Category Archives: disability rights

Massachusetts Landlord Does Not Deny Endangering Senior Tenants & Violating Disability Rights

Posted on by
Reply

Winncompanies Property Manager Kayla Bennett in Ludlow, Massachusetts and her surrounding management team do not deny Winn’s parking-lot policies endanger the lives of tenants and violates the rights of seniors with disabilities with legally issued handicap parking placard or plate. Bennett oversees 170 apartments for seniors.


Asked Friday by this tenant what gave Winn the legal right to take away legal handicap parking privileges, Bennett said, “I will not answer your question.”


When asked why Winn endangers the lives of tenants by forcing them to move their cars in snowy icy weather, Bennett gave the same answer. “I will not answer your question.”

Bennett then asked me to leave the office.

Bennett is not the only member of Winn management not to answer the question regarding the violation of seniors rights and the rights of people with disabilities. Others include, Leanne Chalifoux, Caitlin A. Laplante, Erik Pietz, none, including Bennett have answered emails asking them the same questions.

As detailed by the NIH’s National Institute for Aging. To get a disability plate or placard, one or more of the following apply to you.

You:
•   Cannot walk 200 feet without stopping to rest.
•   Cannot walk without the assistance of another person, prosthetic aid, or other assistive device.
•   Are restricted by lung disease.
•   Use portable oxygen.
•   Have a Class III cardiac condition.
•   Have a Class IV cardiac condition. according to the standards set by the
•   Have Class III or Class IV functional arthritis. according to the standards set by the American College of Rheumatology
•   Have Stage III or Stage IV anatomic arthritis. according to the standards set by the American College of Rheumatology
•   Have been declared legally blind.
•   Have lost one or more limbs.

Landlord Endangers Ludlow Tenants Lives

Posted on by
1

Winncompanies, a Boston-based property management company (and my landlord) does NOT deny two of its policies endanger the lives and violate the civil rights of the senior tenants, many with disabilities, who live in a 75-apartment building on State Street in Ludlow, Massachusetts.

The former mill-building opened for rentals in 2017. Having filed a complaint against them through the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office, management has already threatening my ability to live here.

But first, the two Winn policies that endanger tenants’ lives. One of them, the first listed, also endangers the lives of Ludlow community members. First, there are some facts you have a right to know. Some you may already know. I didn’t.

Deadly Winn Policy #1

What is required in order for the State of Massachusetts to issue a disability license plate or placard, stands on solid ground.

“To obtain disability plates, a placard, or a disability veteran plate, you must be a Massachusetts resident. A Massachusetts registered and licensed physician, chiropractor, registered nurse, physician’s assistant, osteopath, optometrist (for legally blindness only) or podiatrist must certify that you meet one of the following conditions:

  • Cannot walk 200 feet without stopping to rest.
  • Cannot walk without the assistance of another person, prosthetic aid, or other assistive device.
  • Are restricted by lung disease to such a degree that your forced (respiratory) expiratory volume (FEV) in 1 second, when measured by spirometry, is less than 1 liter.
  • Use portable oxygen.
  • Have a Class III cardiac condition according to the standards set by the American Heart Association
  • Have a Class IV cardiac condition according to the standards set by the American Heart Association. A customer in this condition must surrender their license.
  • Have Class III or Class IV functional arthritis according to the standards set by the American College of Rheumatology
  • Have Stage III or Stage IV anatomic arthritis according to the standards set by the American College of Rheumatology
  • Have been declared legally blind (please attach copy of certification). A customer in this classification must surrender their license.
  • Have lost one or more limbs or permanently lost the use of one or more limbs.”

Winncompanies essentially tells all its senior tenants, including those with disability plates and placards: When we need to replace the mulch in our garden beds, repaint the lines in the parking lot, remove snow, or anything else we want to do in the parking lot, you are to park your cars out in the public street and leave your cars there until we say we are done. If you don’t do this, your cars will be towed at your expense.

In other words, tenants have to park their cars in an active driving lane on State Street, a two-way street with no parking spaces on either side, and endangering the lives of passing motorist and members of the community as well.

Deadly Winn Policy #2

Two periods of time each year, at the beginning and then again of the heating season in Massachusetts, defined as September 15 to June 15. Massachusetts regulations say the highest an indoor temperature can go in apartment buildings like the one in question is 78 degrees. Winn’s management appears devoted to holding off as long as possible before turning the building’s A/C on, and the turning the A/C off as soon as it possibly can. Keep in mind, the A/C is expensive, and Winn has to the A/C cost in the common areas, halls, offices, elevators, stairwells, and so on. With the A/C off, the indoor temperatures go up into the high 80s and 90s, way above the 78 degree cut off. When tenants ask for the A/C to be turned on because of the high temperatures, one member of Winn Management sent me an email saying it would be a couple of more weeks before the A/C would be turned on.to be turned off, Winn’s management will wait weeks.

As for the high temperatures, Winn management says it is not their problem because the heat is not heat produced by the building’s heating system. They do nothing to ease the conditions for tenants.

Now, they threaten my home.

I recently filed a civil rights complaint against Winncompanies et al, with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office. Now, Winncompanies’ management is threatening to terminate (their word) my tenancy because, when they recently asked me for extensive information about my life (far more than the housing authority that oversees my Section 8 rental voucher, and far more than Social Security asks for) I asked them to show me what part(s) of what law or regulation allows them to ask for this information. They won’t tell me.

For the record, I pay my rent on time every month and have done so since I moved here in the fall of 2017.

Why I fight (the bullet)

Posted on by
1

The x-rays of the bullet lodged in the frontal lobe of my brain make the point; life happens to us whether we like it or not. So does death.  So do experiences whose realities are so ruthlessly sudden and savage that when (if) you come out the other side with something resembling your wits about you,  you’ll likely find yourself viewing things from a new perspective.  Kahrmann Head Xray 3

Now, needless to say, when I was held up in Brooklyn  in 1984 and shot in the head, things changed. Far, far more than even I realized at the time. The mind and body, it seems, have a way of digesting certain realities over time, particularly when trauma is involved. Were they to absorb so massive a reality in one fell swoop, I suspect some would implode. That would’ve been my fate.

It must be said, I suppose, that all my life I’ve acted, in one way or another, to expose and, hopefully, deplete bigotry’s presence. Whether  its racism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, sexism, the unforgiveable treatment of our senior citizens, and so on, I’ve never been able to sit on my hands, as it were, when  people are being oppressed, having their rights denied, and, as so often is the case when it comes to persons with disabilities (PWD), dehumanized. A reality that came home to roost when I became a PWD as a result of my brain injury and PTSD.

PWD are on the receiving end of some of the most vicious forms of bigotry imaginable. They are perceived and treated as if they are little more than revenue streams for the greedy, and, equally despicable, tattered remnants of humanity whose only purpose is to be trotted out  for display purposes when various agencies decide to use them as bait for donors, or visual fuel for self-aggrandizement, or both.

It would be naive to think this kind of behavior is linked solely to for-profit companies. Not so.   I’ve known and know some non-profits run by arrogant, self-absorbed, self-aggrandizing cretins who, in truth, don’t care a wit about the people they say they care about.  Next time you run across a non-profit company in business to help PWD, find out how many PWD they employ. Find out how many PWD are on their board of directors. And, while you’re at it, find out Kahrmann Head Xray 2what they do with the money they raise. See how much is used to directly benefit the lives of those they are said to care about. Find out – to the penny.

I am writing this essay, in part,  to help some people understand (many already do) why I advocate the way I do. Why, as some have rightly observed, my  advocacy style might be rather aggressive. Some would say, too in the oppressor’s face. Some have wondered why I’ve continued to advocate even after losing all my income in 2008 for doing just that (I would not remain silent when an Albany-based New York State Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) Waiver Provider was  blatantly denying program participants their rights). Why I’ve continued to advocate even after the New York State Department of Health, also unhappy with my advocacy, simply took away my housing subsidy, and, along with the aforementioned provider and others, damaged my ability to be employed in the field of brain injury in New York State and, I suspect, Massachusetts as well.

All that backlash because I would not remain silent when I saw, in this case, individuals with brain injury disabilities having their rights denied,  sometimes brutally so. One particularly abhorrent creature comes to mind.  When a program participant would tell this creature about something they were having a tough time dealing with, this vile thing would invariably respond with, “To bad, so sad.” The program’s owner was well aware of this person’s behavior, and yet he works there still. Testimony,  I believe,  to the owner’s profit-before-people mindset.

As to why have not stopped my advocacy. There’s a constellation of reasons.  I was raised in a civil rights family, our minister marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Growing up me heroes included King and Geronimo. My list of heroes grew to include Mandela, Elie Wiesel, Medger Evers, Gandhi, Malcolm X, and more. All of whom suffered more for their advocacy than I ever have.  Since the shooting I’ve met others who are heroes of mine. People who are not household names. Here is a taste.

  • A remarkable woman who, while walking with her husband one wintry day pulling their two children on a sled, was hit by a snowmobile driven by an intoxicated human being. When she regained consciousness, she learned she was permanently paralyzed from the neck down.  She also learned her two had died in the accident.
  • A woman who sustained a brain injury and forever lost her ability to walk because of mosquito bite that led to meningitis.
  • A young man who,, while in a car on his way to a party with friends, was in a car accident. He suffered a brain injury and witnessed the decapitation of two of his friends during the accident.
  • A several women who suffered strokes in childbirth.

That’s just a few, I could go on. I have a long list of heroes. I also have quite a list of graves too. Those who didn’t make it, sometimes because the greed-based system failed.  I have plenty of motivation to fight.

And then, of course, for me there is that moment I came to on the ground after I was shot. That moment when I knew I was going to die. I was completely alone in that experience. One of the gifts of having survived that is this, there is nothing any government or provider or company or agency or individual can do to me that comes close to that hell. Not even a little.

 

The Tightening Noose

Posted on by
2

It is very rare my anger fires-up to slam the table top with fury level. Yesterday it did, blisteringly so.

When you are on a fixed income society deems worthy of a rent subsidy (Section 8 in my case) the rule of thumb is one-third of your income goes towards your housing, the subsidy pays the balance.  If you are single like I am, you have what’s called a one-bedroom voucher. The amount of rent your voucher provides for is determined by where you live. A one-bedroom voucher provides for a higher rent in, say, Westchester, New York, one of the wealthier community in the country. For a less prosperous community, the allowable rent would be lower. That’s fine. I’m okay with this.

Okay then. My current lease will be up soon and so I recently submitted documentation of my income to the area housing authority that oversees Section 8.  My monthly disability has gone up $18 and my monthly medical expenses (medication co-pays) have gone up $17.20 which means I am dancing on air with an 80 cents a month increase! (That dreamed about cabin cruiser will be mine in no time!) So, my income is pretty much the same as it was last year, which is why I nearly exploded in fury when I received notification yesterday that my portion of the monthly rent will increase by $45. That’s a big hit when you have a little less than $300 to cover food and gas for a two-month period.

I was boiling. On the phone, leaving a voicemail for the housing authority, hand slamming down on my writing table. Fury. There had to be a mistake. One third of my income to housing, cool. But an 80-cent increase in monthly income doesn’t translate into a $45 a month increase in rent. I was wrong. (Math and I have never been on friendly terms.) What I didn’t see coming was this: the allowable rent for a one-bedroom voucher in my area has been drastically reduced, anything over the reduced amount comes out of my pocket. It is moments like this when I want to throttle those hell  bent on protecting the rich and gut the middle class and the poor because God forbid those selfish slivers of slime sacrifice….what exactly?

Now, if someone reading this responds by attacking the government as if the government was and is this big bad nasty-ass entity, let me ask you something. Where exactly are the offerings from the private sector? Hmm? As for the very small minority who thinks that I or anyone in my position like it here because we are leeches, here’s a thought. Let me give you a segment of my life experience to live with; let me fire a bullet into your brain at point blank range, then come talk to me about how much fun your having.

By the way, the woman from the housing authority that works with me and the staff from the area Independent Living Center were very kind, very gentle, and very allowing of my anger and upset yesterday. God bless’m. They’re in no danger of being overpaid either.

In the meantime, the noose tightens, the pressure mounts. Thank God for books and coffee and friends and music and nature and, most of all, life.

Backstabbing Cuomo & New Yorkers with disabilities

Posted on by
3

Examination of proposed changes to the by-laws for a New York State brain injury council reveals a state agency’s attempt to weaken a council, already in disarray, put the council under the state’s control, and weaken the current requirement that people with brain injuries and their families be fairly represented on the council.

The council was signed into being by former New York State Governor Mario Cuomo and the proposed changes are being proposed by current governor Andrew Cuomo’s department of health. It is reasonable to believe, given the current governor’s admirable efforts on behalf of people with disabilities to date,  that the DOH is engaging in practices that violate all Governor Cuomo stands for and all his father stood for.

Now, let’s take a look at these proposed changes.  In one glaring instance of undermining the council, the state DOH proposes removing the following clause from the bylaws in its entirety: “Assuring the appropriate consumer representation of persons with brain injuries and their families is represented in the activities of the Council.”  Were this to be removed the bylaws would in no instance include a requirement that there be ample and fair representation of people with brain injuries and their families on the council. One has to question the council’s willingness to oppose this, especially since the person still claiming to be the vice-chair, even though her term on the council ended more than nine years ago, Judith Avner, the Brain Injury Association of NY State’s executive director, is the very person who blocked persons with brain injury from being on a now defunct committee that was seeking to represent persons with brain injury.

Proposed changes on pages 3 and 4 of the bylaws would, if adopted, allow a  member of a state agency to be the vice-chair of the council (something the current bylaws appropriately blocks because the council is designed to be an independent entity) and the bylaws put the vice-chair in charge of the executive committee. This would allow the state to essentially take over the council, something that must be fought and resisted at all costs.  These proposed changes weaken the requirement for council members attendance (thus weakening the council) by allowing council members to miss two meetings over a period of two years without risking their place on the council rather than two meetings in one year as the current bylaws requires. The council is required to meet a minimum of three times a year,  in case you think the current meeting requirement for council members is too strict.

And then, the DOH proposes a weakening of council documentation. Current bylaws require that a written record of the meeting be mailed out to council members “within 30 days of a meeting.” DOH wants that requirement replaced with “as soon as practicable.”

As a July 5, 2011 post in this blog accurately observed, this council, called the Traumatic Brain Injury Services Coordinating Council, has never done its job as designed by the state legislature: “Under Article 27-CC of the New York State Public Health Law, the New York State Traumatic Brain Injury Services Coordinating Council is mandated to recommend long-range objectives, goals and priorities, as well as provide advice on the planning, development and coordination of a comprehensive, statewide TBI program.”” As this blog previously reported , “more than 10 years of TBISCC meeting minutes tell us the council” has “failed to come up with any real comprehensive proposals for the DOH”at all. Not a one.

History tells us this is just fine with the DOH. Over the years the DOH has proven resistant to any kind of real inclusiveness and input. On page 6 of the proposed changes, the DOH wants the word expert removed in a sentence that currently permits the council  (italics mine) “to provide technical and expert assistance to the Council…” Given the DOH’s resistance to input, one can only conclude the ridding themselves of having to deal with real experts makes it even easier for them to reject input.

The DOH has a history of being unfriendly to New Yorkers when it comes to brain injury. Before the TBISCC’s meeting last December, the DOH’s Cheryl Veith (who later said she was directed to do so by her superiors yet refused to identify said superiors) sent out an email that included this:

Executive Law 166
The Department of Health is required, pursuant to Executive Law § 166, to keep a record of those who appear before it.   All attending the meeting need to complete the attached form.  Below is the form that will need to be completed upon your arrival at the TBISCC meeting so it will save time if you complete it before you arrive. Please print the completed form and bring to the meeting.

Several problems with this: The form would require anyone attending to share the personal address and phone number. Second, the law doesn’t apply for two reasons. First, those in attendance are not appearing before the DOH, they are attending a meeting of the TBISCC which is an independent body. Second, the form is meant for lobbyists, not for members of the public who should not and are not required to hand over the personal information at public meetings.  And then, there is this: the TBISCC was perfectly aware of what the DOH was up to, and they said nothing.

This writer contacted Robert Freeman, head of the NY State Committee on Open Government, who confirmed that Executive Law 166 did not apply. Freeman called Deputy DOH Commissioner Mark Kissinger who agreed the law did not apply. Nevertheless, when this writer and others showed up for the meeting, there Veith was, trying to insist members of the public fill out the form.

The DOH and council’s penchant for stiff arming the public  is also revealed by the fact there is a TBISCC meeting this Wednesday, January 23, and still the council and DOH have not released the agenda. The meeting will run from 10:30am to 3:30pm in Meeting Room A of the New York State Museum in Albany.

There are a few bylaw revisions proposed by the DOH that do make sense. Limited the chair’s term to one year rather than two, and having elections by written ballot rather than voice vote. I would also suggest a term-limit clause permitting any chair and or vice-chair to serve no more than two consecutive terms, thus freeing the council from being under the grip of the rather dictatorial likes of former chair Charles Wolf and Michael Kaplen. The latter still claims he is the council’s chair even though his term as chair expired years ago.

Lastly, for now, there is this. Several council members are directly linked to BIANYS and BIANYS gets a sizeable annual grant from the DOH. Is it any wonder that the council has a documented history of not providing the DOH with anything mandated under the above reference Public Health Law? Is it any wonder that the council avoids holding the DOH accountable for some of its destructive behavior towards those with brain injuries who find themselves in the state’s TBI Waiver?

The problems at set forth here go all the way to the top of the DOH. This writer has sent several emails directly to DOH Commissioner Dr. Nirav Shah (and called his office several times) outlining the council’s problems. He has never responded. Never mind that the Kahrmann Advocacy Coalition has more members with brain injuries than the BIANYS has had in its entire history.