Jump to content

House Oversight Committee 4-15-10


Recommended Posts

Is that a good thing or bad thing? I am not following.

 

The information source for MSP not attending the meeting was mary. The MSP not attending, is just a statement of fact. The way her letter was written passively suggested that the meeting was not going to occur, however this was not the case. She stated that the meeting has not been rescheduled, while this information is accurate, it led me to a false conclusion of assuming that the entire committee meeting had been canceled and needed to be rescheduled. This information was reinforced by the news of one of the presiding reps hospitalization.

 

However, the assumptions many of us made were not correct. MSP were not going to testify at the meeting that part is correct, the other part is that MDCH was going to testify at the meeting about the funding problems and card wait times. The card wait times have been one of our biggest and most important issues, so it was very important for our community to have a presence and a number of voices at this meeting. It seems similar information had been passed onto many members of the community. Therefore, learning today that the meeting had not been canceled left many of our activists scrambling to attend.

 

The true intent of this information isn't apparent. It may have just been poor wording, assumptions made on the reader's side, or just a common mistake. However, this definitely shows us that we need more sources for information from the state, so we can corroborate the details to separate the true ones from the false ones.

 

Does this help clear up some of the confusion?

 

TFB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The information source for MSP not attending the meeting was mary. The MSP not attending, is just a statement of fact. The way her letter was written passively suggested that the meeting was not going to occur, however this was not the case. She stated that the meeting has not been rescheduled, while this information is accurate, it led me to a false conclusion of assuming that the entire committee meeting had been canceled and needed to be rescheduled. This information was reinforced by the news of one of the presiding reps hospitalization.

 

However, the assumptions many of us made were not correct. MSP were not going to testify at the meeting that part is correct, the other part is that MDCH was going to testify at the meeting about the funding problems and card wait times. The card wait times have been one of our biggest and most important issues, so it was very important for our community to have a presence and a number of voices at this meeting. It seems similar information had been passed onto many members of the community. Therefore, learning today that the meeting had not been canceled left many of our activists scrambling to attend.

 

The true intent of this information isn't apparent. It may have just been poor wording, assumptions made on the reader's side, or just a common mistake. However, this definitely shows us that we need more sources for information from the state, so we can corroborate the details to separate the true ones from the false ones.

 

Does this help clear up some of the confusion?

 

TFB

 

 

 

Well put better than I could have said it. Looks like there may also be something else we need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well put better than I could have said it. Looks like there may also be something else we need.

 

 

 

 

Just received

 

 

 

The Investigations Committee agenda today was abbreviated: The only person to testify was Dr. Robert Bobb, superintendent of the Detroit Public Schools. Chairman Cushingberry didn't stay for the entire report from Dr. Bobb because he had to medicate for his health issue. There was no testimony from the State Police on our issue; there was no one in attendance from the DCH. No one. Nada.

I'll let you know when the state police are rescheduled. But, FYI, we've weighed in on the funding for the additional positions several times. We will do it again both in committee and with the appropriations subcommittees as often as possible.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...