right to work for competitive wages, why should a person  with intellectual disabilities who is capable of working at an equal capacity be denied the right to work for competitive wages? And why should a person who is not capable of working at a competitive capacity be denied the opportunity to perform any work at all?”

Why VOR opposes these bills:

The movement to promote competitive employment for disabled individuals, encompassing people with visual, auditory, and physical disabilities as well as many people with I/DD, is a noble effort, a true civil rights issue that is overdue. As a society, we should be creating opportunities for those who want to work, and who are capable of integrating into the mainstream and working at a competitive level. But the implications of these two bills echo the “one-size-fits-all” mentality that dominates the I/DD system and marginalizes those individuals who do not fit into the “one size” population. “One-size-ism” will never be appropriate disability policy. The I/DD population is too complex and diverse to be treated with simplistic, one-sized solutions.

Both of these bills are aimed at providing competitive, integrated employment opportunities for those capable of achieving this level of employment, but they also insist on eliminating the current opportunities provided for those not capable or not desiring this level of employment.

The thinking behind this movement is that work centers are bad things that limit the individual’s capacity, and that given the opportunity to work in a competitive, integrated environment, all individuals will rise to their full capacity. Proponents of this movement, when forced to admit that some people will be shut out or left behind, speak as though this is an “acceptable consequence” of their plan. It is not. These are human lives. These are not disposable, expendable individuals. These people have families who love them and want the best for them.

There is no reason to accept these “acceptable consequences”, especially when there is no correlation between eliminating 14(c) wage certificates and investing in employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities. 

***************************

The Raise the Wage Act has passed the House of Representatives and was introduced in the Senate. The Transformation to Competitive Employment Act has been introduced in the House and Senate with no other actions taken.

More posts from the DD News Blog on this issue.

Wrightslaw: Ann Arbor Special Education Conference, November 3, 2019

Wrightslaw has been providing information on special education law and policy since at least 1993. Their Website has tons of material on special education with links to original sources so that you can learn directly about the law. They include answers to frequently asked questions from parents. Their materials are not disability specific, which means that they connect you with the underlying principles that are the basis for the federal Individuals with Disabilities Act and anti-discrimination laws that apply to all children with disabilities.

That said, they do charge for conferences and sell books and training manuals on their Website. Other offerings are free and available by signing up or just following links.

*********************************

Wrightslaw Special Education conference in Ann Arbor:

Sunday, November 3, 2019 
10:30 am to 6:30 pm
at Kensington Court Hotel,
3500 S. State St., Ann Arbor, MI 48108

The ticket price is $150.00

Ticket includes: lunch, snack, a Wrightslaw highlighter pen and the three Wrightslaw books which retail for $62.85 - Wrightslaw: Special Education Law, 2nd Edition, Wrightslaw: From Emotions to Advocacy, 2nd Edition, and Wrightslaw: All About IEPs.

To register, go to WWW.DOWNSYNDROMESUPPORTTEAM.ORG/WRIGHTSLAW

Michigan hearings on Community Mental Health: House Appropriations Subcommittee on Health & Human Services

Michigan State Representative Mary Whiteford, Chair of the MI House Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services, has announced a series of hearings on Behavioral Health, Community Mental Health Redesign, and Behavioral Health Integration. These are scheduled for Wednesday mornings, from October 2, 2019 through November 6, 2019: 

10:30 A.M. - 12 P.M.

Room 352

House Appropriations
State Capitol Building

Note that two hearings to receive public input will be held on October 30 and November 6, 2019. Call Mary Whiteford's office at (517) 373-0836 or email MaryWhiteford@house.mi.gov for more information (how much time will you have to testify, what is the signup procedure to register, how will written testimony be handled, etc. ???).

To watch a video recording of the 10/2/19 hearing, go to Video Archives for the MI House of Representatives, scroll down to "Appropriations Health and Human Services - Wednesday, October 02, 2019" and click on "Play Video". Presumably future hearings will also appear here after they have been held.

Here is the full schedule:

House Appropriations Subcommittee on HHS

Wednesday, Oct. 2

History and Overview of Public Behavioral Health Financing in Michigan

Jeff Patton - Kalamazoo CMH CEO

Jim Haveman - Former Director of Dept. of Community Health

Wednesday, October 16

CMH Perspective Benefits and challenges of the CMH, PIHP system including House fiscal analysis of Michigan’s behavioral health carve out
Bob Sheehan/Alan Bolter - Community Mental Health Association of Michigan (CMHAM)

House Fiscal Agency


Wednesday, October 23 

The case for Behavioral Health Integration from the former Medicaid Director of Arizona 
Thomas Betlach - former Arizona Medicaid Director

Wednesday, October 30
Public Input

Wednesday, November 6
Public Input

**********************************************

The Michigan Community Mental Health system serves people with developmental disabilities, mental illness, substance abuse disorders  and children with emotional disturbances. People with DD are a small proportion of the total population served, but DD services represent a proportionately larger part of the CMH budget. This is largely due to the need by many with DD for up to 24/7 home or residential care, the complications of complex medical and behavioral needs, and needed support for families. 

It is often the case, that people with developmental disabilities receive less attention than they should by state legislators, so make sure your voice is heard. 

Bad News/Good News in Michigan’s budget wars

October 1st was the beginning of the 2020 fiscal year in Michigan, which meant that at least 16 different budget bills had to be approved to avoid a government shutdown. The intransigence of the legislature and the Governor’s office in finding a way to iron out entrenched differences was resolved by Governor Whitmer. She used the line item veto to achieve a balanced budget and a maneuver used by former Governor John Engler in the 1990’s to shift money around within departments. Governor Whitmer issued 147 line item vetoes totaling $947 million as a way to restart negotiations with the Republican legislature.

According to an email from DDAdvocates of Western Michigan,

“The bad news is that our Governor has vetoed $1 Billion in budget items. The good news is that Sec 298 was one of the items in the $80 Million MDHHS budget cuts. Presumably, a period of negotiations with the Legislature will commence; this is an opportunity to communicate with your Legislators about the need to delete the 298 funding permanently.”

“Section 298” has been a controversial section of state law that promotes the privatization of community mental health behavioral services, including the social services that allow people with disabilities to live safely in community settings. Medicaid funding that is now administered by local Community Mental Health agencies would be handed over to Medicaid Health Plans that manage the medical side of Medicaid but have little experience in providing residential and other services needed by people with disabilities.

I assume that all local and regional newspapers will be covering this in detail. Here is a summary of the main issues from "Bridge, Michigan's non-partisan, nonprofit news source".