Monday, June 26, 2006
Flight Schools Fight Background Checks
A bill that's been lurking under the legislative radar in New York for almost four years has been revived by the state Senate and will hurt the flight training industry there, according to local schools and pilot organizations. In 2002, New York, like many other states, thought it prudent to step into federal jurisdiction by trying to institute background checks on student pilots. As protests grew and federal regulations came into play, most states simply dropped their initiatives. However, New York's background-check law has remained on the legislative agenda and was revived last week by a vote in the Senate. If passed by the Assembly and finally adopted as law, it would prevent anyone from taking flying lessons without approval from the state's division of criminal justice services. Industry spokesmen say that will scare away prospective pilots. Richard Kaylor, of Richmor Aviation, which operates three flight schools in upstate New York, told Business First of Buffalo that schools are already required to submit names of students to the federal government so they can be checked against terrorist watch lists so the state initiative is redundant. AOPA spokesman Craig Dotlo said the law would deter students because of the time lag that would be required to process the background check, giving them time to find other activities. Dotlo, a former FBI agent, also noted that any terrorist who does his homework would be careful to avoid circumstances that would trigger something in the check. "What possible good is this doing except preventing flight schools from being profitable?" Dotlo said.
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
A Definitive Immigration Policy
A Definitive Immigration Policy
By Frosty Wooldridge
June 19, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
America suffers its greatest crisis since the Civil War. “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. We are met on a great battlefield of that war testing whether that nation or any nation can long endure….”
You’ve read or memorized Lincoln’s Gettysburg address. It stood as the definitive mandate for our country in 1865. Lincoln died for his efforts, yet the nation lived. Men and women perished in terrible battles that pitted brothers against brothers and sisters against sisters. In their time, it was states rights and slavery.
Today, in America, our second greatest crisis stems from an endless line of invading illegal aliens crashing our borders from Mexico and around the world. In recent months, they marched for legalizing anarchy and their lawless actions. Their numbers grow and our citizens diminish against the onslaught as our elected leaders work for illegality, for anarchy and in favor for illegal aliens. Some of our greatest national leaders such as Senator McCain, Specter, Hagel, Frist and a slew of others voted against the U.S. Constitution by their actions in supporting Senate Bill 2611. George Bush supports it against 85 percent of the American electorate. Bush aims to destroy the middle class. He’s doing it on purpose because he represents big business. He’s doing it because he is a globalist. He intends to destroy the borders of our country. It is wrong, illegal, unjust, against American citizenship, against legal immigration and a desecration of our rule of law. It stands against every American by provoking and supporting lawlessness. It accepts anarchy as mainstream. Senate Bill 2611 stands against H.R. 4437, which Americans demanded.
The greatest disconnect of American citizens from their leaders wraps itself in the fraud of Senate Bill 2611. Not only will it pound America into the ground with 100 million more people from out of country, it will devastate our sustainability, language, culture, cohesiveness, schools and national fabric. The immigration amnesty of 1986 became a dismal failure which created the 20 million more illegals we suffer today. It allowed the rich and super rich to buy off our leaders as well as degrade our immigration laws or make sure none were/are enforced.
Why is it that Americans know what is best for their country but their leaders stand corrupt in the eyes of history? Why won’t this president and Congress write and enforce a simple, straight-forward immigration policy?
Calie Stephens of Dallas, Texas wrote Bill # 1 USA for a definite immigration policy supported by Americans. How can we stop this invasion? It’s as simple as the nose on your face.
1. Station 20,000 military troops on the southern border of the United States with Mexico. Remove troops from Europe, South Korea or other non-critical areas of the world. Troops must be in place no later than one month after passage of Bill # 1. Once all troops are in place, immediately stop all illegal entry into the United States. Begin construction of a series of actual and virtual fencing to allow for the eventual reduction of manpower necessary to prevent illegal entry. As soon as possible, begin training border agents to replace military troops.
2. Give all illegal aliens already in the United States no more than six months to register with I.C.E. They will be photographed, finger-printed and under go a criminal background check.
a, If they pass the criminal background check and have proof of employment, they will be issued a tamper-proof identification card and a two year work visa.
b, If they fail the criminal background check, they will be deported to their native land.
3. After six months has passed, anyone who does not have proof or a tamper-proof identification card and a work visa will be detained, photographed, finger-printed and deported to their native country.
a, If the illegal who is deported ever enters the Unites States again, he or she will be sent to federal prison for a mandatory term of three years with no chance of parole. The term will be doubled each time the illegal re-enters the United States.
4. Any employer who hires anyone who does not have proof of citizenship or a tamper-proof identification care and a work visa will be fined $10,000.00 per occurrence. Repeated employer violations will be subject to criminal penalties, including prison.
5. All existing citizens will be issued a tamper-proof ID card.
6. Pass a law or a constitutional amendment that prevents children of illegals from gaining citizenship of the United States.
7. Two years after the initial securing of the southern border, as work visa expires, the immigrant must return to his or her native country.
8. If during the term of his two-year work visa, the immigrant was not convicted of any crime and has proof of employment awaiting him in the United States, he may apply for permission to re-enter the United States on a new two year work visa.
9. No one will be allowed to apply for American citizenship while in the United States. Applications for citizenship must be made from applicant’s native country. They must read and speak English fluently for entry as a worker.
10. Anyone not in the United States can apply for a two year work visa. Visas will be issued if applicant passes a criminal background check, has proof employment awaiting him in the United States and meets other requirements yet to be determined.
11. Any non-citizen who works in the United States will pay all taxes currently being paid by citizens except security taxes. He will not be able to collect social security benefits based on his employment while a non-citizen.
12. Any amendments or changes cannot extend the length of Bill # 1 USA beyond one page.
13. Anyone who wants to become an American citizen must apply in his/her country and wait in line for the 100,000 slots annually that will allow a stable U.S. society. Anyone who is convicted of a crime will not be allowed citizenship.
This stands as the template for a definitive immigration policy. It’s simple common sense, realistic and easily workable and fair to all Americans and anyone who wants to work in our country.
By Frosty Wooldridge
June 19, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
America suffers its greatest crisis since the Civil War. “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. We are met on a great battlefield of that war testing whether that nation or any nation can long endure….”
You’ve read or memorized Lincoln’s Gettysburg address. It stood as the definitive mandate for our country in 1865. Lincoln died for his efforts, yet the nation lived. Men and women perished in terrible battles that pitted brothers against brothers and sisters against sisters. In their time, it was states rights and slavery.
Today, in America, our second greatest crisis stems from an endless line of invading illegal aliens crashing our borders from Mexico and around the world. In recent months, they marched for legalizing anarchy and their lawless actions. Their numbers grow and our citizens diminish against the onslaught as our elected leaders work for illegality, for anarchy and in favor for illegal aliens. Some of our greatest national leaders such as Senator McCain, Specter, Hagel, Frist and a slew of others voted against the U.S. Constitution by their actions in supporting Senate Bill 2611. George Bush supports it against 85 percent of the American electorate. Bush aims to destroy the middle class. He’s doing it on purpose because he represents big business. He’s doing it because he is a globalist. He intends to destroy the borders of our country. It is wrong, illegal, unjust, against American citizenship, against legal immigration and a desecration of our rule of law. It stands against every American by provoking and supporting lawlessness. It accepts anarchy as mainstream. Senate Bill 2611 stands against H.R. 4437, which Americans demanded.
The greatest disconnect of American citizens from their leaders wraps itself in the fraud of Senate Bill 2611. Not only will it pound America into the ground with 100 million more people from out of country, it will devastate our sustainability, language, culture, cohesiveness, schools and national fabric. The immigration amnesty of 1986 became a dismal failure which created the 20 million more illegals we suffer today. It allowed the rich and super rich to buy off our leaders as well as degrade our immigration laws or make sure none were/are enforced.
Why is it that Americans know what is best for their country but their leaders stand corrupt in the eyes of history? Why won’t this president and Congress write and enforce a simple, straight-forward immigration policy?
Calie Stephens of Dallas, Texas wrote Bill # 1 USA for a definite immigration policy supported by Americans. How can we stop this invasion? It’s as simple as the nose on your face.
1. Station 20,000 military troops on the southern border of the United States with Mexico. Remove troops from Europe, South Korea or other non-critical areas of the world. Troops must be in place no later than one month after passage of Bill # 1. Once all troops are in place, immediately stop all illegal entry into the United States. Begin construction of a series of actual and virtual fencing to allow for the eventual reduction of manpower necessary to prevent illegal entry. As soon as possible, begin training border agents to replace military troops.
2. Give all illegal aliens already in the United States no more than six months to register with I.C.E. They will be photographed, finger-printed and under go a criminal background check.
a, If they pass the criminal background check and have proof of employment, they will be issued a tamper-proof identification card and a two year work visa.
b, If they fail the criminal background check, they will be deported to their native land.
3. After six months has passed, anyone who does not have proof or a tamper-proof identification card and a work visa will be detained, photographed, finger-printed and deported to their native country.
a, If the illegal who is deported ever enters the Unites States again, he or she will be sent to federal prison for a mandatory term of three years with no chance of parole. The term will be doubled each time the illegal re-enters the United States.
4. Any employer who hires anyone who does not have proof of citizenship or a tamper-proof identification care and a work visa will be fined $10,000.00 per occurrence. Repeated employer violations will be subject to criminal penalties, including prison.
5. All existing citizens will be issued a tamper-proof ID card.
6. Pass a law or a constitutional amendment that prevents children of illegals from gaining citizenship of the United States.
7. Two years after the initial securing of the southern border, as work visa expires, the immigrant must return to his or her native country.
8. If during the term of his two-year work visa, the immigrant was not convicted of any crime and has proof of employment awaiting him in the United States, he may apply for permission to re-enter the United States on a new two year work visa.
9. No one will be allowed to apply for American citizenship while in the United States. Applications for citizenship must be made from applicant’s native country. They must read and speak English fluently for entry as a worker.
10. Anyone not in the United States can apply for a two year work visa. Visas will be issued if applicant passes a criminal background check, has proof employment awaiting him in the United States and meets other requirements yet to be determined.
11. Any non-citizen who works in the United States will pay all taxes currently being paid by citizens except security taxes. He will not be able to collect social security benefits based on his employment while a non-citizen.
12. Any amendments or changes cannot extend the length of Bill # 1 USA beyond one page.
13. Anyone who wants to become an American citizen must apply in his/her country and wait in line for the 100,000 slots annually that will allow a stable U.S. society. Anyone who is convicted of a crime will not be allowed citizenship.
This stands as the template for a definitive immigration policy. It’s simple common sense, realistic and easily workable and fair to all Americans and anyone who wants to work in our country.
Tuesday, June 13, 2006
OOIDA backs bill to simplify background checks
The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association announced its support for a bill introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives that limits the amount truckers can be charged for the background check required to haul hazardous materials. The bill also directs the Transportation Security Administration to improve the efficiency of such checks to eliminate redundancy, lost time and driver income.
Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-Mo., introduced the Professional Driver Background Check Efficiency Act of 2006 (HR5560) that caps the amount professional drivers can be charged for the hazmat endorsement at $50 per individual. The legislation also stipulates that professional drivers who already have undergone background checks to receive the endorsement will not be subject to an additional check to receive a Transportation Worker Identification Credential card or be required to pay the approximately $105 to $139 fee for this additional check.
“We are very pleased with this commonsense piece of legislation,” said Jim Johnston, OOIDA president and chief executive officer. “While professional truck drivers are among those who are most concerned with security in transportation, the scatter-shot approach to security taken so far has left them extremely frustrated."
HR5560 also calls for a study and recommendations to Congress on ways to eliminate the redundancy and inefficiency of additional background checks for professional drivers required by other federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy.
"You can make the case that a driver should pay a reasonable fee to have a background check, but how many times should you be expected to pay that fee and additional ones that bureaucrats dream up?" Johnston asks. "We have at least one member who has undergone a half dozen background checks for different government agencies, not counting the hazmat endorsement that comes when he renews his current license. Not only do drivers get charged higher and higher fees for these, but they also have substantial out-of-pocket costs and lost income from the time off work. It only makes sense for federal agencies to coordinate their efforts to minimize the cost and improve efficiency.”
Rep. Russ Carnahan, D-Mo., introduced the Professional Driver Background Check Efficiency Act of 2006 (HR5560) that caps the amount professional drivers can be charged for the hazmat endorsement at $50 per individual. The legislation also stipulates that professional drivers who already have undergone background checks to receive the endorsement will not be subject to an additional check to receive a Transportation Worker Identification Credential card or be required to pay the approximately $105 to $139 fee for this additional check.
“We are very pleased with this commonsense piece of legislation,” said Jim Johnston, OOIDA president and chief executive officer. “While professional truck drivers are among those who are most concerned with security in transportation, the scatter-shot approach to security taken so far has left them extremely frustrated."
HR5560 also calls for a study and recommendations to Congress on ways to eliminate the redundancy and inefficiency of additional background checks for professional drivers required by other federal agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy.
"You can make the case that a driver should pay a reasonable fee to have a background check, but how many times should you be expected to pay that fee and additional ones that bureaucrats dream up?" Johnston asks. "We have at least one member who has undergone a half dozen background checks for different government agencies, not counting the hazmat endorsement that comes when he renews his current license. Not only do drivers get charged higher and higher fees for these, but they also have substantial out-of-pocket costs and lost income from the time off work. It only makes sense for federal agencies to coordinate their efforts to minimize the cost and improve efficiency.”
Private facilities are not held accountable
By Carolyn Tuft and Joe Mahr
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Gary Oheim lay in a group home as bed sores eroded his skin to the bone and filled his room with the smell of rotting flesh.
The smell should have been a warning sign to the state caseworker assigned to do monthly checks on the mentally retarded man. But the caseworker had been to the privately run facility only once in three months, the state said, and then didn't check on Oheim.
The Department of Mental Health didn't learn about Oheim's condition until a worker in that southwest Missouri home complained. By then it was too late. Twenty days later, Oheim died in a Bolivar hospital. He was 40.
Missouri had failed to follow its own rules to supervise the private companies and nonprofit agencies it entrusts with the vast majority of clients requiring full-time care.
Advocates for the disabled often focus on the mistreatment uncovered in state-run institutions. But it is in private industry - particularly in the housing and care of mentally retarded people - that most complaints and investigations occur, where most injuries are logged, and where most deaths have been blamed on poor care - 14 of the 21 deaths of full-time residents.
A Post-Dispatch investigation has found that Missouri's system to catch abuse and neglect at private facilities for mentally retarded residents is in some key ways worse than the state's often criticized practices in policing its own institutions.
Among the findings:
Caseworkers are considered the eyes and ears of the Mental Health Department oversight system, yet some consistently fail to meet with clients at least once a month, as required.
State auditors have repeatedly found times when private facilities did not report suspicious incidents, as required, and state overseers did not investigate reports that were submitted.
The state takes twice as long to finish investigations in privately run facilities as it takes at its own institutions.
The state has failed to revoke licenses of facilities where workers committed deadly lapses, and has failed to ensure workers who have mistreated residents don't get jobs at other places and abuse again.
The Department of Mental Health's own review of its oversight flaws found a system that "really is stretched," said Clive Woodward, the department's director of quality outcomes.
"We were looking for opportunities for improvement, and we have plenty," Woodward told the department's oversight commission last week.
The strain on the oversight system is expected to get only worse.
Taking part in a four-decade national movement to shutter institutions, Missouri now houses five times as many people in private facilities as ones run by the state - with pressure by many advocates to increase that ratio.
Most mentally retarded Missourians still live at home with their parents. As the parents die, experts predict the state will be asked to find places to house thousands more in a system that already is struggling with tighter budgets, bigger caseloads and waiting lists.
Fewer checks, more paperwork
When the Legislature created the Department of Mental Health in 1974, abuses at large, public institutions had grabbed headlines across the country, and advocates were pushing states to shift money and residents into smaller, privately run group homes that they said would boost the quality of life of residents.
The new state department took over control of the older state institutions, and began regional centers to police the new group homes sprouting across the state. The regional centers assembled an army of state caseworkers - called service coordinators - to check on every resident in every facility at least monthly.
But there has been an explosion in the number and types of group homes, particularly over the last decade, and the ranks of caseworkers are stretched thin trying to oversee a mix of corporate facilities, nonprofits and "mom-and-pop" operations.
Mental Health Department officials acknowledge that caseworkers at some of the 11 regional centers must oversee the care of up to 80 residents. Officials estimate that 10 percent of caseworkers aren't making the required visits each month and others are so busy reviewing required paperwork at the homes that they have little time to visit with the residents.
"They're very valuable staff, and they are really feeling beleaguered right now," said Linda Roebuck, the interim director of the division overseeing services for mentally retarded residents.
As far back as 2001, the state auditor's office - a separate watchdog agency in Missouri government - warned of inconsistent policies and practices throughout the state.
Caseloads for caseworkers averaged 41 to 75, depending on the location, with at least one St. Louis caseworker forced to oversee the care of 139 people in private facilities and homes, auditors reported.
The regional centers also have special quality assurance teams that are supposed to check the performance of privately run facilities every three months, but auditors found they had no standards for staffing them.
Poplar Bluff had 13 staffers to oversee care for about 1,100 people. St. Louis' three-person team was to look after more than 9,100.
In the middle were places like the Springfield regional center, which had seven staffers to watch out for 2,200 residents.
One of them was Oheim.
His cerebral palsy had left him immobile and susceptible to bedsores if his caregivers didn't move him and clean him regularly.
That's what the attorney general's office later discovered had happened to Oheim in the fall of 2001 at Turtle Creek Group Home in Bolivar. Right after Thanksgiving, his bed sores had broken open. He was in constant pain and his body started to smell, according to court records.
Workers said the supervisor of the home, Mary Collura, claimed to be taking Oheim to the doctor when she wasn't, court records show. But no one would know of Oheim's troubles outside the home. That fall, his caseworker visited once, on Nov. 9, 2001, and didn't see Oheim, according to mental health officials.
A month later, the regional center's quality assurance team did its three-month review of the six-resident facility, but didn't note any problems with the care of Oheim, according to Mental Health Department records.
It took a new worker at Turtle Creek to complain to Collura's boss, who called the Mental Health Department. That was Jan. 9, 2002, when Oheim's weight had dropped to 108 pounds.
Oheim's death later that month sparked a rare investigation of abuse and neglect by the attorney general's Medicaid fraud unit.
Collura pleaded guilty in February 2006 to involuntary manslaughter and is serving five years in prison. Six other workers pleaded guilty to lesser charges, and charges against the home's corporate owners are pending.
The state eventually shut down the home for other reasons, and the caseworker was suspended for six months and later quit the agency.
"It should not have happened the way it did," said Roebuck, who took over running the department this year. "There was some confusion at the time."
Mental health officials say they have been trying to lighten caseloads and partner more with local government agencies to boost oversight, and they've been working for years to revamp policies and procedures on the quality assurance teams.
But it's clear that the problems have continued.
Last fall, employees of the state auditor's office walked into the Sagamont Group Home for seven in southwest Missouri and found broken furniture, unpackaged food on shelves, an exposed electrical outlet and dirty rooms. Caseworkers who visited the home in the previous two weeks hadn't noted any of the problems.
Also troubling was what happened four days before they visited, the auditor's report said. A resident who was supposed to be kept away from dangerous, ingestible chemicals drank a bottle of hairspray and had to be hospitalized.
The group home notified the Mental Health Department, which ordered the home to start locking up hygiene products after each use. But the day auditors visited - three days after that order was issued - the products were still scattered about a bathroom shared by residents.
No one from the regional center had stopped by to ensure the orders had been followed.
Not getting reports
Even if a caseworker checks on clients every 30 days, no one from the state is around the rest of the month.
The data, at first, suggests there's not nearly as much to worry about in private facilities compared to state ones. The numbers of incidents are higher in the private system, but when compared to the caseloads, the rate of confirmed mistreatment is only a fourth of the rate for people in state care.
That's if the numbers are accurate.
In a report released last fall, the state auditor's office found "numerous examples" of incidents not being entered into the state's incident tracking system - either by private facilities not submitting reports, or by regional center staff not entering them into the computer. It was a follow-up report to the earlier review by the state auditor's office, which found caseworkers at one regional center threw away incident reports before they could be entered into the tracking system and investigated. Left in the void are investigations that never happened, such as the case of Matthew Mell.
The mentally retarded man was transferred among 14 facilities in two years, his family said.
At a group home in Springfield, he began drinking gallons of fluids and wetting the bed, quickly lost 30 pounds, and had behavior so erratic he pushed his mother down, breaking her shoulder, his family said. He finally collapsed one day in 2000 and was rushed to the hospital, where doctors found he had undiagnosed diabetes.
Mental Health Department policy calls for caregivers to ensure residents receive needed medical care, but there's no record the incident was reported, as required, or investigated.
There's also no record of an investigation of an alleged sexual attack of Mell at a group home in Nixa.
"My parents got a call that one of the workers had attacked him sexually, and they (the group home) didn't want to be responsible for him," said Mell's sister, Kristal Lindstrom.
Lindstrom said the family was told the attacker was a worker recently out of prison, but they weren't told exactly what happened - just that Mell needed to be placed somewhere else.
They tried other places, including a nursing home in Ozark, where his family said staffers trying to control him punched him and broke his glasses in 2001. Such altercations are supposed to be reported. Again, there's no record of the allegation, according to the Department of Mental Health.
Nor is there a record of anyone investigating how nearly $1,500 worth of video games were stolen from his room there.
Lindstrom, her brother's guardian, successfully fought to get her brother into a state-run institution in Nevada. She said his behavior is now under control and he's much safer.
She has testified about the alleged mistreatment of her brother in front of state lawmakers.
The Department of Mental Health has never questioned the accuracy of the family's public complaints. They haven't checked into them either, officials acknowledged.
The lack of reporting doesn't surprise Patricia Campbell.
She has run group homes around Poplar Bluff for more than three decades and has watched the number of homes explode as the federal government has loosened the rules about how Medicaid money can be spent to care for the mentally disabled.
While she said many facilities are well-run, she knows that it's easy for bad facilities to hide abuse or neglect.
"If you have a nice building, they will give you the license and they will give you clients, and they will tell you how to keep the paperwork going," Campbell said. "But nobody comes in and sees if the person that you're supposed to be caring for is being cared for."
If a resident gets mistreated or injured, nobody from the state is there to see it.
"If you don't write up a report and they don't come out and check," she said, "who's going to know? Nobody."
Not investigating
Even when facilities do report, the department takes twice as long to investigate complaints in the private facilities as in its own, according to an analysis of case data.
Department officials cite myriad reasons: It's harder to track down witnesses in private facilities, private facilities keep different types of records, and federal rules now require investigations in the state-run facilities to be done in five days.
"It's harder to have the direct control in a community provider to complete this," said the department's medical director, Joseph Parks.
And not every complaint is entered into the system to trigger an investigation.
One facility in St. Joseph dutifully faxed the state a neglect report in November 2004. A resident who was supposed to be watched constantly had wandered away and into a neighbor's living room. The group home's workers didn't know the resident was gone until the neighbor returned the resident.
But the group home never heard back from the agency - allowing the neglectful employee to work two more weeks with residents before resigning.
The incident in St. Joseph came to light after federal inspectors saw the report and wondered why it hadn't been investigated. But unlike state-run institutions, only a handful of private facilities are large enough or specialized enough to require federal inspections.
And a group that normally monitors the system is also stretched thin. While it supports the use of private facilities over state ones, Missouri Protection & Advocacy acknowledges it's much harder for the nonprofit group to keep tabs on hundreds of group homes spread throughout the state.
Legislators for a decade funded a program with five full-time department workers who trained and sent volunteers from home to home to check on residents, but the $195,000 funding was cut last year.
The department is starting a new program this year to send volunteers out.
The new program has a part-time coordinator, with a budget of $22,000.
No punishment
At times the Department of Mental Health has determined workers were guilty of mistreatment, but the workers have escaped punishment and commited abuse again.
The department is supposed to immediately put the names of banned workers on a list that public or private facilities check before hiring a new employee. But state auditors last year found 38 people on the list who were working with residents in private facilities. The state's delays in adding names to the list and delays in finishing investigations were blamed.
One worker at a private facility physically and verbally abused a client, and it took the St. Louis regional center nearly two years to add the worker's name to the list. By then, the worker had been hired by another facility, where the worker verbally abused and neglected another resident.
Auditors also found that the state wasn't ensuring private facilities did background checks; one place hired someone without performing a background check and later discovered the new worker had sexually abused a resident there.
Another facility learned after hiring someone that the worker had convictions for robbery, unlawful use of a weapon and drug trafficking - all crimes that disqualify someone from working with mentally disabled people. The employee was eventually fired, but not before being accused of sexually abusing a resident.
Mental health officials say they now run regular reports to ensure background checks are done and banned employees are quickly put on the disqualification lists.
But there was at least one time Mental Health Department officials knew of a banned worker, and gave him a license to operate a Kansas City-area home, Schwab Residential Center II.
Department investigators had substantiated 11 cases of mistreatment at the home from 1999 to 2004, including one that led to a resident's death. Yet Mental Health Department officials told state auditors they lacked the authority to revoke the home's license.
After state auditors raised concerns, the state revoked the home's license. It became the first facility since at least 2000 to have a license revoked for abuse or neglect.
Dorn Schuffman, director of the Department of Mental Health, said the department has shut down other homes with chronic mistreatment of clients, but it was done under "no fault" provisions of contracts that allow the state to cancel them for no reason. He won't name the facilities, he said, because he fears lawsuits if he publicly linked them to mistreatment.
A Post-Dispatch review of licensing and certification files revealed that mental health officials didn't shut down any other facilities because of deaths blamed on serious neglect of workers. The state did shut down Turtle Creek, but only because it had revoked licenses for a group of facilities of its parent corporation. Oheim's death wasn't listed as a reason.
Mental health officials say they punish facilities in other ways, such as forcing them to adopt plans to correct their bad behavior. And while facility operators complain the punishment can be too harsh, department workers complain the opposite, Woodward said.
"Regional centers will tell you that they have next to no control whatsoever of the (private) providers, and it's really hard to shut them down when we need to," he told the commission.
Some advocates for the disabled are demanding more accountability. Among the critics is Gary Stevens, who has cerebral palsy and speaks with the help of a caregiver.
"I feel like the providers' money should be pulled, and if they don't do better, their certification should be pulled," said Stevens, who sits on the Missouri Planning Council for Developmental Disabilities. "If you start to pull their money, they'll bow down."
Even some operators of private facilities say they would welcome more oversight and tougher enforcement of the rules to ensure that residents get the care they deserve.
One such plea came from Wendy Buehler, president of Life Skills, which oversees residential services for about 350 people in the St. Louis area. She told the
commission in April that it needed to find ways to shut down bad facilities.
"Historically they have not been held accountable," she said.
"There doesn't seem to be a position from the department, 'This is a good provider, this isn't.' They have to be pretty bad to get kicked out."
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Gary Oheim lay in a group home as bed sores eroded his skin to the bone and filled his room with the smell of rotting flesh.
The smell should have been a warning sign to the state caseworker assigned to do monthly checks on the mentally retarded man. But the caseworker had been to the privately run facility only once in three months, the state said, and then didn't check on Oheim.
The Department of Mental Health didn't learn about Oheim's condition until a worker in that southwest Missouri home complained. By then it was too late. Twenty days later, Oheim died in a Bolivar hospital. He was 40.
Missouri had failed to follow its own rules to supervise the private companies and nonprofit agencies it entrusts with the vast majority of clients requiring full-time care.
Advocates for the disabled often focus on the mistreatment uncovered in state-run institutions. But it is in private industry - particularly in the housing and care of mentally retarded people - that most complaints and investigations occur, where most injuries are logged, and where most deaths have been blamed on poor care - 14 of the 21 deaths of full-time residents.
A Post-Dispatch investigation has found that Missouri's system to catch abuse and neglect at private facilities for mentally retarded residents is in some key ways worse than the state's often criticized practices in policing its own institutions.
Among the findings:
Caseworkers are considered the eyes and ears of the Mental Health Department oversight system, yet some consistently fail to meet with clients at least once a month, as required.
State auditors have repeatedly found times when private facilities did not report suspicious incidents, as required, and state overseers did not investigate reports that were submitted.
The state takes twice as long to finish investigations in privately run facilities as it takes at its own institutions.
The state has failed to revoke licenses of facilities where workers committed deadly lapses, and has failed to ensure workers who have mistreated residents don't get jobs at other places and abuse again.
The Department of Mental Health's own review of its oversight flaws found a system that "really is stretched," said Clive Woodward, the department's director of quality outcomes.
"We were looking for opportunities for improvement, and we have plenty," Woodward told the department's oversight commission last week.
The strain on the oversight system is expected to get only worse.
Taking part in a four-decade national movement to shutter institutions, Missouri now houses five times as many people in private facilities as ones run by the state - with pressure by many advocates to increase that ratio.
Most mentally retarded Missourians still live at home with their parents. As the parents die, experts predict the state will be asked to find places to house thousands more in a system that already is struggling with tighter budgets, bigger caseloads and waiting lists.
Fewer checks, more paperwork
When the Legislature created the Department of Mental Health in 1974, abuses at large, public institutions had grabbed headlines across the country, and advocates were pushing states to shift money and residents into smaller, privately run group homes that they said would boost the quality of life of residents.
The new state department took over control of the older state institutions, and began regional centers to police the new group homes sprouting across the state. The regional centers assembled an army of state caseworkers - called service coordinators - to check on every resident in every facility at least monthly.
But there has been an explosion in the number and types of group homes, particularly over the last decade, and the ranks of caseworkers are stretched thin trying to oversee a mix of corporate facilities, nonprofits and "mom-and-pop" operations.
Mental Health Department officials acknowledge that caseworkers at some of the 11 regional centers must oversee the care of up to 80 residents. Officials estimate that 10 percent of caseworkers aren't making the required visits each month and others are so busy reviewing required paperwork at the homes that they have little time to visit with the residents.
"They're very valuable staff, and they are really feeling beleaguered right now," said Linda Roebuck, the interim director of the division overseeing services for mentally retarded residents.
As far back as 2001, the state auditor's office - a separate watchdog agency in Missouri government - warned of inconsistent policies and practices throughout the state.
Caseloads for caseworkers averaged 41 to 75, depending on the location, with at least one St. Louis caseworker forced to oversee the care of 139 people in private facilities and homes, auditors reported.
The regional centers also have special quality assurance teams that are supposed to check the performance of privately run facilities every three months, but auditors found they had no standards for staffing them.
Poplar Bluff had 13 staffers to oversee care for about 1,100 people. St. Louis' three-person team was to look after more than 9,100.
In the middle were places like the Springfield regional center, which had seven staffers to watch out for 2,200 residents.
One of them was Oheim.
His cerebral palsy had left him immobile and susceptible to bedsores if his caregivers didn't move him and clean him regularly.
That's what the attorney general's office later discovered had happened to Oheim in the fall of 2001 at Turtle Creek Group Home in Bolivar. Right after Thanksgiving, his bed sores had broken open. He was in constant pain and his body started to smell, according to court records.
Workers said the supervisor of the home, Mary Collura, claimed to be taking Oheim to the doctor when she wasn't, court records show. But no one would know of Oheim's troubles outside the home. That fall, his caseworker visited once, on Nov. 9, 2001, and didn't see Oheim, according to mental health officials.
A month later, the regional center's quality assurance team did its three-month review of the six-resident facility, but didn't note any problems with the care of Oheim, according to Mental Health Department records.
It took a new worker at Turtle Creek to complain to Collura's boss, who called the Mental Health Department. That was Jan. 9, 2002, when Oheim's weight had dropped to 108 pounds.
Oheim's death later that month sparked a rare investigation of abuse and neglect by the attorney general's Medicaid fraud unit.
Collura pleaded guilty in February 2006 to involuntary manslaughter and is serving five years in prison. Six other workers pleaded guilty to lesser charges, and charges against the home's corporate owners are pending.
The state eventually shut down the home for other reasons, and the caseworker was suspended for six months and later quit the agency.
"It should not have happened the way it did," said Roebuck, who took over running the department this year. "There was some confusion at the time."
Mental health officials say they have been trying to lighten caseloads and partner more with local government agencies to boost oversight, and they've been working for years to revamp policies and procedures on the quality assurance teams.
But it's clear that the problems have continued.
Last fall, employees of the state auditor's office walked into the Sagamont Group Home for seven in southwest Missouri and found broken furniture, unpackaged food on shelves, an exposed electrical outlet and dirty rooms. Caseworkers who visited the home in the previous two weeks hadn't noted any of the problems.
Also troubling was what happened four days before they visited, the auditor's report said. A resident who was supposed to be kept away from dangerous, ingestible chemicals drank a bottle of hairspray and had to be hospitalized.
The group home notified the Mental Health Department, which ordered the home to start locking up hygiene products after each use. But the day auditors visited - three days after that order was issued - the products were still scattered about a bathroom shared by residents.
No one from the regional center had stopped by to ensure the orders had been followed.
Not getting reports
Even if a caseworker checks on clients every 30 days, no one from the state is around the rest of the month.
The data, at first, suggests there's not nearly as much to worry about in private facilities compared to state ones. The numbers of incidents are higher in the private system, but when compared to the caseloads, the rate of confirmed mistreatment is only a fourth of the rate for people in state care.
That's if the numbers are accurate.
In a report released last fall, the state auditor's office found "numerous examples" of incidents not being entered into the state's incident tracking system - either by private facilities not submitting reports, or by regional center staff not entering them into the computer. It was a follow-up report to the earlier review by the state auditor's office, which found caseworkers at one regional center threw away incident reports before they could be entered into the tracking system and investigated. Left in the void are investigations that never happened, such as the case of Matthew Mell.
The mentally retarded man was transferred among 14 facilities in two years, his family said.
At a group home in Springfield, he began drinking gallons of fluids and wetting the bed, quickly lost 30 pounds, and had behavior so erratic he pushed his mother down, breaking her shoulder, his family said. He finally collapsed one day in 2000 and was rushed to the hospital, where doctors found he had undiagnosed diabetes.
Mental Health Department policy calls for caregivers to ensure residents receive needed medical care, but there's no record the incident was reported, as required, or investigated.
There's also no record of an investigation of an alleged sexual attack of Mell at a group home in Nixa.
"My parents got a call that one of the workers had attacked him sexually, and they (the group home) didn't want to be responsible for him," said Mell's sister, Kristal Lindstrom.
Lindstrom said the family was told the attacker was a worker recently out of prison, but they weren't told exactly what happened - just that Mell needed to be placed somewhere else.
They tried other places, including a nursing home in Ozark, where his family said staffers trying to control him punched him and broke his glasses in 2001. Such altercations are supposed to be reported. Again, there's no record of the allegation, according to the Department of Mental Health.
Nor is there a record of anyone investigating how nearly $1,500 worth of video games were stolen from his room there.
Lindstrom, her brother's guardian, successfully fought to get her brother into a state-run institution in Nevada. She said his behavior is now under control and he's much safer.
She has testified about the alleged mistreatment of her brother in front of state lawmakers.
The Department of Mental Health has never questioned the accuracy of the family's public complaints. They haven't checked into them either, officials acknowledged.
The lack of reporting doesn't surprise Patricia Campbell.
She has run group homes around Poplar Bluff for more than three decades and has watched the number of homes explode as the federal government has loosened the rules about how Medicaid money can be spent to care for the mentally disabled.
While she said many facilities are well-run, she knows that it's easy for bad facilities to hide abuse or neglect.
"If you have a nice building, they will give you the license and they will give you clients, and they will tell you how to keep the paperwork going," Campbell said. "But nobody comes in and sees if the person that you're supposed to be caring for is being cared for."
If a resident gets mistreated or injured, nobody from the state is there to see it.
"If you don't write up a report and they don't come out and check," she said, "who's going to know? Nobody."
Not investigating
Even when facilities do report, the department takes twice as long to investigate complaints in the private facilities as in its own, according to an analysis of case data.
Department officials cite myriad reasons: It's harder to track down witnesses in private facilities, private facilities keep different types of records, and federal rules now require investigations in the state-run facilities to be done in five days.
"It's harder to have the direct control in a community provider to complete this," said the department's medical director, Joseph Parks.
And not every complaint is entered into the system to trigger an investigation.
One facility in St. Joseph dutifully faxed the state a neglect report in November 2004. A resident who was supposed to be watched constantly had wandered away and into a neighbor's living room. The group home's workers didn't know the resident was gone until the neighbor returned the resident.
But the group home never heard back from the agency - allowing the neglectful employee to work two more weeks with residents before resigning.
The incident in St. Joseph came to light after federal inspectors saw the report and wondered why it hadn't been investigated. But unlike state-run institutions, only a handful of private facilities are large enough or specialized enough to require federal inspections.
And a group that normally monitors the system is also stretched thin. While it supports the use of private facilities over state ones, Missouri Protection & Advocacy acknowledges it's much harder for the nonprofit group to keep tabs on hundreds of group homes spread throughout the state.
Legislators for a decade funded a program with five full-time department workers who trained and sent volunteers from home to home to check on residents, but the $195,000 funding was cut last year.
The department is starting a new program this year to send volunteers out.
The new program has a part-time coordinator, with a budget of $22,000.
No punishment
At times the Department of Mental Health has determined workers were guilty of mistreatment, but the workers have escaped punishment and commited abuse again.
The department is supposed to immediately put the names of banned workers on a list that public or private facilities check before hiring a new employee. But state auditors last year found 38 people on the list who were working with residents in private facilities. The state's delays in adding names to the list and delays in finishing investigations were blamed.
One worker at a private facility physically and verbally abused a client, and it took the St. Louis regional center nearly two years to add the worker's name to the list. By then, the worker had been hired by another facility, where the worker verbally abused and neglected another resident.
Auditors also found that the state wasn't ensuring private facilities did background checks; one place hired someone without performing a background check and later discovered the new worker had sexually abused a resident there.
Another facility learned after hiring someone that the worker had convictions for robbery, unlawful use of a weapon and drug trafficking - all crimes that disqualify someone from working with mentally disabled people. The employee was eventually fired, but not before being accused of sexually abusing a resident.
Mental health officials say they now run regular reports to ensure background checks are done and banned employees are quickly put on the disqualification lists.
But there was at least one time Mental Health Department officials knew of a banned worker, and gave him a license to operate a Kansas City-area home, Schwab Residential Center II.
Department investigators had substantiated 11 cases of mistreatment at the home from 1999 to 2004, including one that led to a resident's death. Yet Mental Health Department officials told state auditors they lacked the authority to revoke the home's license.
After state auditors raised concerns, the state revoked the home's license. It became the first facility since at least 2000 to have a license revoked for abuse or neglect.
Dorn Schuffman, director of the Department of Mental Health, said the department has shut down other homes with chronic mistreatment of clients, but it was done under "no fault" provisions of contracts that allow the state to cancel them for no reason. He won't name the facilities, he said, because he fears lawsuits if he publicly linked them to mistreatment.
A Post-Dispatch review of licensing and certification files revealed that mental health officials didn't shut down any other facilities because of deaths blamed on serious neglect of workers. The state did shut down Turtle Creek, but only because it had revoked licenses for a group of facilities of its parent corporation. Oheim's death wasn't listed as a reason.
Mental health officials say they punish facilities in other ways, such as forcing them to adopt plans to correct their bad behavior. And while facility operators complain the punishment can be too harsh, department workers complain the opposite, Woodward said.
"Regional centers will tell you that they have next to no control whatsoever of the (private) providers, and it's really hard to shut them down when we need to," he told the commission.
Some advocates for the disabled are demanding more accountability. Among the critics is Gary Stevens, who has cerebral palsy and speaks with the help of a caregiver.
"I feel like the providers' money should be pulled, and if they don't do better, their certification should be pulled," said Stevens, who sits on the Missouri Planning Council for Developmental Disabilities. "If you start to pull their money, they'll bow down."
Even some operators of private facilities say they would welcome more oversight and tougher enforcement of the rules to ensure that residents get the care they deserve.
One such plea came from Wendy Buehler, president of Life Skills, which oversees residential services for about 350 people in the St. Louis area. She told the
commission in April that it needed to find ways to shut down bad facilities.
"Historically they have not been held accountable," she said.
"There doesn't seem to be a position from the department, 'This is a good provider, this isn't.' They have to be pretty bad to get kicked out."
A Routine Background Check Can Reveal Identity Theft
If you’ve ever applied for job, volunteered, or applied for credit, chances are excellent that a routine background check has been run on you. Despite the fact that most people have some form of background check run on them, very few people have an accurate idea of what a background check reveals about them. This is especially frightening since identity theft is on the rise. Many people only realize after they’ve been turned down for job or credit that their identity has been stolen and has been used by a criminal to steal or to perpetuate crime.
What can you do?
If you haven’t already considered running a full background check on yourself, it’s something you may want to think about. For a modest fee, you can hire a private investigator to run the standard type of pre-employment check, credit check, driving check, criminal check, and general background check that employers, landlords, and others can run on you. This can help you determine whether there are any errors on your records that need to be fixed and can help you find out whether someone has used your identity to perpetuate crime. Correcting mistakes and addressing identity theft before someone else runs a background check and finds false information about you just makes sense. Why lose a great opportunity because of someone else’s crime?
How to avoid identity theft:
Many people assume that identity theft only has to do with your credit report. Therefore, they only check their free credit reports once a year and assume that all is well as long as no one has been obviously stealing from them. This is very misleading. After all, your driving record, criminal record, as well as your credit record can be affected by identity theft as well. Therefore, one of the first ways of avoiding identity theft is to be alert for all the different types of background checks that employers can run on you. Generally, you should run a full background check on yourself at least once a year to determine any errors or problems.
You can also help avoid identity theft by keeping an eye on your identity papers and identifying information. Do not give your credit card numbers, driver license information, and other personal information over the phone or through the Internet unless there’s a reason to do so and only if someone trustworthy is asking for the information. Any mail that arrives with personal information about you should be destroyed before being discarded. Too many people simply throw out junk mail that has filled out forms that criminals can use.
If a routine background check does show that you have been the victim of identity theft, a private investigator can help you determine who is responsible. Moreover, a professional investigator can provide evidence to police authorities, credit bureaus, driving bureaus, and other departments to prove that you’re innocent. Be sure to fill out a police report and report the crime if you are the victim of identity theft. If possible, try to close down as many accounts affected as possible. For example, you need able to close down affected credit cards and bank accounts to prevent criminals from stealing more of your money. Some law enforcement agencies will also allow you to attach commentaries to your criminal, credit, and other types of records to state your side of the story.
What can you do?
If you haven’t already considered running a full background check on yourself, it’s something you may want to think about. For a modest fee, you can hire a private investigator to run the standard type of pre-employment check, credit check, driving check, criminal check, and general background check that employers, landlords, and others can run on you. This can help you determine whether there are any errors on your records that need to be fixed and can help you find out whether someone has used your identity to perpetuate crime. Correcting mistakes and addressing identity theft before someone else runs a background check and finds false information about you just makes sense. Why lose a great opportunity because of someone else’s crime?
How to avoid identity theft:
Many people assume that identity theft only has to do with your credit report. Therefore, they only check their free credit reports once a year and assume that all is well as long as no one has been obviously stealing from them. This is very misleading. After all, your driving record, criminal record, as well as your credit record can be affected by identity theft as well. Therefore, one of the first ways of avoiding identity theft is to be alert for all the different types of background checks that employers can run on you. Generally, you should run a full background check on yourself at least once a year to determine any errors or problems.
You can also help avoid identity theft by keeping an eye on your identity papers and identifying information. Do not give your credit card numbers, driver license information, and other personal information over the phone or through the Internet unless there’s a reason to do so and only if someone trustworthy is asking for the information. Any mail that arrives with personal information about you should be destroyed before being discarded. Too many people simply throw out junk mail that has filled out forms that criminals can use.
If a routine background check does show that you have been the victim of identity theft, a private investigator can help you determine who is responsible. Moreover, a professional investigator can provide evidence to police authorities, credit bureaus, driving bureaus, and other departments to prove that you’re innocent. Be sure to fill out a police report and report the crime if you are the victim of identity theft. If possible, try to close down as many accounts affected as possible. For example, you need able to close down affected credit cards and bank accounts to prevent criminals from stealing more of your money. Some law enforcement agencies will also allow you to attach commentaries to your criminal, credit, and other types of records to state your side of the story.
Sunday, June 11, 2006
What Tiahrt amendments include
Here are some of the restrictions on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, commonly called the Tiahrt amendments, that were attached to funding legislation in 2003, 2004, last year and this year and which some members of Congress now want to make permanent:
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Archdiocese missed arrests
Background checker convicted a week before hiring
Alex Henties was on probation in two states while he supervised the Archdiocese of Cincinnati's criminal background-check program.
Church officials say they were aware before hiring Henties that he had committed a theft and some other minor crimes in the 1990s. But they say they did not know about the more recent offenses.
The archdiocese fired Henties last year after he was arrested on drug possession charges.
Court records show that he was convicted of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest in Hamilton County June 16, 2003 - one week before the archdiocese hired him as coordinator of the background-check program.
Three months after starting his new job, Henties was arrested again in Dearborn County, Ind., on drunken-driving charges.
Judges convicted him in both cases and sentenced him to probation for one year.
After initially defending the decision to hire Henties, Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk said last week that he regretted hiring someone with a felony record to run the background-check program.
"The fact that there was more than one arrest might add to that regret," church spokesman Dan Andriacco said of Henties' arrests in 2003. "But one felony conviction is bad enough."
Critics say the failure to spot convictions in two states before and after Henties' hiring raises questions about the background-check program.
They say their concerns are magnified in Henties' case because he was hired to help set up and coordinate the program, which fingerprints all church employees and checks their criminal history.
"In the position he was in, they should have done a background check," said Christy Miller, co-leader of Cincinnati's chapter of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. "That's not a lapse in judgment - that's just very poor policy."
ACCESS TO PERSONAL DATA
Miller and others have complained that someone with Henties' history never should have access to employees' personal information.
More than 30,000 people have gone through the background-check program, and church officials say there is no evidence anyone's information was compromised.
The archdiocese has hired a private investigator to examine the program and to investigate sexual abuse allegations that Henties recently made against his former boss, Vince Frasher.
Frasher, the archdiocese's personnel director, has been suspended with pay pending the outcome of those investigations.
Church officials have referred the case to Hamilton County prosecutors, who also are investigating. Authorities recently obtained a search warrant to seize some of Frasher's computers.
Prosecutor Joe Deters declined comment, and Frasher could not be reached. Andriacco would not say whether any church computers have been taken.
"We would welcome a criminal investigation if the prosecutor's office felt it was warranted," Andriacco said.
WCPO-TV (Channel 9) reported this month that Henties, who is serving a two-year prison sentence, had told police that Frasher abused him.
Henties, 32, said the abuse took place while he was growing up in Montgomery and continued for several years.
Andriacco said Frasher last month gave church officials a letter, signed by Henties, denying any abuse took place. He said he did not know anything more about the letter or the circumstances under which Henties signed it.
ABUSER OR MENTOR?
Andriacco said the letter describes Frasher as a mentor and surrogate father.
Court records also indicate that Frasher and Henties had a close relationship.
A report prepared last year after the drug arrest describes Frasher as a "friend and legal guardian."
Judge Robert Ruehlman sent Henties to prison for two years in March after he returned to court on a new charge of fleeing police in a car. That charge led to the two-year prison sentence.
Monday, May 29, 2006
Maid to order - The Times of India
Maid to order - The Times of India
Getting a domestic help is a tough job and running a background check is even tougher. We tell you why.
Roma pishi came to work in the house as a domestic help when she was in her teens. Then she grew up, got married, had kids — who live in the village. But Roma pishi stays in the city, does household chores, is happy with a Rs 50 hike, doesn't dream of chiffon sarees and loves watching TV in the evenings.
It makes her feel part of the family. And most importantly her employer trusts her 'blindly.' This typical image of the maid or domestic help has changed considerably though.
In fact, the image has undergone a negative transformation, thanks to the constant reports of servants playing a major role in robberies, murder and cheating of their employers.
That's why more and more employers are going for a thorough background check before hiring a maid. Helping in this process are the centres that supply domestic helps. But is the checking system foolproof ? CT checks out.
One such centre Sevika has the system of checking the ration card of the employee along with a letter from the local councillor or panchayat, along with two photographs of the individual.
"We are very particular about the papers,"says Col Amlendu Deb, the owner of the centre, adding, "But when we give the papers to the police for verification, the response is very slow. It takes months.
This is again a problem for us."Another centre, Care, which has its offices in Kolkata along with all the other metros in India, too follows these norms. "We are very particular about the papers being right as we send girls to other states too.
We also have to check the age of the employee, since she must not be below 18. It's almost an unwritten code that we take people through references. Which means they are referred to us by someone who has worked here before.
That way it is easier for us to track the girls,"says Sharmeela Chatterjee, the owner of the centre. And what about police verification?
"They do help but not always. Only when we ask them to take up one particular case, they do so. Rest of the time, they just keep the papers with them and seldom give us feedback,"says Chatterjee.
But A Ganguly who had hired a domestic help from such a centre, has a different story to tell. "There is always a security risk with them as most of the time they do not have the right papers. Also, their family members start visiting the house. You constantly stay with the fear that they are passing on information to the wrong people,"said Ganguly.
On the other hand, a senior official of West Bengal Police, refuses to accept the charge that police doesn't do regular verification.
"I have never encountered such complaints that the police is not ready to cooperate. One can pick up an identification form from us, fill it in and submit it to us with relevant papers and photographs of the domestic help. Then we run a check on the person and get back to the employer. There are very few people who make good use of this facility provided by us."
Nobody probably ever thought that hiring a maid can become such a cumbersome process. As the new breed of salwar-kurta-fairness cream-flaunting breed of maids take over, scepticism mounts in households. Roma pishis are dearly missed.
McCarthy Cites Need for Gun Reform
McCarthy Cites Need for Gun Reform
In the future, gun buyers may be subject to more comprehensive and complete background checks, thanks to an increasingly more streamlined and efficient national databank.
The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security passed the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Act, a series of additions and upgrades to already existing laws. The NICS is a federally mandated databank of criminal records utilized by Federal Firearm Licensees and managed by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. A licensed firearms dealer is required, under permanent provisions of the Brady Act, to conduct a criminal background check on prospective gun buyers.
The proposed law, which is sponsored by Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-Mineola), would require state agencies to cooperate fully with the FBI in terms of providing relevant criminal records, if they wish to continue receiving federal dollars. Although the NICS was established in 1998, not all states have fully participated in the program nor are they currently required.
New York State, for example, is considered a non-Point of Contact state, meaning firearms dealers must deal directly with the FBI for background check information and solicit state background checks from state police. Thirteen other states are recognized as Point of Contact (POC) states. Agencies in POC states have established their own Brady NICS units so that gun dealers may request background checks from only state authorities, who can access state and federal databases.
In 2000, in a General Accounting Office report to Congress, states were found to be better equipped to handle background checks. The report said that states are more familiar with their own gun laws and could therefore expedite background checks on potential buyers. Also, some states had established databases for the purpose of criminal background checks already. Unfortunately, a majority of states still do not fully participate in the NICS program because of the most common prohibitive barrier: cost.
McCarthy’s legislation authorizes $250 million grants for fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008. However, if the legislation takes more time to pass through Congress, the grants would be pushed ahead to span the next three years. The money is intended for states to use for keeping their records electronically up to date and, more importantly, federally accessible through the NICS.
“While maintaining NICS records ultimately is the responsibility of the states, state budgets are already overburdened,” says McCarthy.
The 2000 report suggested several revisions necessary to make NICS as effective as possible. Suggestions included mandating federal funding so that NICS units can be established and operated under the supervision of state authorities. McCarthy realizes the grave importance of attaching federal dollars to the issue of state compliance.
“Here’s the carrot and the stick, states will have a certain number of years to comply with the legislation or else lose federal dollars in the end,” says McCarthy.
Along with state regulations and gun laws, federally mandated criteria for firearms dealers have been considered generally acceptable. Under federal law, dealers are not to sell guns to known felons, those convicted of a crime with a sentence exceeding one year (two years for misdemeanor), known addicts or users of a controlled substance, those dishonorably discharged from the armed forces, and those “adjudicated mentally defective.” Other disqualifying criteria include renouncing one’s citizenship, non-immigrant or illegal alien status, anyone subject to a restraining order or anyone convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor.
Twenty-eight states have failed to fully report their felony convictions to NICS databases, according to McCarthy. Domestic violence restraining orders are not available via NICS in 15 states. The proposed bill aims to mandate the collection of data so a criminal prohibited from buying a firearm in one state cannot cross into another state and purchase a weapon. It’s this kind of abuse and negligence that worries McCarthy.
“I was on a radio show just yesterday where gun owners all over the country called in…most were saying how they believed this legislation is reasonable. One dealer said he wouldn’t sell his guns at gun shows because there were no background checks there, he didn’t want to put his guns in the wrong hands,” McCarthy added, “Most gun owners are very reasonable.”
McCarthy is a long time advocate for stringent gun laws. In 1993 tragedy shook the Long Island native when her husband was killed and son wounded after Colin Ferguson opened fire on commuters riding a Long Island Rail Road train. Ferguson had purchased the gun legally.
McCarthy, who was elected to Congress in 1997, was inspired to do everything she could to promote stricter gun legislation.
McCarthy has referred to the expiration of the assault weapons ban as “infuriating” and sponsored legislation to continue the ban. She has also sponsored more than a dozen similar pieces of legislation promoting gun safety, strengthening existing gun laws and an attempt to close the “gun show loophole,” which allows gun buyers to purchase weapons at gun shows without submitting to a background check.
McCarthy has been carefully and aggressively promoting the NICS improvement legislation. She has been working closely with committee leadership, members of the House and members of the Senate, including Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). McCarthy believes that the bill has what it takes to pass through Congress.
Sunday, May 28, 2006
Bouncer background checks?
Nightclub safety focus of law being drafted
There is a new push to make nightclubs in Manhattan safer. The move comes after several high profile murders, including Immette St. Guillen's at a club in Soho and this week's fatal shooting at a club in Chelsea. In both cases, bouncers at the club are accused of the crime.
"You have these bouncers put into authority positions in these clubs where they have power over people. It's clear that when that power is unchecked and unregulated, terrible things can happen," says City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.
Quinn instructed her staff after the Immette St. Guillen tragedy to find anyway to bring the largely state-regulated realm of nightclubs under city control. St. Guillen was allegedly raped and murdered by bouncer Darryl Littlejohn after he worked last call at The Falls bar in Soho.
A simple background check would have revealed the ex-con was violating probation by working around a bar.
"We're going to require that bars check to see whether their bouncer's have licenses to carry guns and check the bouncers to see if they're going to carry guns with their own licenses," says Quinn. "If they fail to do either of those things, we're going to shut them down."
Quinn's "Bouncer Bill", which is still being drafted, will work through the city's nuisance abatements laws. The legislation seeks drug testing, background checks, gun permits, and weapons inspections for anyone employed as security personnel around a club or bar.
Sunday, March 05, 2006
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Bill would exempt judicial records from Ohio public records law
ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS
Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - A new version of a bill updating Ohio's open records laws would exempt records kept by Ohio courts and give authority over keeping such records open to the state Supreme Court instead.
Proponents of the bill and court officials say the issue stems from the constitutional separation of Ohio's legislative and judicial branches and is not meant to close off court records that are now open.
"The third branch, the judicial branch, has the authority to determine which records are open and not open," said Chief Justice Thomas Moyer of the Ohio Supreme Court.
However, the measure would be a significant change to current Ohio law governing taxpayers' ability to examine court records pertaining to administration and personnel.
Advocates for open records say the change by itself won't close any records. But they're concerned that lawmakers would lose control of the process for keeping court records open in the future if the bill becomes law.
"The way it's written now, the legislative branch would totally give up any oversight of those records," said Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association. "That's the danger."
The change is included in the latest draft of open records legislation proposed by Rep. Scott Oelslager, a Canton Republican and open records' advocate.
The legislation was introduced following a 2004 survey by the Newspaper Association and The Associated Press that found public employees followed the law only about half the time when asked to provide common records on an unconditional and timely basis as required by law.
The proposal regarding courts and open records was made by Rep. Bill Seitz, a Cincinnati Republican who had held up an earlier version of the bill when Seitz was chairman of the House Civil and Commercial Law Committee.
Seitz, now the sixth-ranked Republican leader, and Oelslager had disagreed over the time a public agency would have to fulfill a records request of more than 100 pages.
Oelslager wanted a 10-day limit; Seitz said in some cases, public officials would need more time.
Oelslager has since replaced Seitz as committee chairman, and the new version includes the 10-day limit with extensions allowed based on the size of a request.
Seitz said courts are governed both by a constitutional requirement to keep their records open and by state law, which he said could create problems.
A law prohibiting the release of a public employee's name, for example, might conflict with the appearance of that name in a court document, Seitz said.
Moyer emphasized that the change is not meant to close off any documents, whether case files or a court's administrative records.
"There should not be a concern that seven members of the court in the future would decide to close from public view a substantial category of records that have been traditionally open," Moyer said. "That's not very realistic to think that that would occur."
Oelslager agreed but acknowledged he doesn't think the change will come easily.
"We're going to have a lot of discussion on this one, and we'll see what happens," he said Friday.
The new version of the bill would also permit individuals who sue public agencies for refusing to provide records to seek fines of up to $1,000.
It would also create a state office to handle complaints from people who say they were denied records or kept out of public meetings. That provision is modeled after a similar office in Indiana.
Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio - A new version of a bill updating Ohio's open records laws would exempt records kept by Ohio courts and give authority over keeping such records open to the state Supreme Court instead.
Proponents of the bill and court officials say the issue stems from the constitutional separation of Ohio's legislative and judicial branches and is not meant to close off court records that are now open.
"The third branch, the judicial branch, has the authority to determine which records are open and not open," said Chief Justice Thomas Moyer of the Ohio Supreme Court.
However, the measure would be a significant change to current Ohio law governing taxpayers' ability to examine court records pertaining to administration and personnel.
Advocates for open records say the change by itself won't close any records. But they're concerned that lawmakers would lose control of the process for keeping court records open in the future if the bill becomes law.
"The way it's written now, the legislative branch would totally give up any oversight of those records," said Frank Deaner, executive director of the Ohio Newspaper Association. "That's the danger."
The change is included in the latest draft of open records legislation proposed by Rep. Scott Oelslager, a Canton Republican and open records' advocate.
The legislation was introduced following a 2004 survey by the Newspaper Association and The Associated Press that found public employees followed the law only about half the time when asked to provide common records on an unconditional and timely basis as required by law.
The proposal regarding courts and open records was made by Rep. Bill Seitz, a Cincinnati Republican who had held up an earlier version of the bill when Seitz was chairman of the House Civil and Commercial Law Committee.
Seitz, now the sixth-ranked Republican leader, and Oelslager had disagreed over the time a public agency would have to fulfill a records request of more than 100 pages.
Oelslager wanted a 10-day limit; Seitz said in some cases, public officials would need more time.
Oelslager has since replaced Seitz as committee chairman, and the new version includes the 10-day limit with extensions allowed based on the size of a request.
Seitz said courts are governed both by a constitutional requirement to keep their records open and by state law, which he said could create problems.
A law prohibiting the release of a public employee's name, for example, might conflict with the appearance of that name in a court document, Seitz said.
Moyer emphasized that the change is not meant to close off any documents, whether case files or a court's administrative records.
"There should not be a concern that seven members of the court in the future would decide to close from public view a substantial category of records that have been traditionally open," Moyer said. "That's not very realistic to think that that would occur."
Oelslager agreed but acknowledged he doesn't think the change will come easily.
"We're going to have a lot of discussion on this one, and we'll see what happens," he said Friday.
The new version of the bill would also permit individuals who sue public agencies for refusing to provide records to seek fines of up to $1,000.
It would also create a state office to handle complaints from people who say they were denied records or kept out of public meetings. That provision is modeled after a similar office in Indiana.
Felons, sex offenders target of online dating legislation
Northwest Indiana News: nwitimes.com
BY CATHERINE ANDREWS
Medill News Service
SWM, 32. Enjoys travel, cooking and 19th century literature. Nonsmoker. Convicted of a felony in 1998.
Not exactly what a typical online dating profile looks like these days. But if legislation before the Illinois Senate about background checks for dating sites passes, it would be the law.
The draft, House Bill 5299, which was approved by the House on Wednesday and is now in the Senate, would require paid dating sites with over 1,000 users to disclose whether other members are subjected to background checks for sex offenses and felony convictions. If such a check is conducted, the sites would have to disclose information about any member with either a felony or sex offense conviction.
"People in my district came up to me and were saying, 'do you realize those internet dating services don't provide any kind of safety check?' " said Rep. John E. Bradley, D-117, who introduced the legislation. "I said that can't be right, but I looked into it and was shocked to find out they don't. So I proposed just a simple background check. Sites should at least tell their users if they do a check or not."
If the bill passes, sites like Match.com or eHarmony.com that fail to disclose whether or not they perform background checks would face a $1,000 fine.
Patrick Elward, a Chicago web developer and user of several online dating sites, said he thinks that the legislative bodies have good intentions. But it was his belief that people should simply use common sense when it comes to online dating, instead of relying on state regulation.
"The best protection one can use when dating is to use your judgment," Elward said. "There are snakes in all walks of life ... Would it be any more successful if offenders had to wear a large orange cap on their heads when perusing the vegetable aisle at the local grocery store?"
But Bradley thinks the bill, which passed the House 74-36, will be worthwhile and is likely to be approved.
"I know a lot of people really utilize and enjoy these sites and there are a lot of good stories out there," he said. "But let's not wait for there to be a bunch of bad stories, too."
BY CATHERINE ANDREWS
Medill News Service
SWM, 32. Enjoys travel, cooking and 19th century literature. Nonsmoker. Convicted of a felony in 1998.
Not exactly what a typical online dating profile looks like these days. But if legislation before the Illinois Senate about background checks for dating sites passes, it would be the law.
The draft, House Bill 5299, which was approved by the House on Wednesday and is now in the Senate, would require paid dating sites with over 1,000 users to disclose whether other members are subjected to background checks for sex offenses and felony convictions. If such a check is conducted, the sites would have to disclose information about any member with either a felony or sex offense conviction.
"People in my district came up to me and were saying, 'do you realize those internet dating services don't provide any kind of safety check?' " said Rep. John E. Bradley, D-117, who introduced the legislation. "I said that can't be right, but I looked into it and was shocked to find out they don't. So I proposed just a simple background check. Sites should at least tell their users if they do a check or not."
If the bill passes, sites like Match.com or eHarmony.com that fail to disclose whether or not they perform background checks would face a $1,000 fine.
Patrick Elward, a Chicago web developer and user of several online dating sites, said he thinks that the legislative bodies have good intentions. But it was his belief that people should simply use common sense when it comes to online dating, instead of relying on state regulation.
"The best protection one can use when dating is to use your judgment," Elward said. "There are snakes in all walks of life ... Would it be any more successful if offenders had to wear a large orange cap on their heads when perusing the vegetable aisle at the local grocery store?"
But Bradley thinks the bill, which passed the House 74-36, will be worthwhile and is likely to be approved.
"I know a lot of people really utilize and enjoy these sites and there are a lot of good stories out there," he said. "But let's not wait for there to be a bunch of bad stories, too."
Thursday, February 09, 2006
Check finds no offenders at TC schools
But officials cautious about releasing data
By CHRISTINE FINGER
Record-Eagle staff writer
TRAVERSE CITY - A statewide background check didn't turn up any convicted sex offenders working for Traverse City Area Public Schools, but district officials are cautious about disclosing the full results.
The state reports, sent last week to school districts, are part of new laws that went into effect Jan. 1 and aim to keep sex offenders out of schools. Michigan State Police ran background checks on about 200,000 current school employees statewide.
Christine Davis, TCAPS human resources director, said results received Monday showed none of the district's 2,000 employees had convictions for sex offenses, for which state law would require immediate termination.
But TCAPS, like other districts around the state, discovered inaccurate information on the initial list.
"I'm confident that when we get the list to a point where it is accurate, it will be a much more usable document," she said.
Davis said she found numerous misdemeanor criminal convictions inaccurately assigned to district employees. She is contacting the affected employees, running another criminal record check through state police and relaying that information to the state department of education so officials there can correct the list.
The new state laws, dubbed the Student Safety Initiative, require criminal background checks on all school employees, including teachers, administrators, janitors, cafeteria workers and paraprofessionals.
The legislation dictates that districts fire any employee convicted of a sex offense and requires employees with other felony and some misdemeanor convictions to get written permission from their superintendents and school boards to continue their jobs.
Davis said TCAPS in 1994 began running criminal background checks on all incoming teachers, administrators and other non-certified staff, as well as volunteers working in the district.
The Michigan Education Association cited inaccuracies in persuading a judge last week to issue a temporary order preventing the state from releasing results to the public. But the state released the results to local districts.
Davis predicted TCAPS will publicly report the results once accuracy is ensured.
"I think it will be very good news," she said.
Tim Bolles, manager of the Michigan State Police identification and criminal history section, said cross-checking the Department of Education's school employee list and the state police criminal database yielded some "false positives" because of misused Social Security numbers or common name matches.
The data-to-data searches will be replaced by more accurate fingerprint matching when all employees are required to be fingerprinted starting in 2008, he said.
Alison Burns, a parent at Central Grade School, said the results are important to ensure students' safety, but TCAPS doesn't necessarily need to publish the list.
"I would expect the district and law enforcement to take appropriate action," Burns said.
http://www.record-eagle.com/2006/feb/08school.htm
By CHRISTINE FINGER
Record-Eagle staff writer
TRAVERSE CITY - A statewide background check didn't turn up any convicted sex offenders working for Traverse City Area Public Schools, but district officials are cautious about disclosing the full results.
The state reports, sent last week to school districts, are part of new laws that went into effect Jan. 1 and aim to keep sex offenders out of schools. Michigan State Police ran background checks on about 200,000 current school employees statewide.
Christine Davis, TCAPS human resources director, said results received Monday showed none of the district's 2,000 employees had convictions for sex offenses, for which state law would require immediate termination.
But TCAPS, like other districts around the state, discovered inaccurate information on the initial list.
"I'm confident that when we get the list to a point where it is accurate, it will be a much more usable document," she said.
Davis said she found numerous misdemeanor criminal convictions inaccurately assigned to district employees. She is contacting the affected employees, running another criminal record check through state police and relaying that information to the state department of education so officials there can correct the list.
The new state laws, dubbed the Student Safety Initiative, require criminal background checks on all school employees, including teachers, administrators, janitors, cafeteria workers and paraprofessionals.
The legislation dictates that districts fire any employee convicted of a sex offense and requires employees with other felony and some misdemeanor convictions to get written permission from their superintendents and school boards to continue their jobs.
Davis said TCAPS in 1994 began running criminal background checks on all incoming teachers, administrators and other non-certified staff, as well as volunteers working in the district.
The Michigan Education Association cited inaccuracies in persuading a judge last week to issue a temporary order preventing the state from releasing results to the public. But the state released the results to local districts.
Davis predicted TCAPS will publicly report the results once accuracy is ensured.
"I think it will be very good news," she said.
Tim Bolles, manager of the Michigan State Police identification and criminal history section, said cross-checking the Department of Education's school employee list and the state police criminal database yielded some "false positives" because of misused Social Security numbers or common name matches.
The data-to-data searches will be replaced by more accurate fingerprint matching when all employees are required to be fingerprinted starting in 2008, he said.
Alison Burns, a parent at Central Grade School, said the results are important to ensure students' safety, but TCAPS doesn't necessarily need to publish the list.
"I would expect the district and law enforcement to take appropriate action," Burns said.
http://www.record-eagle.com/2006/feb/08school.htm
Thursday, January 12, 2006
ADD, Depression Made Me Late
nbc4i.com - Employment Advice - Ask Ella: ADD, Depression Made Me Late
Dear Ella,
I was terminated from a major company in October 2004 for not arriving to work on time. I could understand that and accept that reason, as long as my medical problems were taken into consideration.
I feel I was wrongfully terminated because at the time I was supposed to be on an anti-depressants and medication for ADD. I stopped taking the medications because they made me very sleepy and I felt I was endangering people on the road.
I put off contacting my psychologist for re-evaluation. My manager and the director of the department knew of my issues and seemed supportive. My doctor told me that lack of focus, procrastination and never getting anywhere on time were a result of the depression and the ADD.
When I was written up for tardiness, I was told by the director of the department that if I straightened up within 30 days all would be OK. I must mention that I was always on time for the mandatory 8:45 daily meeting but continued to be between three and eight minutes late for the prescribed 8:30 arrival time.
After I was ultimately terminated, I found out that my position was dissolved and that my boss, the director of the department, was fired the following Monday
That company was my dream company to work for and now I have lost every hope of ever having a great career. Is there anything I can do in order to have this company re-evaluate my situation and possibly hire me back?
Dear Four Steps Back From The Brink,
Organize your thought processes and get back on track by following these four simple steps, listed in the order of their importance.
1. Contact a doctor through a social services program in your area to get the immediate medical attention you need.
2. Determine how your ADD and depression affected your level of culpability surrounding your termination through careful medical evaluation and documentation, and take action to correct the problem.
3. Know that if you were no more than eight minutes late on each count but always arrived before the commencement of the staff meeting then maybe you're not as unstable as you would think, but rather working in an environment, or for a boss, that created instability. Be clear on this point before considering re-employment with your former firm.
4. Consider that, since your boss was fired the Monday following your termination, this might be a good time to make a written appeal to his boss for re-hire. Include in your correspondence that you were always present and on-time for the 8:45 staff meetings, completed projects within budget and on-time, contributed to the success of the organization overall and looked forward to a long and healthy career with a company you respected.
Unless asked about your ADD and depression directly, leave it out of your letter and any subsequent conversations that may take place. As long as you manage your conditions as prescribed, your mental health is none of your employer's business.
It would be wonderful if we could re-write our pasts once we learned from our mistakes, but since this isn't possible, work on fine-tuning your professional offering with an eye toward making a new mark in time.
Written By Ella Kallish
Dear Ella,
I was terminated from a major company in October 2004 for not arriving to work on time. I could understand that and accept that reason, as long as my medical problems were taken into consideration.
I feel I was wrongfully terminated because at the time I was supposed to be on an anti-depressants and medication for ADD. I stopped taking the medications because they made me very sleepy and I felt I was endangering people on the road.
I put off contacting my psychologist for re-evaluation. My manager and the director of the department knew of my issues and seemed supportive. My doctor told me that lack of focus, procrastination and never getting anywhere on time were a result of the depression and the ADD.
When I was written up for tardiness, I was told by the director of the department that if I straightened up within 30 days all would be OK. I must mention that I was always on time for the mandatory 8:45 daily meeting but continued to be between three and eight minutes late for the prescribed 8:30 arrival time.
After I was ultimately terminated, I found out that my position was dissolved and that my boss, the director of the department, was fired the following Monday
That company was my dream company to work for and now I have lost every hope of ever having a great career. Is there anything I can do in order to have this company re-evaluate my situation and possibly hire me back?
Dear Four Steps Back From The Brink,
Organize your thought processes and get back on track by following these four simple steps, listed in the order of their importance.
1. Contact a doctor through a social services program in your area to get the immediate medical attention you need.
2. Determine how your ADD and depression affected your level of culpability surrounding your termination through careful medical evaluation and documentation, and take action to correct the problem.
3. Know that if you were no more than eight minutes late on each count but always arrived before the commencement of the staff meeting then maybe you're not as unstable as you would think, but rather working in an environment, or for a boss, that created instability. Be clear on this point before considering re-employment with your former firm.
4. Consider that, since your boss was fired the Monday following your termination, this might be a good time to make a written appeal to his boss for re-hire. Include in your correspondence that you were always present and on-time for the 8:45 staff meetings, completed projects within budget and on-time, contributed to the success of the organization overall and looked forward to a long and healthy career with a company you respected.
Unless asked about your ADD and depression directly, leave it out of your letter and any subsequent conversations that may take place. As long as you manage your conditions as prescribed, your mental health is none of your employer's business.
It would be wonderful if we could re-write our pasts once we learned from our mistakes, but since this isn't possible, work on fine-tuning your professional offering with an eye toward making a new mark in time.
Written By Ella Kallish
Manager's Background Check Comes Up Mixed
Manager's Background Check Comes Up Mixed
By Tom Palmer
The Ledger
MULBERRY -- Depending on whose version you believe, new City Manager Ralph Bowers is an energetic city leader who brought economic development and public works projects to the rural north Florida communities he served -- or he is someone who sexually harassed two female employees.
The pros and cons are contained in a background investigation presented to Mulberry city commissioners and the mayor Monday.
Bowers, 66, said the sexual harassment allegations are the work of two disgruntled employees -- one of whom he fired for stealing city funds and the other against whom he filed a complaint -- and political enemies in Jasper, where he served as city manager for 13 years before being fired in late 2004.
He said a $6,000 settlement in one of the cases noted in the report involved a racial discrimination complaint by one of the women that the city settled to avoid the costs of defending itself in federal court.
Mulberry commissioners voted 3-0 Dec. 20 to hire Bowers, subject to completion of a background check.
Bowers started work last month.
The background investigation conducted by Mulberry police includes a Dec. 28 memo from Bowers to Police Chief Larry Cavallaro in which Bowers said the report omitted documents clearing him of the charges for which he was fired in Jasper.
"I was, however, surprised to find your organization was doing the background check, since I specifically agreed to a standard FDLE background check," Bowers wrote in the memo, referring to a check that simply determines whether an applicant has an arrest record. Bowers has no arrest record, according to the report. Bowers met individually with commissioners while the investigation was under way to give his side of story.
"I hope the City Commission will see past the petty local politics and confirm my employment at the next meeting," he said Tuesday.
Commissioners said they support Bowers' version of events and want to keep him.
Commissioner Jim Splaine discounted the sexual harassment allegations. Splaine said, if there had been a serious problem, there would have been a lawsuit and Bowers wouldn't have received severance pay.
Splaine said he was impressed by Bowers' references.
Those references included positive comments from Michael Sittig, executive director of the Florida League of Cities; Elaine Brown, Jacksonville's council president; and North Florida lawyer William Haley.
Sittig described him as "an expert on federal grants that is reliable and gets along with people" and Haley credited Bowers for bringing industry to Jasper.
Splaine said he's impressed with Bowers' performance so far on the job, saying he's getting things done.
Since starting work in his $65,000-a-year position just before Christmas, Bowers has confronted issues ranging from the dispute over the ownership of a downtown alley to the repair and reopening of the Mulberry Civic Center.
"I am really excited," Bowers said. "There are all kinds of challenges facing us."
Commissioner Julian Mullis agreed with Splaine's assessment.
"I'm willing to give the man a shot and see where it goes," he said.
Mullis said it didn't appear the allegations had much of a basis.
"It was more a `he said, she said,' " Mullis said.
Mullis said he was impressed with Bowers' resume and the job he's done so far.
"He's very knowledgeable and I think he'll do a good job," he said.
Commissioner Collins Smith did not respond to a request for comment.
Two other seats on the five-member City Commission are vacant, pending a special election on Jan. 24.
Bowers' hiring in December occurred with little discussion -- he was never interviewed for the job -- as commissioners scrambled to fill the post after David Bloome resigned Dec. 15 as interim city manager.
Bloome, the city's public works director, had been serving as interim manager since February when Patricia Jackson left for a new job in Eagle Lake.
Bowers' only previous appearance before the City Commission occurred at a raucous June 8 special commission meeting at which then-Commissioners Sam McLaughlin and Irene Sams resigned and walked out, and another manager candidate was interviewed.
Bowers was not interviewed at that time, but simply submitted his resume and asked to be considered for the job.
He said he contacted city officials again in December after learning through the International City Managers Association that the job was still vacant.
Tom Palmer can be reached at tom.palmer@theledger.com or 863-802-7535.
By Tom Palmer
The Ledger
MULBERRY -- Depending on whose version you believe, new City Manager Ralph Bowers is an energetic city leader who brought economic development and public works projects to the rural north Florida communities he served -- or he is someone who sexually harassed two female employees.
The pros and cons are contained in a background investigation presented to Mulberry city commissioners and the mayor Monday.
Bowers, 66, said the sexual harassment allegations are the work of two disgruntled employees -- one of whom he fired for stealing city funds and the other against whom he filed a complaint -- and political enemies in Jasper, where he served as city manager for 13 years before being fired in late 2004.
He said a $6,000 settlement in one of the cases noted in the report involved a racial discrimination complaint by one of the women that the city settled to avoid the costs of defending itself in federal court.
Mulberry commissioners voted 3-0 Dec. 20 to hire Bowers, subject to completion of a background check.
Bowers started work last month.
The background investigation conducted by Mulberry police includes a Dec. 28 memo from Bowers to Police Chief Larry Cavallaro in which Bowers said the report omitted documents clearing him of the charges for which he was fired in Jasper.
"I was, however, surprised to find your organization was doing the background check, since I specifically agreed to a standard FDLE background check," Bowers wrote in the memo, referring to a check that simply determines whether an applicant has an arrest record. Bowers has no arrest record, according to the report. Bowers met individually with commissioners while the investigation was under way to give his side of story.
"I hope the City Commission will see past the petty local politics and confirm my employment at the next meeting," he said Tuesday.
Commissioners said they support Bowers' version of events and want to keep him.
Commissioner Jim Splaine discounted the sexual harassment allegations. Splaine said, if there had been a serious problem, there would have been a lawsuit and Bowers wouldn't have received severance pay.
Splaine said he was impressed by Bowers' references.
Those references included positive comments from Michael Sittig, executive director of the Florida League of Cities; Elaine Brown, Jacksonville's council president; and North Florida lawyer William Haley.
Sittig described him as "an expert on federal grants that is reliable and gets along with people" and Haley credited Bowers for bringing industry to Jasper.
Splaine said he's impressed with Bowers' performance so far on the job, saying he's getting things done.
Since starting work in his $65,000-a-year position just before Christmas, Bowers has confronted issues ranging from the dispute over the ownership of a downtown alley to the repair and reopening of the Mulberry Civic Center.
"I am really excited," Bowers said. "There are all kinds of challenges facing us."
Commissioner Julian Mullis agreed with Splaine's assessment.
"I'm willing to give the man a shot and see where it goes," he said.
Mullis said it didn't appear the allegations had much of a basis.
"It was more a `he said, she said,' " Mullis said.
Mullis said he was impressed with Bowers' resume and the job he's done so far.
"He's very knowledgeable and I think he'll do a good job," he said.
Commissioner Collins Smith did not respond to a request for comment.
Two other seats on the five-member City Commission are vacant, pending a special election on Jan. 24.
Bowers' hiring in December occurred with little discussion -- he was never interviewed for the job -- as commissioners scrambled to fill the post after David Bloome resigned Dec. 15 as interim city manager.
Bloome, the city's public works director, had been serving as interim manager since February when Patricia Jackson left for a new job in Eagle Lake.
Bowers' only previous appearance before the City Commission occurred at a raucous June 8 special commission meeting at which then-Commissioners Sam McLaughlin and Irene Sams resigned and walked out, and another manager candidate was interviewed.
Bowers was not interviewed at that time, but simply submitted his resume and asked to be considered for the job.
He said he contacted city officials again in December after learning through the International City Managers Association that the job was still vacant.
Tom Palmer can be reached at tom.palmer@theledger.com or 863-802-7535.
Friday, January 06, 2006
MIT: Technology Can't Tame Terror
ISSUE: Air travel screening. The U.S. Transportation Security Administration wants to increase the use of technology to improve airline security. But will it really help?
Personal Point of Impact: Former head of global security for Israel's El Al airline Technology Review: How can technology make security screening for air travel safer?
Isaac Yeffet: Technology works well when used to help qualified and well-trained human beings. Technology can never replace the human being. And in the U.S.A., technology is the only security that we have and rely on for baggage and carry-on screening in our airports. The people we have are not qualified, and the technology we have at the airports around the country-which has a 35 percent false-alarm rate-is the wrong concept.
^^^Read More Here^^^
Personal Point of Impact: Former head of global security for Israel's El Al airline Technology Review: How can technology make security screening for air travel safer?
Isaac Yeffet: Technology works well when used to help qualified and well-trained human beings. Technology can never replace the human being. And in the U.S.A., technology is the only security that we have and rely on for baggage and carry-on screening in our airports. The people we have are not qualified, and the technology we have at the airports around the country-which has a 35 percent false-alarm rate-is the wrong concept.
^^^Read More Here^^^
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
