BUSINESS ENTERPRISE PROGRAM OF OREGON SPECIAL MEETING

Date: Wednesday, November 29th, 2017 Time: 3:30 pm

OREGON COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

535 SE 12th Avenue (Portland office)

Conference line: 404-443- 6397 Participant code: 943611#

Agenda • Any of the agenda items listed below may become an action item. • Any of these items may be a conflict of interest.

1. Open Meeting

2. Roll Call

3. Public Comment

4. Proposed Administrative Rules

5. Other Business

6. Adjourn

Verbatim

Hauth: All right. All right, all right. Hi, everybody. So let’s go ahead and get the meeting going and call roll. First of all, thanks for those who have joined in, taken the time out of their day to join in. So we’ll start with the Board. We have Art Stevenson?

Art Stevenson: Here.

Hauth: Do we have Derrick Stevenson? Do we have Derrick Stevenson? Do we have Jerry Bird?

Bird: Here.

Hauth: Hey, Jerry. Do we have Steve Gordon? We have Steve Gordon? We have Steve Jackson? Do we have Steve Jackson? Well, we have myself, but I think we only have three Board members. I don’t think we have a quorum yet. But I know Steve Jackson and both Steve Gordon planned on joining in. Steve was going to be at an eye doctor appointment and travelling. So Art, if you don’t mind taking the rest of the roll and starting open, you know,

public comment or whatever, I’m going to try and reach out to both of those folks. If you would, please. Art? Hello?

Derrick Stevenson: Hello? This is Derrick.

Hauth: Hey, Derrick. Great. Great. Glad for joining. Thanks. Okay. So we’ve just taken roll. There’s four Board members. Who just joined in, please? Okay. Well, we do have a quorum so we’ll go ahead and go down the list of managers. Do we have Lin Jaynes on the line?

Jaynes: Present.

Hauth: Hi, Lin. Do we have Cathy Dominique on the line? Do we have Char Hawkins on the line? Okay. Do we have Sal Barraza on the line? Do we have Tessa Brown on the line? Okay. Do we have Gordon Smith on the line?

Smith: Yes.

Hauth: Hey, Gordon. How about Carole Kinney? Carole Kinney on the line? Okay. Do we have Harold Young on the line? Do we have Lewanda Miranda on the line?

Miranda: Present.

Hauth: Hi, Lewanda. Do we have Celyn Brown?

Smith: Hi, Lewanda.

Miranda: Hi, Gordo.

Hauth: Do we have Celyn Brown on the line? Okay. So we’ve taken the roll of the Board and the managers. Is there anybody that joined in that I missed?

Jackson: Steve Jackson’s here.

Hauth: Hey, Steve. Welcome.

Jackson: Hi, guys.

Hauth: Anyone else? Okay. Are there any members of the public that want to be identified?

Edwards: James Edwards.

Hauth: Hey, James. Welcome. Thanks for joining. Anybody else? Okay. And Eric, you are here, I know that. Correct?

Morris: I’m here.

Hauth: All right. Thanks. Thanks for convening the meeting. Let me… Let me get back to the agenda here. Is there anybody else joined in that I’ve missed? Okay. So we’ve opened the meeting and we’ve done roll call. Did I hear somebody ask for the floor? Was that Art?

Art Stevenson: Yeah. Am I off mute, Randy?

Hauth: Yeah, you are. You are, Art.

Art Stevenson: Okay. Two things I’d like to do: I know at least one of the Board members has a limited amount of time to be on the phone today and so I’d like to move public comment to the end of the meeting. And also, I would like to add Other Business to the agenda. I contacted Mark and he didn’t send anything out but I do believe that Other Business should be added to the agenda. So I make a motion that we add that to the agenda.

Hauth: Okay, a motion’s been made to adjust the agenda. Do I have a second for that?

Derrick Stevenson: I second.

Hauth: Second’s been made. Any discussion around that? Okay. Hearing no discussion, we’ll take a yea or nay vote. Art Stevenson.

Art Stevenson: Yea.

Hauth: Derrick Stevenson.

Derrick Stevenson: Yea.

Hauth: Jerry Bird.

Bird: Yea.

Hauth: Steve Jackson. Steve Jackson.

Jackson: Yea. Yes.

Hauth: Steve Gordon.

Jackson: Can you hear me?

Hauth: Yeah. Yes.

Jackson: Okay, good.

Hauth: Steve Gordon. Okay. And I vote yea as well. So we’ll go ahead and move along. And thank you for that, Mr. Stevenson. So, moving over public comment brings us into the proposed administrative rules. And just to recap, I know Eric had been gone a few days. We received I

think what the agency identified as the Final Draft. I don’t know when we received that, maybe last week. Or early this week. And then there’s been a little bit of back and forth about trying to identify the changes. And I know Eric sent out the changes this morning that followed our last BECC meeting and those, I believe, were underlined. I don’t… I just… Honestly, I haven’t had a chance to go over that, yet. I was hoping to get them yesterday but, you know, I understand that that didn’t happen or wasn’t available to happen. So I would just… So, anyway… And also, Eric sent out last week, I believe, before he left for a few days was the Final Draft and the Final Draft of the operating agreement. And I believe those were also sent to RSA and to the Commissioners and those will be considered Friday, I think, during the Commission for the Blind Board meeting. And so I don’t know if you want to summarize any more on what’s going on, Eric. But have at it, if you do.

Morris: No, Randy. I think you outlined it well. Thank you.

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Hauth: Yes, Art?

Art Stevenson: Okay, first of all, I want to make a motion that we dispense the minutes of the last meeting till the next meeting so that we have a little more time to go over them and… before we approve them. So I’d like to make that motion.

Hauth: Motion’s been made. Do I have a second?

Derrick Stevenson: I second.

Hauth: Okay. Any discussion around that? Okay. I will just state that those were not on the meeting agenda today. And… But that’s a well-received motion and second. No discussion. We’ll do a yea or nay. Art Stevenson. Art? We’ll move on to Derrick Stevenson.

Derrick Stevenson: Yea.

Hauth: Jerry Bird.

Bird: Yea.

Hauth: Steve Jackson.

Jackson: Yea.

Hauth: Steve Gordon. Going back to Art Stevenson.

Art Stevenson: Am I off mute?

Hauth: You are now.

Art Stevenson: Okay. Yea.

Hauth: And I vote yea as well. Okay. Thank you. So, gosh, the long and winding road of the public administrative rules… [Noise from unmuted phone.] Somebody’s off mute. So where do we begin on this? Any Board members that want to share their perspective or their thoughts or any recommendations?

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Derrick Stevenson: [Inaudible.]

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: Did you want to say something first, Derrick?

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I’ll go ahead and go. First… First of all, I think that I object to the fact that Eric has taken it upon himself to send a draft to RSA before it’s actually been adopted by the OCB Board. I think it’s putting the cart before the horse and there’s still, you know, more discussions and more things that need to be talked about. And for him to just send them off to RSA before the final authority, which the OCB Board is, okays them. And that’s about all for now on that one.

Hauth: Thank you. Art.

Art Stevenson: Am I off mute?

Hauth: You are.

Art Stevenson: Okay. Well, where to begin. I did read Eric’s response to the Elected Committee’s recommendations of the last meeting. I did get as far as that. And I find it incredibly interesting that when we began this process the Oregon Commission for the Blind, including Eric, made a statement that we had to have complete rules, everything had to be included in it; we had to do everything. And then now, in this latest recommendation… well, response from the Oregon Commission for the Blind, they say, “No, we’re not going to address the priority definition. No, we’re not going to address the preference addition. We’re going to put that off for now.” I find that incredibly interesting since RSA has also stated, and the agency knows this, that they wanted a complete set of rules. And, you know, it’s incredibly interesting that the agency can just say, “Oh, we’ve got to have complete rules. We’ve got to do it all now,” and then turn around and say, “Nope, we’re not going to do it now; we’re going to do it later.” And, quite frankly, that disturbs me immensely.

Now, I was on the Elected Committee back the last time we tried to pass rules and the agency claimed, “Oh, no, that has to be a separate rule; we got to write it later.” And that was approximately two and a half years ago. And, of course, those rules on compliance and… and all that dealt with the same issue. And, quite frankly, I don’t believe that the agency really wants to address the preference/priority thing. And, quite frankly, I believe that we do have to have complete rules; that all of the quote unquote issues have to be addressed. And the state

statutes say that the agency shall promulgate rules to ensure the proper and satisfactory operation of vending facilities. Of course, if they leave those two sections out, then they’re not ensuring the proper and satisfactory operation of vending facilities because they’re not ensuring compliance. They’re not ensuring, you know, anything, really. So that is number one of my definite concerns and that’s one of the reasons that, at this point in time, I do have other concerns but we’ll let some other people talk, too.

But I want to start off right now by making a motion that the Elected Committee rejects the proposed rules as they are because they’re incomplete, they’re not in compliance with the federal law, they are going to cause problems and they need to be done right. They need to be done right this time. And… And there shouldn’t be any excuses or putting it off. It should be done and it should be done now. So I make a motion that we reject these rules because there’s a lot of areas that they are not in compliance with, including the active participation definition.

Hauth: Okay. A motion’s been made. Do we have a second?

Derrick Stevenson: Second.

Hauth: Okay, second. Open for discussion. I… you know, I have a couple of questions and I hope, Eric, you’ll be able to answer these. The first is… and, again, thank you for underlining the changes and sending them out. I haven’t had a chance to look through them completely. But a couple of things: were there any changes to the active participation definition in this last revision, do you know?

Morris: I… I don’t know, right off the top of my head, Randy. I’d have to go back and look. I don’t think so.

Hauth: Okay. And were there any changes to the subcontracting provisions or the work log or the, I forget, the scope of work. I forget the terminology. But do you know if there were any changes made to those what I call are, you know, more major hot… hot button items?

Morris: Yeah, Randy, I don’t remember right off the top of my head. Obviously, like, the document that Art was talking about outlined in detail, you know, based on the recommendations of… the Elected Committee had put forward, what we were going to accept and what we weren’t going to accept. I think subcontracting was dealt with that… in that. But I’m not positive right off the top of my head.

Hauth: Okay. Yeah, and I haven’t looked at the latest. I would, you know, I would guess… My thoughts are… I would guess that the agency didn’t make any additional changes to that; maybe made some, you know, supplementary changes to the definition or to the operating agreement, with the dates and that. But, again, I’ll look through that further. So has RSA approved these rules?

Morris: No, I haven’t heard from RSA. I figure it’s just like everybody else; everybody was off for Thanksgiving and stuff. So I haven’t heard anything from Jesse yet.

Hauth: So how does this…? And I guess that leads me into… how does this work if the agency is proposing to take action on adopting rules that haven’t been approved by RSA? Has the agency thought through that? Because it seems… it seems a little bit disjointed to have rules that are being adopted and acted on without RSA approval of those. You know, and I don’t know if you can help fill us in on how that works, but…

Morris: Well, I think the thing we’ve talked about since the beginning, like, the summertime is that, like, the fact that, as we got a final document created it would go to RSA at the same time as the Commission was getting ready to look at it. And, quite frankly, the Commission hasn’t approved it yet, so I don’t want to be presumptive and say, “Hey, this is the exact path it’s going to happen.” Because I, quite frankly, don’t know. Friday is the day after tomorrow and we’ll see what happens during that meeting.

Hauth: Well, and it’s… it’s funny you mention that. Because when you look at the agenda… when you look at the agenda for the temporary rules and when you look at the agenda for this, it says Approval of BEP, you know… I don’t have it in front of me but it says Approval of Temporary Rules, Approval of BEP Rules. I’m wondering why that language is contained within the agenda, you know. I know you said you want to be presumptive and think that’s going to happen. I would guess that is probably going to happen, just going back, the history of how the Commission for the Board, you know, interacts with the agency, in my opinion, is they’re just a rubber stamp and they go along with anything that’s brought forward to them. But, you know, I guess we’ll see.

But is there anybody else that… you know, it’s just concerning and confusing to me that the agency seems to be steadfast and, again, in my opinion, other managers’ opinion, the agency doesn’t appear to be listening. They have a predetermined destination on what they want in the rules and they’re basically placating or, you know, dumbing down active participation, simply tracking the hours and believing that equivocates to active participation.

If you go back to the first day of the rules summit, when Terry Smith identified that Dacia Johnson had ensured that you had the responsibility as the Director and the authority as the Director to be able to work with us through these rules, everything I’ve seen has contradicted that, including I believe there’s already $14,000 in AG costs that are associated with these rules. And I believe that you identified that October and November still haven’t been billed. I would think that would be close to $20,000, if not more, billed by the Attorney General’s office to these rules. I’ve seen Dacia Johnson’s involvement in these draft rules. I’ve seen the Commission for the Blind Board’s involvement or attempted involvement. So, really, did you have the authority and the allowance to work with us as Director to develop these? Or were there a lot of other hands in the pot? It looked to me like the AG basically has written our rules, which is, again, a concern.

I’ve kind of become resigned to understanding that the agency is not going to listen, they don’t want to address our recommendations that, again, are some of the major concerns we’ve continued to bring forward. And the agency is just moving forward, as they sometimes do. So I’m resigned to understanding that probably if that occurs and happens, and unless RSA can have some kind of intervention in some of those key topics and support the positions that we’ve brought forth and Susan brought forth, then we’re going to end up down that road of litigation once again. I don’t think that there’s any other way around it.

So, you know, I’m hoping that I’m wrong but just wanted to share that. Again, very… very concerned and troubled and disheartened that there’s so much controversy and conflict, exactly what the legislators did not want to occur. But it looks like we’re there again and it looks like we’re there again because the agency has their mind made up and their mission and they’re just marching forward. So, wanted to say that. Any other comment?

Derrick Stevenson: This is Derrick.

Hauth: Derrick.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I agree with everything that you said. And I think something that needs to be perfectly clear is that Eric is not the final authority and Dacia Johnson is not the final authority, it’s the OCB Board. They are the SLA, they are the final authority. And it’s… it’s rather evident that Eric, you know, mentioned that he thought it was the bill’s… the bill was supposed… supposed to… meant that we were going to get rid of third-party vendors and stuff and that’s not it. I mean, obviously, for the last couple years Eric and Dacia have misinterpreted the Attorney General’s Opinions to say that we can’t use third-party vendors and it’s all been kind of a shady… a shady deal, as I don’t really know any other way to put it.

I think… you know, I don’t have any confidence in Eric and I don’t have any confidence whatsoever in Miss Johnson to be able to work from a neutral place and forget about all the stuff they’re working on in the past. But that, to me, is not going to happen.

And like I said before, you know, the Oregon Commission for the Blind Board should be actively participating with us, especially if we ask them to. I mean, they… they’re the ones that are going to make the final decision. And yet, they don’t want to interact with us in any way, shape or form. I think, you know, it might be a good thing for us to actually, you know, write a letter complaining that they’re not… they’re not allowing us to active participate in their decision-making process. I… I don’t know if it will actually do any good. But, you know, I think it’s important that we throw it out there that, you know, they’re… they’re the State Licensing Agency; they’re supposed to actively participate with us, not just participate with Eric and Dacia.

And I think, you know, if possible, I make a motion that we send a letter to the OCB Board, informing them that they are the State Licensing Agency, they are the final authority and they should be actively participating with us to make sure these rules are getting done satisfactorily. You know, they have a duty to listen to our side…

Hauth: Yeah.

Derrick Stevenson: … and not just take Eric and Dacia’s word on things, which I think, you know, over the whole process that, at the very least, has been misleading. And, like I said, I have no confidence in Eric and Dacia whatsoever. So with that I’d like to make that motion, that we…

Hauth: Well… Well, hey, Derrick, there is a motion on the table.

Derrick Stevenson: Okay.

Hauth: So, yeah. So let’s… let’s revisit that after this, please. If we can.

Derrick Stevenson: All right.

Hauth: Okay. So, any other discussion?

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth? Chair Hauth?

Hauth: Yes, Art. Yes.

Art Stevenson: Anyways, I think I heard somebody join. Did somebody join on the line? I know I talked with Carole Kinney yesterday and she said she was going to be at the meeting. Are you here, Carole?

Hawkins: Art, it’s Char.

Art Stevenson: Oh, hey, Char.

Hawkins: I just wanted…

Art Stevenson: Well, if you want to get credit for being here… so I’m glad to hear somebody come on so I wanted to…

Hawkins: Thank you. Yeah. I was on last time… I was on last time, too.

Art Stevenson: Yeah.

Hawkins: But I was late so I just don’t feel like interrupting the meeting. So, anyway…

Art Stevenson: No…

Hawkins: … I’m here.

Art Stevenson: No, that’s okay. I heard somebody come on so I wanted to make sure…. Randy, I’d like to kind of see if there’s any manager input. I know lots of the managers put forth money to get the Susan Gashel evaluation of our rules. Of course, she said it was an accident waiting to happen. And so, you know, if there are any managers that want to voice any of their concerns right now I would definitely encourage you to do so. I do believe, you know, that Susan did a bang-up job on that and a lot of her recommendations have been ignored by the agency. And, quite frankly, I’m very disappointed that they have… they definitely have done that. And I do know that, you know, a lot of that stuff hasn’t been incorporated into the rules and… and they should’ve been.

And so, are there any managers…? Char… Obviously, you know, you want to be able to run your business the way that you see fit. There’s some things that we talked about before that haven’t been incorporated in these rules. Like, I know for a fact right now the agency is coming in and evaluating cafeterias and snack bars every month. And I, you know, I believe

that’s overkill. I think if the agency wants to come in and check on a cafeteria or a snack bar or a vending route on… on… on a, you know, quarterly basis or something like that… but to come in and… and disrupt the running of a facility every month, I believe, is overkill and a waste of time and effort.

Bird: Now, let’s keep it to the…

Hauth: Art. Art. Let’s…

Bird: Got a motion going here.

Hauth: Yeah.

Art Stevenson: No, I’m talking about that, Jerry, because these rules… these rules do not have in there… I know for a fact right now that the agency is going in and evaluating, we know this, cafeterias and snack bars on a monthly basis. And… And, you know, I believe it should be in the rules that they don’t do that every dang month. It’s a waste of time and resources…

Hauth: Hey, Art.

Art Stevenson: … et cetera.

Hauth: Art…

Art Stevenson: Yes, sir.

Hauth: … let’s go ahead and see if anybody… Is there anybody out there that has… that wants the floor? Wants to make a comment?

Bird: Jerry Bird.

Hauth: Jerry.

Bird: Yeah, I just want to stick to my biggest issues on this whole thing, which is the hourly. And like I said forever, I don’t mind you having to provide all the information to show that you are performing your duties and your customers are happy and all that. But when you start wanting me to be your employee and say that I got to punch a clock and I’ve got to prove… show to you that I’ve spent this many hours to become self-employed is against, I think, my… just to be an American. Let… not even talking about the disability part of it.

But I looked up the dictionary what is self-employment. You know, because if you look at our handbook and all the other Randolph-Sheppard, it discusses self-employment opportunities, you know? And self-employment is very clear when you look under dictionary and ask about it, it states right in there that it is… that you don’t have to be an hourly thing. That’s one of the luxuries. You… You may have to spend 200 hours a month or whatever or you might have to spend ten. It’s up to you as deciding you become an independent business person, whatever business… self-employed, as long… we got a little differently, I think, because

we have… we have buildings and properties that state employees and stuff are our customers, which are, you know, have certain stuff and that, and that’s why we obey by them to make sure they’re being properly filled and served in the cafeteria or whatever. It’s not to come in and tell you, “I don’t want you to put that salt in your… Tell me what’s your recipes. What’s in your recipes, you know? And I’ll tell you if you can have that in there or not.” Or, you know, “You go do some hours and show us that you’re doing your business.”

It’s… It’s self-employment and it just drives me nuts now that you guys want to say we’re now employed by this agency and they will… if you don’t work this many hours, then this could happen. I mean, that was one of the reasons I became self-employed, you know? And I still think that’s there. And just because I’m in this program, which is a self-employment program, you want to make it different here to where, like I just said, I don’t want to kill it to death, it is absolutely wrong and we asked you many, many times to just at least remove the hour part out of there.

Because I was at the Capitol along with everybody else and we made it clear it wasn’t going to be an hourly thing to where we was like an employee but we still need to have duties that you must do to show that you’re employed, you’re doing something with your business, not just, you know, letting it do it and then you’re gone. So that was the idea. And then they say, “Well, you can’t add stuff to it that they didn’t say.” Well, they didn’t say one thing about hours, just that… just to show what full-time employment means, what, you know, which is that you do these duties. And they run with it and now it’s like, “We want you to, you know, go take pictures and make sure that you’ve been doing this for this many hours,” when it’s… you don’t even need to do the hours.

So it defeats all my reasoning of being in this program and each, every one of us who decided we didn’t want to go work for a boss or I have many, many times been a foreman and I wanted to make my own decision, you know. So… and that’s why I got licensed, not… and they set you up… they’ll set you up, they’ll give you a change fund, they give you your first inventory and hand you the key and it’s up to you, buddy. You can either fail or not. But, you know, you have the skills to do it because these are individual, self-employed opportunities for blind people. What more greater is that?

And then now we have them doing this. So, you know, and I can’t… they’ll change a few little things on it but these ones that mean something, like putting in… just remove the hour part and we’ll still show you what we’re doing.

But… and then the other one is… is if you want to use your subcontractors or call them teaming partners or the teaming partners… the agency doesn’t contract with them. That’s absurd again because they’re your teaming partner. And it don’t happen that way but in Oregon you do. And we ask them, you know, “Take this stuff out.” You know, we could live with some of the stuff in there but it’s like, “Nope, you will no longer be a self-employed person. You will… We will dictate what you do and where you do and how you do it,” and, you know… So I can’t agree to these current ones because they won’t make the changes that really effect the blind people and our right as a US citizen. So I’ll just leave it at that.

Hauth: Thank you. Thank… Thank you, Jerry. Hey, Eric? So help us out here. As far as the 27th being the deadline for the comment period that the agency was to consider from the, I believe, the eight interested persons who provided comment, can you tell me when that… when that information will be considered? And if… if changes are made, how that will occur? Like, I’m looking forward, like I’m thinking, “Okay, so the Commission for the Blind Board on Friday

perhaps will adopt these rules,” and then if you make changes to it based on RSA or based on the input you received through the public meeting, how is that going to play out?

Morris: In what respects, Randy? I don’t… I don’t quite… I kind of follow what you’re saying, but I’m not sure about the “play out” part.

Hauth: So as far as the changes… the recommendations that were sent to the agency for agency’s consideration…

Morris: Yeah.

Hauth: … relative to these rules, have you decided or has the agency decided to incorporate any of those? Or when will that decision be made?

Morris: I’m assuming it’s going to be sometime this week. I mean… and today’s Wednesday so over the next day or so. And then with RSA, you know, RSA… I… I don’t know what it looks like for them to approve it in the sense of, is it a big letter that they send? I think that’s what it is, saying, “Hey, these have been officially approved.” Last year when we were working with RSA there was kind of a back-and-forth, a little bit of, “Hey, you know, this… this language needs to line up in a certain way or needs to be said in a certain way to be within the Randolph-Sheppard Program.” And so my… my guess is there will be a little bit of that. And then the changes… the changes that RSA… it’s not like RSA says, “Hey, it’d be great if you did this.” RSA says, “This has to change this way.” And it’s not really optional. So that’s kind of how I see it playing out. I haven’t heard from Jesse, like I said before, so… I think he’s terribly busy. So, yeah, I think a lot’s going to depend on, you know, if we get permission to move forward and then trying to integrate those last comments and feedback from RSA.

Hauth: So will those last comments be brought forward to the Commission Board prior to them considering it?

Morris: Yeah, I don’t know that.

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Hauth: A couple other questions. Hold on just a sec. Has the Commission for the Blind Commissioners, have they seen the comments that were suggested?

Morris: I…

Hauth: To you, through the public?

Morris: I… I don’t know, Randy.

Hauth: Okay. Let me ask one other… one other question here. You know, I guess that confirms… it kind of just confirms my concern is that, you know, they throw you out there as the Director to, you know, be the Grand Poobah of this whole process. But clearly there’s a lot of other, you

know, there’s a lot of other hands in the pot. And that’s one of the reasons that I respectfully requested Executive Director Johnson’s participation. Because – I mean, correct me if I’m wrong – but she’s had weigh in and consideration of these rules but, you know, didn’t… didn’t come to the table and sit down with us. And then, no disrespect to you intended, but when I ask you questions, a lot of them you don’t know. So…

Morris: Well…

Hauth: … maybe that’s where, you know, other people are making decisions behind, you know, without… without us. And so I do want…

Morris: Well, hey, Randy? Randy just real… just real quick, with the Elected Committee, er, with the Commission Board, I hope everybody realizes, I do not communicate directly with the Commission Board. That’s not part of my… part of my wheelhouse. So, you know, to make it sound like there’s some big thing going on that I’m not aware of because it’s a secret conspiracy, it’s just not how… it’s not how things work. I… I work for Dacia here at the agency and Dacia works for the Commission Board. So that flow of information, I don’t flow stuff to the committee, er, the Commission. So.

Hauth: Yeah, I guess… so I guess my only thought and comment on that is, the Commission is… the Commission is the rule makers, the Commission Board is the rule makers. So, in my opinion, a lot of stuff is filtered to them if the agency wants them to see it and then if they don’t want them to see it, it’s not. And I’m not putting that responsibility totally on you. I’m just suggesting that, you know, it’s been a flawed process in some instances. Let me ask you just a couple other questions and maybe you know them, maybe you don’t. But on August 31st you and I and Terry had a conversation meeting with Jesse Hartle and we asked about the operating agreement and the, you know, terming out of the operating agreement. And Jesse said he was going to get back with us on that. We talked about the summary determination versus the full evidentiary hearing and how that was allowed. We asked about the administrative review process and I know you and I have gone back a little bit, back and forth on emails around that whole subject.

But have you heard…? Because Jesse said he’d get back with us on this, have you heard from him on that? Or do you know what’s going on? Have they reviewed that? Have they given you any feedback on that?

Morris: No, Randy, they haven’t. And I’m not sure if it was August 31st; I’ll take your word for that. But I remember the conversation with Jesse and I’ve heard zero back from him. I even offered up Gretchen’s name and contact information so that their general counsel person could, you know, so they could have a lawyer-to-lawyer conversation about, like, the legal aspects of a fair hearing and summary determination and stuff like that. And Gretchen hasn’t heard from them and neither have I. So, yeah.

Hauth: So, what is being approved on Friday, then? Do we have…? When will we… When will the Elected Committee have that… that document that’s going to be provided to the Commissioners for their consideration?

Morris: You have it now.

Hauth: So no changes are going to be made to that based on the input you received through the public comment meeting?

Morris: The public comment meeting?

Hauth: I mean the public testimony that, you know, when you… it was the…

Morris: When you guys asked… When you guys asked for the extra 21 days? Is that what you’re talking about?

Hauth: Yeah. And then we provided information for consideration.

Morris: Yeah, we just talked about that. The Commission’s going to take… they’re going to take action on the Final Draft that we sent out last Monday. So based on the… I think I put that in the comments. We’re still considering the information that was sent in. You… I think you’re probably the only person that sent in anything that I can recall from the documents that were sent. And so, obviously there could be changes made based on that information and there could be changes based on RSA’s feedback and guidance. So the Commissioners are looking at the Final Draft on Friday. Do I know if…? I don’t know if there’s going to be any changes between now and Friday. I seriously doubt it. So that’s… that’s kind of where we’re at.

Hauth: So…

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Hauth: So… Let me just ask one more question, here. So when, just so I can understand this…

Morris: Yeah.

Hauth: So when, if and when the Commission Board approves that Draft and then… and then the agency brings more changes forward, would that go… then go back to the Commission Board for their approval? I’m just trying to understand those moving parts, there. And… And, yeah. So, go ahead.

Morris: I’m not sure, Randy. It’ll depend on the guidance we get from the Commission Board on Friday. If we say, you know, “There may be some changes based on the information we’ve received during the extended comment period or RSA recommends changes or tells us to change things,” then the Commission Board may say, “Hey, we want to come back and have another look at it.” Or they may say, if it’s minor changes that aren’t, you know, systematic changes to the whole program, "Go ahead and move forward.” It’s just going to depend on that. And, frankly, that’s not within my purview to… to, you know, speculate on it. But that’s my guess.

Hauth: Yeah. Okay, Art. I know it’s… Again, for the record, it’s confusing. I know that there’s a rule-making process and it seems to me that the target has changed a lot. It seems to me that

commitments have changed a lot and it’s just really, yeah… confusing, to say the least. But Art, go ahead.

Art Stevenson: Am I off mute?

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: Am I off mute?

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: Okay. First of all, I do want to get back on one part. I want to… I want to ask Char… Char? Do you think it’s necessary for you to be evaluated every month by the agency? I know that the Health Department only comes in, what is it? About every six months? I haven’t been in a cafeteria for a little bit. But it used to be they come in every six months. And… And, Char, you got a business to run. Do you really think that it’s necessary for the agency to evaluate your business every month? Or do you think it’s…? You know, personally, I believe, you know, on a quarterly basis would be okay. But to come in and… and disrupt your business every month, I think that’s kind of crazy. And can you… can you elaborate how you feel about that? Do you think it’s necessary for you to be evaluated every month by the agency?

[Silence.]

Hauth: Well, let’s go ahead… you know, we have a motion. We have…

Art Stevenson: Char?

Hauth: … we have a second and we… we’ve had plenty of discussion. And, you know, if Char doesn’t want to comment at this point in time, then that’s fine, you know. Let’s go ahead and if there’s no other comment let’s go ahead and call the question.

Bird: Jerry.

Hauth: Jerry.

Bird: I got one other quick comment. Let’s see, this is the Randolph-Sheppard Program, right?

Hauth: Right.

Bird: So it’s a special program… it’s a special program. Right. Okay. Now, why would… if it has… if the Randolph-Sheppard Program has to approve a set of any rules before they can be impulated [sic] or whatever that… take effect, right? Why would you…? Although I think we kind of know… but is, why would an agency take it to the Commissioners before the product is final? I can see you maybe saying, “Here’s the draft. Approve our draft and there shouldn’t be any changes but it does have to be approved by the agency if they want to make it into a final version.”

And then it’s almost like it’s… and then we’ll send it… and then we’ll try to get the approval from the Randolph-Sheppard Program, which is the main program. So it’s almost like, “Oh, they’re just a subsidiary. We just need theirs and they just might come back and say, ‘Maybe you ought to adjust this or that.’” That’s not the idea. They have to approve them. And so I… if I’m not taking it wrong, it almost sounds like to me Eric’s saying, “Well, these Commissioners approve it as a final thing, it’s going to be in effect because we don’t care what the Randolph-Sheppard Act says at the time.” Almost like this isn’t a federal Randolph-Sheppard Program.

So it seems like they’re manipulating… Why wouldn’t you wait, get the Randolph-Sheppard Program to approve it, then you them to the Commissioners and say, “Here’s… the Randolph-Sheppard Program has approved this handbook; it passed them. Now we would like your blessing.” You got it backwards. I mean, it’s like… and then, if they don’t like it… I mean, I don’t know how they cannot; it’s been passed. I mean because they are kind of like… they’re not that informed on our stuff. Because Eric just said he don’t pass them the information that other than they want to do. So how do these people get any of our information? They won’t allow us to be… talk at the meetings and give our side. So I guess if we don’t know nothing then we don’t know nothing. That’s confusing.

But anyway, Eric is that true? Do you think you can implement these rules before you get your official approval of the Randolph-Sheppard Act?

Morris: Well, Jerry, I think your… your recap of the process is not totally accurate. And we do need to get RSA to approve the rules. That’s… That’s a given. So the fact that, you know, we would somehow subvert the RSA Program and their approval is just not accurate. So.

Hauth: All right. Any other comments before we take the vote?

Art Stevenson: Chair… Chair Hauth?

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: Yeah, I did… I did want to make one more comment. And, you know, Eric… Eric said… Well, I didn’t see any blessing of the temporary rules from RSA and…

Jackson: You guys, I need to vote yes. I’m sorry. I vote yes…

Unknown woman: I vote yes!

Jackson: … to no more rules.

Unknown woman: No more rules!

Art Stevenson: Hey… Hey, Randy?

Hauth: Yes?

Art Stevenson: Let’s just go ahead and take the vote and I’l…

Hauth: Yep. Okay, I’ll call the vote, yea or nay. Art Stevenson?

Art Stevenson: Yea.

Hauth: Derrick Stevenson.

Derrick Stevenson: Well, this is to accept or not accept?

Hauth: To reject the rules.

Derrick Stevenson: Yea.

Hauth: Jerry Bird.

Bird: Yea.

Hauth: Steve Jackson? Steve Jackson? I’ll vote yea. Steve Gordon.

Jackson: I vote yes. Please.

Hauth: Okay.

Jackson: I vote against the rules.

Hauth: Steve Gordon. Okay. And I vote yes as well. So…

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: Okay. Now that we’ve rejected the rules I want to make a motion that we send… obviously, as soon as this is put out there so it’s available, to send a copy of this meeting to Mr. Hartle. But also I believe I want to make a motion that we do two things: number one is that we write a letter to… an official letter from RSA and send it to them registered mail with a list of all our concerns. All of our concerns. And so that RSA has that on the record. And then I also believe that we need to schedule a meeting with Jesse to elaborate more on our concerns and why. A perfect example… Well, anyways, so that’s… that’s my two motions, that… well, one motion that we do those two things. Number one is send an official letter about… the letter and a copy of this recorded meeting to Jesse on our official objections and why. And then also schedule a meeting with him to discuss what RSA is going to do, as far as addressing our concerns.

Hauth: So a motion has been made. Do we have a second?

Derrick Stevenson: I second.

Hauth: Okay. Open for discussion. You know, I would just like to say, I think it’s very important that RSA be tied into this mess. RSA, you know, not too long ago was part of a federal lawsuit and, unfortunately, they… fortunately, they have the authority to be able to assist in this matter and to make sure that the agency here in Oregon is complying with all the requirements, you know. And so, I hope I’m wrong, but it looks like this may, if we can get RSA to assist and resolve some of these key concerns like the subcontracting and other requirements, other concerns that are contained within the proposed rules then I think… I think that’ll be great. But, short of that, we may end up down that slippery slope of litigation that also will possibly bring RSA to the party. So, you know, it’s sad to even state that but the facts are, this agency has not listened to us. And so all they do is pretend they’re listening, pretend they’re actively participating and, you know, just head down and rear end up and go, go, go. So that’s the way I see it. If it’s right or wrong, that’s the way I see it. And I think that’s the way a lot that I have communicated with see it. Any other conversation around that? There’s a motion and…

Derrick Stevenson: This is Derrick.

Hauth: … a second. Go ahead, Derrick.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I’d just like to throw in there that, you know, it’s very obvious… you know, we did a fiscal impact and the Commission for the Blind miraculously, for whatever reason, figured that there is no fiscal impact whatsoever. And, you know, the mis-checking of the box saying that we had a committee and then all of a sudden no, we didn’t have one. And that got replaced with the fiscal impact. It’s these kinds of things that cause us to have no trust in Eric and Dacia. And I think, you know, we need to let RSA know that this is what’s going on.

Hauth: Thank… Thank you. Any other…

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Hauth: … discussion? Yes.

Art Stevenson: Well, I also want to say, you know, that the agency believes that the Elected Committee and the managers, in my opinion, are second-class citizens and that our rights, you know, do not matter. And the email that we received today from Eric about the Capitol café is a perfect example, you know. We go informed after the fact that Eric and whoever went in and met with those individuals. And they knew they were going, Randy. We all know they knew they were going. And Eric also knew that we had a Vending Facility Development Committee and that we very much want to be involved and actively participate in… in this stuff. Basically… and Susan Gashel it well in her evaluation: Why in the heck wouldn’t you want the managers, who have all the experience, involved? But no, you know, Eric and whoever else went into that meeting, went without either you or me as the Vice Chair or me as the Chair of the Vending Facility Development Committee participating in that meeting. And you know what? Eric didn’t care. Eric didn’t care. He informed us after the fact. He did that purposely; he told us we couldn’t have the meeting on Monday or he couldn’t do it on Tuesday because he had other things to do. And so he purposely went into that meeting and didn’t involve us. He stated in the

email he sent to the Elected Committee that “I will develop the contract and then let you guys see it after the fact;” not even allow us to give our input or anything. Quite frankly, I am appalled that this state continues to do things that they shouldn’t be doing. I’ve been all across this country – Alabama, Texas, Indiana, North Carolina, Tennessee – and that’s not how business is conducted in those states and that’s why they are successful, that’s why they have less controversy, they have less complaints. And, quite frankly, I’m getting a little tired of it. And… And therefore…

Derrick Stevenson: Make it short, Art.

Art Stevenson: … rights protected. So…

Hauth: Okay. So, yep. Thank you. Thank you, Art. There is a motion on the table. I do want to say that, you know, Eric, I mean, feel free to weigh in on this. I don’t know why the request wasn’t made to the Elected Committee to have the unit development or facility development be part of that meeting. You know, the legislators had stated and the agency stated you want the blind seen, right? You want us seen out there. But is it only filling a candy bar or riding along in a car like a bobbly head doll? But you don’t want us at a meeting, especially when there’s a committee established by law that’s supposed to be involved in these? So, again, I’m a little disheartened, I’m a little concerned. I’m… I’m fit to be tied. I’m tired of banging my head back and forth in these meetings where, you know, the agency has no answers. No matter what we try and encourage and suggest, to try and be more inclusive and have more inclusion and have more of a role through active participation, we get sidelined. You know, we get denied those rights. And so my efforts are going to be at a different level to try and invoke change. And it’s just too bad. I mean, feel free to share why a request wasn’t made to the Elected Committee or the facility development to have a blind manager or Board member there, if you want.

Morris: Well, Randy, we’ve talked about this issue I think literally since the day I got here. And so over the last almost five years you guys have been lecturing me on all the different issues of what you think’s important in contracts and facility development. So this initial meeting with legislative… the legislative administrator’s office was a meeting of staff people. And I’ve explained that before, that when, like, an Elected Committee member or a Board member comes they… the other staff members… you know, there’s not… there’s not a legislator sitting at that meeting, it’s somebody that’s part of the building, that uses the building. Frankly, they wouldn’t – and we’ve had this conversation before – they wouldn’t grasp the concept of active participation and part of the development process.

So the whole… I think the issues you guys had before, before I got here, was that, hey there wasn’t a blind person in the room to give a perspective on blindness. Well, I’m blind. So I can bring that perspective. Now, if things get more detailed and we have more detailed conversations, may it be appropriate – and I think we’ve had that exact same discussion many, many times – then I think there is an opportunity for that. I did that a couple times, like down at the State Hospital and stuff.

But, you know, when Art’s talking about this all I hear is Art talking a lot about why he wasn’t involved himself. That’s what I hear when he’s saying that. And I’m sure he doesn’t intend it that way but it kind of comes off that way. So, you know, my job is to go out and get locations and negotiate contracts and do those kind of things. So that… that’s what I’m doing.

And so we didn’t reinvent the wheel during this meeting. We tried to get the timelines lined out and get the contract, whatever vehicle that contract’s going to look like, in process. So it’s not like we did some big, amazing, you know, turn the key kind of thing. So, frankly, we’ve had the discussion probably two or three times a year for the last five years. So.

Hauth: Yeah. Well, thank you. And, you know, without going back and forth with you, I mean, my… it would’ve been nice to have the Facility Development Committee contacted. You know, we’re supposed to be integrated and included in these type of things. And so for somebody to decide when that’s appropriate, when it’s not appropriate I think is where it comes down to maybe more is better, you know? So, anyway… so thank you for… thank you for answering that. So there’s a motion…

Derrick Stevenson: This is Derrick.

Hauth: Derrick, go ahead.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I just want to throw this out real quick. I think, you know, I’m not going to say, you know, we should be involved or we should be able to go to these meetings or whatever. But I do think that the Commission for the Blind should allow us to see their contracts before they’re signed and finalized. I think that is a right that we have and it’s something that needs to be done. We can’t, you know… It just goes to show that we don’t have the… we don’t have the trust that they’re going to write contracts that’s in the best interest of our program. And, you know, many times we had contracts written up that we basically did not agree with 100%, saying that, you know, they can get rid of us for no clause or we might have to pay some certain amount of revenue to do that or whatever. We do… We should have a right to see the document before OCB signs it.

Hauth: Okay, thank you. Any other comment before we take the vote?

Art Stevenson: So Randy?

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: Yeah, I sort of agree with Derrick but I sort of don’t agree with Derrick because just exactly what was in that email. I know you probably haven’t had a chance to read it, Derrick, but it stated, as usual, that Eric and OCB will write the contract and once it’s finalized then quote unquote, “We’ll let you guys see it and we’ll put… we’ll put the place out to bid.” You know, and as I stated, and Eric still don’t get it… you know, I have 31 years, Eric, of experience, expertise in running cafeterias, snack bars, vending routes, et cetera. I have a bevy of knowledge that the agency should be taking advantage of and… and embrace.

And, of course, I know you don’t like to be lectured; you stated that time and time again. But again, I don’t like my knowledge and expertise and the managers’ knowledge and expertise – Randy’s, Derrick’s, Jerry’s, et cetera – to be marginalized. And, quite frankly, I don’t want to see another contract that’s developed that has a no-cause clause and the whole nine yards. We want to see it done right. And OCB, time and time again, has proven, for example, the other two contracts that you did, there was stuff in it that we weren’t pleased with. And of

course you didn’t… there was no concern about it, which is terribly disturbing. It’s like you don’t care about us, the managers. Because we got to go in and run those facilities once you develop a contract. And you don’t have the knowledge and expertise that we have because you haven’t got 31 years’ experience running facilities.

And so for you to again marginalize the Elected Committee and the blind licensed managers and like, you know, we’re insignificant and not important enough to be in the mix. So again, this is another lecture. And this is why we keep having problems, is because you don’t embrace what the other states embrace, like Alabama, Tennessee, et cetera. They have committees and the committees are listened to and heard and give their input. And you marginalize us. You… You… anyways, you know, I’m done with that and I…

Derrick Stevenson: Call the question.

Hauth: Yeah, okay. So a motion’s been made, a second. There’s been a lot of discussion and so I’m going to call the question. Art Stevenson, yea or nay?

Art Stevenson: I said yes.

Hauth: Derrick Stevenson?

Derrick Stevenson: Yea. Yea.

Hauth: Jerry Bird.

Bird: Yeah.

Hauth: Steve Jackson. Steve Gordon. And I’ll vote yea as well. So motion passes. Okay. Other Business I believe is what is following.

Art Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: It gives me no great pleasure to make this motion but I’m going to make it because obviously over the past several weeks and months, you know, there’s been a lot of disturbing things that have gone on, including some of the statements that Eric just made. And therefore, I want to make a motion that this Committee send a letter of no confidence to the Commission Board and to Dacia Johnson concerning our Director Eric Morris. I have no confidence that he gets it. I have no confidence that he embraces the principles and the concepts of this program, of active participation. He has no respect for our knowledge and expertise.

And therefore, I make the motion that this Committee send a letter of no confidence to the Commission Board and to Dacia Johnson, that… that we need somebody in this position who actually cares about the laws and rules and regulations and embraces active participation, embraces the managers’ knowledge and expertise. And, quite frankly, I don’t believe Director Morris – and he said it himself, he hasn’t… hasn’t got time to do all the things that he should be

doing, which is part of his job and his job description. He admitted it in the meeting. You know, “I can’t direct the accountants to find out how much money is owed to the blind licensed managers in federal vending machine income and get it done. I may get around to it next week, next month, five years from now.” And we need a Director who is going to be able to do the job of the Director and I do not feel that Director Morris is capable of doing it.

Hauth: So a motion’s been made. Do I have a second on that motion?

Derrick Stevenson: This is Derrick.

Hauth: Derrick.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I’d like to second it but I’d actually like to ask for an amendment, if that’s possible.

Hauth: So suggest a friendly amend…

Derrick Stevenson: What…

Hauth: Yeah, yeah, go ahead.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah. I don’t think the no confidence should be strictly addressed to Eric Morris. I think Dacia Johnson has shown over the years that she is unwilling to work with us in any manner, any fair manner at all. Like before, when she said, “Well, we’re not going to write these rules now but it’ll be the first thing on our agenda” last time we did the handbook. And of course here it is, two and a half years later and she never even brought it up. Instead she, you know, brought up code of conduct and did all that stuff, too. And it’s just… it’s just clear that it’s not necessarily just Eric. We can’t say we have no confidence in him without saying we have no confidence in Dacia. Because she’s allowing these things to happen.

And I would also ask that we also address the fact that we’re not giving… given the time to actively participate with State Licensing Agency, which the Board is. And that needs to change. Before they pass these rules they should engage with us and at least give us the opportunity to bring up what we feel is necessary.

Art Stevenson: Chair Hauth?

Derrick Stevenson: So…

Hauth: Yes.

Art Stevenson: I accept that friendly amendment.

Hauth: Okay. Open for discussion now. Hey, Eric, let me ask a couple of questions. I know you were gone for a few days and I know you did respond to me on a few emails but I think a couple of them maybe you haven’t gotten a chance to yet. One of the things I was wondering about is,

has there been other communications with the Attorney General’s Office around these rules? Other than the recommendations that you sent to the Board?

Morris: I… I don’t believe so, Randy. And, quite frankly, your questions at this point, based on the vote and the motion you guys have, I think you should call the question at this point.

Hauth: Well, I guess my thought was this: so, at… when I looked at… and I appreciate you sending those to me, the charges that the AG charged with, like, $15,000, I believe, at this point the only document that was in the agency’s possession or received or transmitted was the ones that the Elected Committee got?

Morris: Yeah, we shared the feedback with you.

Hauth: Well, what about other communications…

Morris: Randy, I…

Hauth: … phone or text.

Morris: I’m not texting with the AG’s Office. I talk to Gretchen routinely about all sorts of things. So I… I don’t know what else to tell you. And like I… like I already said, this whole Q&A thing in the middle of a no confidence vote, you guys should probably wrap up that business before you move on to more Q&A.

Hauth: Any other discussions?

Derrick Stevenson: Call the question.

Hauth: Any other discussion? Okay, I’ll call the question, yea or nay. Art Stevenson. Art Stevenson.

Art Stevenson: Yea. Yea.

Hauth: Derrick Stevenson.

Derrick Stevenson: Yea.

Hauth: Jerry Bird.

Bird: No vote.

Hauth: Steve Jackson. Steve Jackson? Steve Gordon. Well, I would say… I’ll say for the record, we don’t have enough votes. There’s only going to be three. Unfortunately, I don’t have confidence in, Eric, your position at this time and the job that you’ve done on behalf of the managers, unfortunately. I’ve said it again. I thought when you were hired it was going to be, you know, a new day…

Derrick Stevenson: Point of order.

Hauth: … a new dawn. A new day, a new dawn for the… Go ahead. Go ahead.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah…

Hauth: But I have to say that…

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I’d like to…

Hauth: But I… Go ahead.

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah, I’d just like to say that we did have a majority vote of the people, the members that voted and so it does pass.

Hauth: Well, there’s not… there’s not a quorum. There’s only three managers…

Art Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: There’s only three…

Art Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: Yeah.

Art Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: Okay. Yeah.

Art Stevenson: Okay. Are you… Are you going to vote? If you vote… If you vote then there is a majority of the quorum present and therefore it does pass.

Hauth: I don’t think that’s accurate, Art. Because we have six members on the Committee, right?

Derrick Stevenson: Yeah.

Hauth: And there’s only three… Jerry voted… Jerry voted no. So okay.

Bird: Still makes me part of the quorum.

Art Stevenson: That’s right. He’s still part of the quorum.

Hauth: Okay. I’ll go ahead… I’ll go ahead… Unfortunately, I will at this point vote no confidence in Director Morris. [Note: Chair Hauth made no mention of Dacia Johnson, who is included in

the amended motion.] So motion passes. Okay, any other business? Art, I know you wanted to talk…

Derrick Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: … about the vacation.

Derrick Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: Go ahead.

Derrick Stevenson: This is Derrick. Yeah, it’s my grandson’s 18th birthday and I’m already late getting there so I got to… I got to leave. Sorry.

Hauth: Okay…

Derrick Stevenson: I don’t know if that’s going to stick you without a quorum or what.

Hauth: The motion and the amendment passes. So…

Art Stevenson: Randy?

Hauth: If there isn’t… Art, go ahead.

Art Stevenson: Yeah, Derrick’s leaving so I make a motion that we adjourn.

Hauth: Okay. Well, motion’s made to adjourn the meeting.

Morris: Have a good night, everybody.

Hauth: Thanks.

Derrick Stevenson: I second.

Gordon Smith: See you guys.

Motions Passed During November 29 BECC Special Meeting

1. That item “Other Business” be added to the agenda. Proposed: Art Stevenson. Seconded: Derrick Stevenson. Passed (with Steve Gordon absent).

2. That approval of the minutes from the previous BECC meeting be postponed to the next meeting.Proposed: Art Stevenson. Seconded: Derrick Stevenson. Passed (with Steve Gordon absent).

3. That the Elected Committee reject the proposed BE rules for being incomplete and out of compliance with federal law.

Proposed: Art Stevenson. Seconded: Derrick Stevenson. Passed (with Steve Gordon absent).4. That the BECC send to Jesse Hartle a copy of the audio recording of this meeting along 

with a letter expressing the vending facility managers’ objections to the proposed rules. Additionally, that the BECC set up a meeting with Jesse Hartle to discuss how RSA plans on addressing those objections.Proposed: Art Stevenson. Seconded: Derrick Stevenson. Passed (with Steve Jackson and Steve Gordon absent).

5. That the Elected Committee expresses a vote of no confidence in Director Morris and Executive Director Johnson and that that should be communicated to the OCB Board.Proposed: Art Stevenson. Seconded: Derrick Stevenson. Passed (with Jerry Bird abstaining and Steve Jackson absent and Steve Gordon absent).

Transcription: Mark Riesmeyer