Errors in story on the blind

Recently (Feb. 8), your newspaper printed an article by John Hale on the future of the Division for the Blind and Visually Impaired, specifically addressing the plan by the governor’s productivity task force to move the division from the Department of Education to the Department of Labor.

The article contains many erroneous statements that this organization would like to bring to the attention of your readers. Perhaps the most blatant is the assumption that all blind persons in Maine are opposed to, or at best deeply concerned with, the change — and fear the loss of the wonderful services currently enjoyed by the blind in the state.

The truth is that for more than 50 years the DBVI has had virtually unlimited control over the ives of blind persons in Maine. During that time period, the literacy rate among blind students has dropped from about 40 percent to a national low of 4 percent; unemployment among working-age blind adults has risen to a whopping 75 percent!

What services, then, are people so worried of losing? It is the opinion of the directors of the NFB of Maine that change is strongly indicated.

The National Federation of the Blind of Maine is supportive of the task force’s plan to move the DBVI into the Department of Labor for many reasons. First, we believe that the change would help bring blind persons more fully into the mainstream — a major goal of both the Americans with Disabilities Act and the revised national Vocational Rehabilitation Regulations.

The main purpose of vocational rehabilitation is to assist disabled persons in becoming gainfully employed. The proposed transition would incorporate the services for disabled persons into traditional job training and job seeking agencies statewide, and facilitate the employment process for all disabled persons.

Furthermore, we have been given to understand that, with this move, the DBVI will lose its status as an autonomous bureau. This means that a system of checks and balances will now be implemented in the workings of the division. Ultimately, this will lead to a svaings because the division will need to subscribe to state rules and regulations regarding bidding proposals. Presently, DBVI awards contrats to the same entities year after year, without allowing for a competitive biddy process, which helps to keep encouraging excellence in service.

Also, in the long run, we see this move as a first step to ending costly duplication of services in the field of special education. Mr. Hale’s article states that “The Division for the Blind provides teachers for blind children.” This is a false statement. Teachers of the blind are contracted for through a private agency, which contract could either continue or not, at the discretion of the educational entity responsible for ecuating the children in question.

Additionally, in comply with federal laws such as the Individuals wtih Disabilities Educational Act, schools hire personnel to provide appropriate educational services to all disabled students. DBVI education coordinators, despite their protestations to the contrary, merely provide the same services available locally. The only difference is that, while local special education personnel can be held accountable for their actions, DBVI staffers cannot.

We of the National Federation of the Blind of Maine believe the proposal by the Productivity Task Force regarding the disposition of the DBVI will be beneficial to Maine’s Blind citizens, and to Maine taxpayers as well.

This column was prepared by the following: Connie Leblond, president; David McCabe, vice president; Robert Leblond, treasurer; Seth Leblond, secretary; Rob McIninch, Michael Jacubouis and Bruce Westfall, executive board members, all of the National Federation of the Blind of Maine Inc. in Portland.