PCB- A Peer Network for All Impacted by Vision Loss
PENNSYLVANIA COUNCIL OF THE BLIND
PO Box 68
Volant, PA 16156-0068
(717) 920-9999 or (877) 617-7407
PCB Information Line: 773-572-6314
To promote independence and opportunities for all people with vision impairments.
To continue to be recognized as the leading advocacy organization for people with vision impairments in Pennsylvania. The aim of all our efforts is to encourage and assist people in achieving their potential as valued members of society. PCB assistance, advocacy, and encouragement will be carried out in such areas as, but not limited to, all aspects of accessibility, transportation, education, employment, entertainment, recreation, and quality of life.
The PCB Advocate is available in large print, braille, audio cartridge, and email. Send changes of address or format preference to the PCB office. Contents are available to the public via pcb1.org and the PCB Information Line at 773-572-6314.
Articles in this publication reflect the views of the individual writers. They do not necessarily represent the views and policy of PCB.
Editor in Chief: Will Grignon
Copy Editing: Rebecca Holland, Sue Lichtenfels, Lisa Salinger, and Irene Rehman
Audio Production: AccessiDocs Team
Braille Edition: Horizons for the Blind
If you wish to submit articles for consideration, submission deadlines are:
March 1, Spring
June 1, Summer
September 1, Fall
November 20, Winter
Email articles to: firstname.lastname@example.org
Send all inquiries to: Will Grignon
Table of Contents
Teams Do Things Together, by Chris Hunsinger
2022 PCB Conference Report, Jackie Wissinger
Advocacy Volunteers Needed, Chris Hunsinger
The Power of Advocacy, Mary Ann Grignon
The Peer Engagement Team Wants You!, Suzanne Erb
With Gratitude and the Deepest Appreciation, by Tony Swartz
Why Do They Say That?, Jule Ann Lieberman and Vision Loss Resource Team
A Safe Team Is a Happy Team, PAGDUS
2022 Report From the Parliamentary Team, Carla Hayes
Wrapping Up 2022 With a Bow, Elizabeth Oleksa
Self-reliance and the Mixed-vision Partnership, William H. Grignon
Making Dog Laws: Is It All in the Name?, William H. Grignon
Teams Do Things Together
By Chris Hunsinger, President PCB
PCB has Teams, and Teams need members.
We are getting near the beginning of the new year, so think about what you would like to do with and for PCB in 2023.
Are you going to remain on a particular team? Do you want to join a team? Have your interests changed so you are ready to leave a team? If you have not been on any teams, what interests do you have that would help a PCB Team? Is there something you would like to learn more about so that a PCB Team would give you the incentive to do that? Think about the above questions.
You can be a part of more than one team. You might well ask, what do particular teams do? Here is one idea of what each team does, but it isn’t the only work for any team.
Do you search the internet for information about particular topics so that you can keep an eye on advocacy issues with the Advocacy and Governmental Affairs team?
Are you someone who likes getting the right message to the right person so that you can share that skill with the Communications team?
Do you like organizing parties, events, and people so that you can help the Conference Planning and Program Team?
Are you someone who likes budgets, math, spread sheets, and investing? Might that make you a candidate for the Finance team?
Do you know about new and innovative ways to do fundraising? Might the Fund Development team be a place for you to show those skills?
Are you analytic and interested in Roberts Rules? Might that make the Parliamentary team a good fit for you?
Do you like encouraging involvement in groups? Might Peer Engagement be a landing spot for you?
Do you like technological solutions so that the Technology Access team would be a place for you to volunteer?
Do you have an interest in how people cope with vision loss throughout their lives? Might the Vision Loss team be a good place for you to give to PCB?
There are many more reasons to join a particular team, but these are the first that come to mind. Talk to the team leader for any team you might be interested in joining so that together the two of you can talk about what the team can give you and what you can bring to the team.
Here are six additional reasons to work on a team.
- Working on any team teaches collaboration and cooperation skills.
- Working on a particular team can teach skills related to team projects.
- Working on a team builds self-confidence.
- Working on a team gives all of us a chance to do something extra for PCB.
- Working on a team is a resume builder.
- On any team more hands make the work easier.
I am pasting below current information with meeting times for teams and contact info for leaders to help you get in touch with the right person so that team leaders know if you are coming, going or staying.
Messages can also be left at the PCB office phone number if you have problems getting in touch with team leaders.
Let’s make next year an even more meaningful and productive year for PCB with even more of us working on PCB projects!
Here is a list of all PCB teams:
Advocacy: Chris Hunsinger
(Meets Third Monday 7:30 p.m. in odd months and Advocacy for All Calls in even months.)
Communications: Will Grignon
(Meets Second Tuesday at 7:30 p.m.)
Conference Program and Planning: Chris Hunsinger email@example.com 412-881-9328.
(Meets Second Thursday at 7:00 p.m.)
Finance: Michael Zaken
(Meets Third Thursday at 7:30 p.m.)
Fund Development: Mary Ann Grignon
(Meets Third Wednesday 7:30 p.m.)
Parliamentary: Carla Hayes
(Meets Fourth Tuesday 8:30 p.m.)
Peer Engagement: Suzanne Erb
(Meets first Wednesday 7:00 p.m.)
Technology Access: Joe Fagnani
(Meets First Thursday 8 p.m.)
Vision Loss Resource: Jule Ann Lieberman
(Meets Third Tuesday 8 p.m.)
2022 PCB Conference Report
By Jackie Wissinger, PCB Secretary
For the third year in a row, cyber space was the venue for our PCB conference, which was held from Thursday the 27th of October through Sunday the 30th. Thanks to Nicki Keck and Doug Hunsinger, who were our streamers, and to some assistance from ACB, our conference will go down in the annals as a rousing success.
This year, our theme was “Accelerating Your Trip to Self-Reliance,” which was amply supported by the amazingly creative presentations. Space is limited here, so I would encourage you to check out our website, (www.pcb1.org), where Conference workshops and presentations will be archived for your listening pleasure. I will mention a few of them here, just to spark your interest.
We were treated to a virtual cruise, complete with authentic ocean sound effects and virtual ports of call. Once again, the Conference Program and Planning Team hosted the Rise for a Prize, and, of course, there were door prizes. Other offerings included a presentation for guide dog users, a demonstration of yoga techniques, live after-banquet entertainment, a demonstration of low-cost digital recording devices, an introduction to improvisation, an orientation to our revised PCB website (which is still in process), and so much more!
Each of our evening sessions began with musical presentations from some of our talented peers. The festivities also included 2 game nights, (Riddle Bits and Can You Sing It), a virtual tour, a movie, and a radio play.
Our opening general session began with the National Anthem, performed by Melissa Carney. Chris Hunsinger, our president, called the conference to order, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. The invocation was given by our chaplain, Jackie Wissinger, who next presented the necrology service. Sadly, 5 of our peers have passed away since our last conference.
Chris presented her opening remarks. She elaborated on our theme, stating that: “All life is a trip, and that trip takes you toward self-reliance.” She stated that this is a continuum; that we are all on this trip to self-reliance regardless of our age or the circumstances in which we live. She added that: “The tools, resources, information and people that you will learn from in this conference will allow you to become that wiser person, making better decisions for yourself and not letting other people make them for you.” She concluded by expressing the hope that “by your being at this conference you will embrace and accelerate your trip to self-reliance.”
This was followed by the first reading of the proposed bylaw amendments and resolutions presented by the Parliamentary Team. Again, I would encourage you to check out the article in the fall Advocate for the proposed bylaws amendments. This information can also be found on the PCB website, (www.pcb1.org), where the conference will be archived in full.
We were then treated to 4 skits, written by Cathy Long and Ed Facemyer, and presented by members of the Vision Loss Team to aid in our trip to self-reliance, depicting various situations that addressed the question, “What would you do?”
The first 2 presentations of our general session on Friday were devoted to the adjustment to vision loss. Sue Lichtenfels first discussed “PCB’s newest resource,” the Now What booklet, which contains information about what a person new to vision loss, as well as their friends, family, colleagues, and loved ones, can expect as the person new to vision loss navigates this change in life.
We then enjoyed a “pre-recorded riff on The Newlywed Game” entitled “The Not-So-Newly–Blind Game” (self-reliance and the mixed-vision partnership), by Sue Lichtenfels and Will and Mary Ann Grignon. You won’t want to miss this one.
Chris Hunsinger and Donald Dunn then presented a discussion on “State Government Resources and the State of Disability Services.”
The Saturday morning session opened with a presentation by Sharla Glass, from Envision America, concerning “Health Literacy” at the Pharmacy Counter.
Deborah Kendrick, author and advocate, next discussed “Maintaining Self-reliance Through the Aging Process and Other Changes.”
Our Trip to Self-Reliance continued with a thorough discussion of self-hypnosis by Maverick Garner, founder of Mavmind.com.
The business meeting convened on Saturday afternoon. Chris asked for a motion to count the order of the business meeting as printed in the program as the agenda for the meeting. A motion was made and seconded to this effect and was adopted by unanimous consent.
This was followed by the team reports.
A discussion followed as to whether or not we should plan for in-person conferences in the future or to continue having virtual conferences. The main concern seemed to be whether or not we would be able to meet the minimum room requirement and the minimum food and beverages requirements established by the hotel. A vote was taken as to whether or not those attending this conference would attend an in-person conference next year with a Zoom component, and the results were fairly evenly split. A motion was next made by Will Grignon and seconded by Donald Dunn to empower the board to make a decision after receiving a report from the site selection committee regarding whether or not next year’s conference would be an in-person one or a virtual one and was passed. A decision will be made by the first board meeting of next year.
Mike Zaken presented the financial report. A motion was made by Mary Ann to accept the report as presented and was passed.
Jackie did the roll call of chapter delegates, and all were present.
Carla Hayes presented the Parliamentary Team report after which followed the reading of the proposed bylaws amendments. The first amendment was passed by unanimous consent. A motion was made by Suzanne and seconded by Mary Ann to accept the second proposed amendment. There was some discussion on this amendment and it did not pass. A motion was made by Sue and seconded by Doug to pass the third proposed amendment and it was passed by unanimous consent. A motion was made by Tom Burgunder and seconded by Donald Dunn to pass the fourth proposed amendment and it was passed.
Carla then read Resolution 2022-01. A motion was made and seconded to pass this resolution and it was passed by unanimous consent.
Sue presented the slate of nominees for the 4 available positions on the board, which were William Grignon, Debra Hill, Sandra Marsiglia and George Holliday. Both Will and Debby were elected by acclamation. Nichole Keck was nominated twice to serve as a member of the board, but Sandra Marsiglia and George Holliday were elected to fill these positions.
Sue administered the Pledge of Obligation to the 3 new members of the board who were present, and they all responded in the affirmative. Sandy, who was not present, will receive the Pledge of Obligation at another time.
A motion was made by Sue and seconded by Doug to adjourn the business meeting, and it was adjourned.
Our virtual banquet was held on Saturday evening. Our keynote speaker was Brian Hartgen, owner of Hartgen Consultancy. Tony presented his company, Hartgen Consultancy, with the Community Impact Award. Tony next presented the John A. Horst Champion of Independence Award to Donald Ciccone, who recently retired from LAMP. Mary Ann next presented the Anthony B. Swartz Peer Excellence Award to George S. Holliday. The PCB Reimage Award was presented to Deborah Kendrick after her presentation on Saturday morning by Will Grignon.
Suzanne Erb presented 2 student Merit awards. The first recipient was Travis White, and the second recipient was Julie Goldberg.
Our conference would not be complete without the amazing PCB auction. Thanks to the generosity of both donors and bidders, we did very well this year. The total amount sold was $4,575.00. Minus expenses, our net profit was $4,206.32.
I would like to commend all of those who worked so hard to make our 2022 PCB conference a wonderful success. PCB truly is an organization of peers who are laughing and working together to make this life a Trip to Self-reliance.
Advocacy Volunteers Needed
By Christine Hunsinger, Advocacy team leader
It’s December, and that means that PCB is looking for a group of us to advocate with our Federal legislators around the time of the ACB mid-year meetings in early March 2023.
Are you interested in Advocating for the benefit of blind and low vision people? Do you want to learn more about the advocacy issues that affect all of us? Do you have time to participate in virtual meetings from March 4 through March 7? This year’s Leadership Conference activities might be just what you are looking for.
This year, the ACB meetings that we usually attend either virtually or in-person have a new twist. We have called them several things in the past: Leadership Conferences, Legislative Seminars, or Mid-year meetings; whatever they will be called, they will take place over a two-week period instead of the four or five days that we have come to expect.
The totally-virtual part of the meetings will take place March 4 through March 7, with about four or five hours of programming each day. All in attendance will be joining via Zoom. Saturday, March 4, and Sunday, March 5, will be focused on Leadership issues for affiliates and ACB.
Monday, March 6, and Tuesday, March 7, will be focused on the advocacy issues that we will be taking to Congress; hopefully with presentations from those in-the-know from government and other advocacy groups.
The strategy and composition of the events have changed because going to the office of anyone in Congress is more complicated now than it was before January 6, 2021. Offices are much less likely to give us in-person meeting times, so most meetings will be virtual; although we are going to have some in-person events in the Metro Washington area during the time of Thursday, March 9, through Sunday, March 12.
If we identify particular Pennsylvania legislators who we might want to visit in person, we might want to stay over to Monday, March 13, to do that, but those decisions can’t yet be made.
These new wrinkles in the events mean that there will be an in-person segment with parts of these meetings possibly being held in a hybrid manner.
There will be an ACB Board Meeting on March 9 in Alexandria Virginia.
March 10 will have an afternoon rally for Accessible Currency, advocating for Harriet Tubman on the $20-bill at the Treasury Department; with a possible walk over to Lafayette Square, or somewhere else near the White House.
Some kind of a reception is planned for Friday evening, March 10.
Team-building activities are planned for the mornings of Saturday, March 11, and Sunday, March 12.
Other events may include but are not limited to: museum tours, audio described theater, and possible networking with fellow advocacy enthusiasts during restaurant evening meals.
Much of this is very fluid because presentations are still in the planning stage and costs to individuals or affiliates have yet to be announced, so we have no idea of how many of us would be able to go to Washington for the full event. We could, however, have a presence of many Pennsylvanians, at least at the Rally, since it could actually be a day-trip from Philadelphia: And who wouldn’t want to stand up for accessible currency?
Even if you can’t come to the in-person meetings, you can still be a part of the virtual segment and you can still be a part of the virtual meetings with legislators. You can continue your virtual conversations with legislators throughout the year by emailing the Legislative Assistant we speak to about future developments in meaningful legislation for visually impaired people.
If you cannot be a part of the legislative meetings, you may want to join us when we have our talk with your member of the House of Representatives. We will have talking points to help you and information about how all of us can be most effective when conducting business with your legislators.
Sometimes, we need someone from the district to set up the meeting. Some members set up meetings only for people in their district. Don’t be afraid to ask to participate because all of us have had a first time doing this, and the old hands will be glad to guide you and answer your questions.
The costs will be different for each level of participation. The Advocacy Team will be distributing informational material (including projected costs) in the upcoming months.
If this all sounds interesting to you, please send a brief description of what you think of as your qualifications for participation, and what level of participation you can give to the project. I know that isn’t easy to say when we don’t really know the costs and might not be able to have PCB cover all of them, but since we are not going to be doing anything until sometime after the middle of February, we just need to know about your interest by Feb. 1, 2023.
You can send an email with your information to firstname.lastname@example.org with the subject line of “legislative seminar”, or you can call me, Chris Hunsinger, at 412-881-9328 or you can leave a message with Autumn at the PCB office at 717-920-9999 or toll free if needed at 877-617-7407.
It’s not enough to just say that you want to do this. You should explain a little about why you want to do this and why you would be a good advocate. I hope that the advocacy team will be flooded with requests to participate and peers will want to join the PCB Advocacy and Governmental Affairs team. We hope to see those submissions of interest. Happy advocating!
The Power of Advocacy
By Mary Ann Grignon
On September 28, a category 4 Hurricane named Ian barreled through Lee County, leaving devastation in its wake. The aftermath was simply terrible. People died, many lost their homes, and many of our beautiful landmark beaches were wiped out.
For my family, it meant 11 days without electricity or internet, and minor property damage. Perhaps the most difficult hurtle was the disruption to cell service and transportation. When I awoke on Thursday, September 29, I had absolutely no cell service and no idea what the landscape surrounding our home was, whether there were downed wires, other dangerous obstacles, etc. and, thus, no way to reach out to friends, neighbors, or family.
Two days after the storm, cell service was restored to a minimal degree but it meant sometimes being able to reach people in the outside world and, by Saturday, September 30, it meant that there was a slim chance that phone service could work well enough to schedule an Uber ride to obtain groceries or other essentials.
While this was my small world, our para transit (passport) buses and drivers were rescuing people from some of the most hard-hit areas, closest to the gulf of Mexico and bringing them to shelters. This went on for nine days until October 7 when finally, the fixed-route buses began running. I was thrilled because this meant that pursuant to our rights under the ADA, Passport must also begin running parallel to the fixed-route system. To this point, Passport had only been transporting folks to essential medical appointments and grocery stores. In order to get to work, many of us were paying more for rides than we were earning.
So, happily, I called on the 7th to schedule my rides to work for the following week and was told that Passport was only transporting for medical purposes and groceries. After a weeklong letter-writing campaign, at which time I suggested that work was most certainly a critical and life-sustaining function, they agreed to transport those of us with disabilities to and from work.
When after two more weeks, we were still limited to work, medical appointments and grocery runs, I got serious about fixing this broken system.
After being told that full service would not be restored until November 27, yes, a full 2 months after the storm, I attempted to negotiate other rides for our community of people with disabilities, such as church, vet appointments for our service animals, airport runs, and the like. When I was informed, with no explanation or reason, that they would not add these types of rides to what they were already doing, I knew that my efforts would have to be taken to a whole new level.
Fortunately, I have established some contacts within the American Council of the Blind and was directed to Ron Brooks, the transportation committee leader, who sent me direct contacts to the Regional Federal Transportation Administration (FTA), Civil division.
On Monday, October 31, I wrote a very detailed letter to the FTA with an accounting of the stance taken by the managers of our para transit system. Imagine my surprise when I received a response from them within the hour. What they said was “Per 49 CFR 37.131(d), there can be no restrictions or priorities based on trip purpose for paratransit services.” I quote them directly here in the event that this information can be of any use to any of my peers in the future. Immediately, I sent this reply to our Director of Transportation and within an hour, I was assured that Passport services would be restored in full by November 2.
It’s been quite a while since I’ve taken on this kind of advocacy but it felt wonderful to have succeeded. The lessons learned here are that persistence, diplomacy and researching the proper entities to whom to address your concerns are key. I also believe that when something is as big as this was, it’s best to write on behalf of a community rather than on a personal level. Surely, there are times when it is definitely personal and then, I urge you to remember to be as diplomatic and non-confrontational as possible. It is also important to remember that if you are lobbing bullets, they need to be aimed in the direction to have the greatest impact. In this case, it was the Regional FTA civil division.
I hope this story motivates you, my peers who have teetered on the edge of spreading your wings to fly high on the feeling of empowerment that this kind of success brings.
The Peer Engagement Team Wants You!
By Suzanne Erb, Peer Engagement Team Leader
This past year, the Peer Engagement Team has focused a good bit of our efforts on being healthy and happy as individuals. This coming year, we would like to focus on the health and happiness of our organization; namely, our chapters. After all, that’s where it all starts.
While folks can join the PCB as members at large, there is a special relationship that you can have with other chapter members when you work on a project together or just discuss a topic in which you are all interested. So, to this end, we would like to invite you to join us in our efforts to grow our chapters. The happiness and health of PCB depends on all of us.
Currently, our virtual Keystone chapter is thriving, but even strong chapters need new people, new energy, and new ideas. In addition to supporting the Keystone chapter, we, at the Peer Engagement Team, still believe that in-person chapter meetings offer so much for those who attend. There is something comforting, supportive, and inspiring that one only gets at an in-person meeting, where members can meet face-to-face and interact on a social level. To this end, the Team will be striving to start chapters across the state, but we need your help!
Even if you think you don’t have anything to contribute, chances are, you do. After all, you are a member of PCB, and you may just have an idea that could impact the entire state.
We meet on the first Wednesday of each month at 7:00 or 7:30, depending on whether any of us has other meetings that evening. Our date and meeting times are always listed on the PCB calendar. So, if you would like to try something new, or you’ve been on the fence about joining a team, this could be the team and time for you.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please feel free to get in touch. Better still, come to a meeting and get to know us.
With Gratitude and the Deepest Appreciation
by Tony Swartz
During our recently concluded conference, PCB debuted the fruits of a remarkable effort for which each peer should be especially proud. The publication of “NOW WHAT? Assisting a Loved One Through Vision Loss” is the culmination of a project begun by our immediate past president Sue Lichtenfels and the further work and support of our Communications Team.
What makes this pamphlet such a valued resource for anyone experiencing vision loss is that it is written from our perspective; “Tips, Strategies, & Resources from People Living with Vision Loss”. We understand best as people who have adapted to blindness or low vision that vision loss is not the end, rather with the correct information and positive attitude there exists a road back to self-reliance and a full life. “Now What?” is the road map for the Journey.
Carefully reading through its content as I work to produce the audio version, my appreciation deepened when I considered the potential the pamphlet could have to touch the lives of so many who are first experiencing vision loss and for their family members and friends.
Could? Yes could, because with its creation and unveiling, it is now in our hands to carry the effort forward. We collectively as chapters and each of us as individual members must ensure that “Now What?” is spread far and wide.
As a start, “Now What?” belongs in every ophthalmologist’s and optometrist’s office, the social work office of every nursing home and hospital, on the bulletin board of every senior citizen high rise and recreation center and each of us should be willing to pledge to take a few copies and see that they are delivered into the hands of anyone who is or knows of someone losing vision. I’ve already had an opportunity to send an electronic copy to someone in my neighborhood.
How many times have we expressed our outrage at the dual messaging of the “for the blind” agencies speaking out of both sides of their mouth talking rehabilitation while employing the “by the grace of God go you” fundraising message. Our motivation is pure and unsullied, and “Now What” provides us the perfect vehicle for getting in the first word.
Just read through the table of contents and you’ll quickly grasp that “Now What?” touches each aspect of life. No, it’s not a comprehensive rehabilitation manual, but it’s the best possible start. I think that we can all agree that the best way to express our gratitude and appreciation and our pride and recognition of an effort well done is for each of us to do our part in distributing “Now What?” far and wide.
Thank you to all involved in the creation of “Now What Assisting a Loved One Through Vision Loss”, as a PCB peer I’m so proud.
Why Do They Say That?
By Jule Ann Lieberman MS CLVT/CATIS and the Vision Loss Resource Team
This article is a continuation of the “What Would You Do?” conversation started at the 2022 PCB Conference. As peers who are blind or have vision impairment, we have encountered others who may make ignorant or insensitive statements when they have perceived that we are blind or have low vision.
The following are situations where peers have experienced comments that were hurtful and could lead some of us to isolate ourselves or prevent us from using vision tools or alternative techniques.
It is our intention not to excuse these comments, rather we want to suggest possibilities that could explain the thinking behind the insensitive comments or rude questions. It is our hope that we can then respond with a positive and informative conversation, rather than feeling anger or despair.
The first example involves a first-year college student, 17, new to using optical devices and traveling home for a weekend by train. She was using a monocular, which is a handheld small telescope that can focus magnification on signs at a distance. While focusing on the information posted above the boarding platform, the station security guard approached her.
The guard insisted that she had to follow him to his office and explain what she was doing. When she asked why, he said that other passengers were concerned she was acting strangely and could be a spy. Fortunately, this young woman had the presence of mind to provide an explanation of the device used by persons with low vision. He was still not convinced.
She presented him with the business card from her counselor at the Bureau of Blindness and Vision Services and suggested that he call him and ask if she indeed was a person with vision loss using a device to read the signs. The security guard did just that. Fortunately, the counselor happened to be at his desk and verified her identity as a person with low vision. As she left the office, the guard sniped, “Well, I will still keep an eye on you.”
Let’s look at his behavior and statements. It’s possible that he had never met a person who used devices to support vision loss and was confused by a woman using such a device. He may have felt that his role was to protect other passengers from a person who was behaving differently. This could have led the young woman to stop using this device in public – out of fear of another encounter such as this one.
Instead of getting angry or frightened, this young woman provided what she hoped would be enough information to relieve his suspicions. She also had the foresight to keep that business card available!
The second example involves a young man with low vision shopping at a drug store. He made use of his remaining vision by bringing products close to his eye to read labels and instructions. He was approached by the store manager, asking why he was holding the product so close to his face. While the young man was trying to explain, another person in the store grabbed another product and ran out of the store. This suspicious manager directed his attention to the wrong customer, making a mistake because of his failure to recognize that the young man with low vision was behaving appropriately.
In this case, the manager was unaware that a person with vision loss can shop and read with alternative techniques. It is unfortunate that this manager focused on the wrong customer just because he looked different.
Next, a middle-aged woman using her white cane was outside her office waiting for her ride home after a full day of work. She was approached by a sighted woman who said, “Oh you poor dear, I will pray for a miracle for you.”
Slightly shocked by this statement the blind woman replied, “I will then in turn pray for you, too.”
The stranger said, “but I am not blind.”
The blind woman said, “That is OK. We all need prayers from time-to-time.” The stranger walked away, perhaps a little confused.
It is possible that the stranger thought that she was being helpful or sympathetic to this blind woman, who she felt needed a miracle. The blind woman hoped to reassure her that we all are in need at some point, and she, too, can ask for prayers for others. The blind woman continued to use her white cane and hoped that this encounter had helped the stranger to understand that need can come in many forms.
Another example involves the story of two couples out to dinner. One of the women was blind, while the other three had vision. During conversation at the table, the sighted woman at the table became aware of the other’s blindness. She then repeatedly said how awful this would be and that she would rather die than be blind. Given this statement, the sighted woman was clearly expressing her deep fear of becoming blind and could not understand why the blind woman wanted to live on. The blind woman’s only response was “I am sorry you feel that way as I am happy, loved, and able to enjoy life.”
It is possible that the sighted woman lacked the temperament and imagination to even get past the horror of blindness as a total disability, making it impossible for her to live to her current level of participation and accomplishments. The two couples have not dined out again, probably owing to the sighted woman’s discomfort. The blind woman is empathetic to these fears and looks forward to further opportunity to demonstrate how life can be good without vision.
Finally, a woman with limited vision, living in a senior living community, was approached by another resident who exclaimed, “You are so amazing on how you get around and do things when you don’t see so well.”
The woman with limited vision replied that it is not so amazing if you learn how to compensate and went on to say that she was afraid of losing her skills should she also lose her hearing.
The fellow resident was wearing hearing aids and said, “Well you are right we all get through life despite having a disability.” The fellow resident was also afraid of losing the skills she had developed to compensate for her hearing loss by using visual strategies. Both women recognized that alternative techniques are not amazing miracles, but are simply skills that can be appreciated by others.
Whether you are new to vision loss or blindness, it is likely that you have had or will have experiences such as these. It is the hope of the Vision Loss Resource Team that these examples will help you to avoid isolating yourself and encourage you to boldly use devices or alternative strategies when in public. The more we are out in the community, the better others will understand us.
A Safe Team is a Happy Team
By Pennsylvania Guide Dog Users and Supporters
In this season of giving, we wanted to share some links to resources as a follow-up to our presentation during the 2022 PCB conference.
In case you missed it, we kicked off the conference with an informative discussion surrounding emergency preparedness with our guide dogs. Though it can be a heavy topic to explore, our speakers shared valuable insights and resources.
Mike Gravitt, PAGDUS Vice President was joined by David Johnson, Director of the Instruction & Training Department at the Seeing Eye; Melissa Allman, Advocacy and Government Relations Specialist at the Seeing Eye; and Melissa Carney, Community Outreach and Graduate Support Manager for Guiding Eyes for the Blind.
The panelists collectively helped us feel more prepared and able to maintain self-reliance, should an emergency occur.
Below are three links to resources that were mentioned during the presentation and were provided by Melissa, David, and Melissa, who all gave permission to share this additional information and guidance concerning emergencies and our guide dogs, advocacy, tips for preparation, and much more. Be sure to scroll through the webpages, as there are links to additional resources as well.
Seeing Eye Knowledge Center – Emergency Preparedness
ADATA – Resource Hub – Emergencies
Guiding Eyes – A 911 Primer
If you weren’t able to attend this presentation, you can find it in the PCB conference archives online. Thanks to our PAGDUS members and conference attendees who participated in this presentation.
Now that the emergency preparation talk is done, we’re wishing all PAGDUS and PCB dogs (and your humans) a safe and joyful holiday season, and a happy New Year!
On a personal note, as my term as PAGDUS president ends, I’d like to thank the current and past PAGDUS board, PAGDUS members, and PCB peers for your support over the past few years. PAGDUS started because of you, and I’m excited for what the future holds for our group. Forward!
2022 REPORT FROM THE PARLIAMENTARY TEAM
by Carla Hayes
2022 has been a busy year for the PCB Parliamentary Team. There were two resolutions this year.
First, Resolution 2022-01 was presented and passed at the 2022 PCB Virtual Conference and Convention. It is the PCB version of ACB Resolution 2021-04. It addresses allegations of bullying, harassment and abuse by providers of services for the blind such as blindness training centers and other rehabilitation programs.
Second, we drafted Resolution 2022-02, a resolution of appreciation thanking the Conference Program and Planning Team, the officers and Board of Directors of PCB, ACB Media, conference and convention presenters, sponsors and donors, and many others who worked very hard to plan and implement this conference and convention. We truly appreciate all of these people and everything they did which helped to make the 2022 PCB Virtual Convention and Conference a success.
We also addressed four proposed amendments to the PCB Bylaws. In short, proposed Bylaw Amendments 1, 3, and 4 passed, while Amendment 2 which dealt with junior membership was defeated. Please see the Fall issue of the PCB Advocate for the full text of all four proposed amendments. Please note that the Web-Based collection method is not yet active on the PCB website, but will be put in place during the year of 2023; information about how to use it will be given at the next Conference. In addition, chapters and affiliates should check to see what their bylaws say about dues collection, in case they have to amend them to allow for the payment to the Office, with money coming back from the PCB Treasurer.
Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the PCB Parliamentary Team for their hard work and dedication. They include John Anderson, Christine Hunsinger, Nicki Keck, John Luttenberger, and Pam Shaw. I would also like to express my appreciation to Doug Hunsinger for editing the recordings of the Bylaw Amendments and Resolutions which were played during the convention and Will Grignon for his help with the preparation of the Bylaw amendments and for all the extra time and support that he gave our team this year.
Wrapping Up 2022 with a Bow
By Elizabeth Oleksa, LVCB President
The Lehigh Valley Council of the Blind (LVCB) has grown in so many ways over this past year. From loss to love, from old and new membership, from reaching across the country to serving from Florida, LVCB is proud of its chapter.
We have gone through losses of family and friends. Member Frank Gasper lost both his wife, Ruth, and his mother in January. My son and I lost our father/husband and member of LVCB, Rem Lederer, the first week in February. Member Lee Pupo’s guide dog crossed the Rainbow Bridge suddenly in March. I lost my first Guide dog, Bryce Krispie the beginning of April. Our most recent loss was Tuesday, November 29, 2022, as Joanne Rath’s husband and longtime LVCB member, Hank Rath, passed away after a short battle against Cancer. For all of us, each of these losses comes with a heavy heart, yet our deep friendships and connections with one another have helped to carry each other through these challenging times.
So many more of our members have faced medical hardships, and, again, our chapter has continued to reach out to support and encourage each other through it all. We truly are blessed beyond measure to have such caring and loving members.
We have also witnessed some growth of new relationships and love as the year passed us by. In July, I was matched with my 2nd guide dog, Nacho. He is a beautiful yellow lab, about two-and-a-half-years old. Then, in the middle of August, Jeanette and Dick flew across the country to celebrate the marriage of their granddaughter. Jeanette celebrated her 80th birthday, While Jeanette and Dick also celebrated their 60th wedding Anniversary during our PCB State Conference. Additionally, Member Debbie Rozear is at the Seeing Eye, Inc., being matched with her 4th guiding angel. We wish her all the very best as she begins her new adventure with this new guide.
We have had several guest speakers throughout the year; including a Genetic Endocrinologist, Accessible Pharmacy Services, and Dr. Sheila, of New York, a retinal Neurologist working on research to help those with blindness to regain their sight.
We held our Annual picnic in August, where we shared a beautiful pot-luck picnic meal with a brief meeting at the Covered Bridge Park in Allentown. It was a gorgeous day with a great turn out of fun, food, and friendship.
In November, LVCB held its annual elections. I personally thanked all of our officers and leadership for their hard work and accomplishments throughout 2022: Vice President Gary Dvorshak, Corresponding Secretary Dianne Michels, Recording Secretary Elaine Young, and Treasurer Jameel Memon. I am so grateful for all you have done to make LVCB have another successful year! I also would like to welcome our new officers and leadership for the 2023 year. President: Liz Oleksa, Vice President: Debbie Rozear, Corresponding Secretary: Dianne Michels, Recording Secretary: Elaine Young and Treasurer: Jameel Memon.
I also want to give an amazingly HUGE shoutout to our chapter for selling 229 tickets in the PCB 6-month lottery fundraiser!!! Jameel Memon was our top seller, with Paul Miller right behind. Thank you all for the time, outreach and advocacy you all do to bring a new light and view to supporting individuals living with sight loss and blindness.
On December, 17, 2022, LVCB will be holding its Annual Winter luncheon at the Hamilton Family Restaurant from 11:00a.m. to 2:00 p.m. We all look forward to this time to share a meal together: a brief meeting and then friendships and fellowship for the remainder of the time together.
It truly has been my honor to be the President of the Lehigh Valley Chapter for another year. I am looking forward to more possibilities, more outreach within the community, and more growth in our membership. We now have members from Pennsylvania and from Florida. We are so glad to be able to welcome so many to our chapter, and look forward to finding out where each of us fits best into our organization.
With many Blessings and Thanks,
Elizabeth Oleksa, President LVCB 2022
Self-reliance and the Mixed-Vision Partnership
By William H. Grignon (Communications Team)
One partner has sight, the other partner has vision loss, how does this dynamic affect the latter’s quest for self-reliance? The Communications Team tried to answer this question when it presented the Not-So-Newly-Blind Game at our recently-concluded Conference.
Not surprisingly, it turns out to be not a simple, black-and-white, one-size-fits-all answer. After all, we are talking about human beings, each with life experiences, emotional baggage, preconceptions, and feelings that may or may not be acknowledged, expressed, and honored.
The Game presented four relationships: a husband-wife, a father-daughter, an involved couple, and a pair of friends. Notwithstanding the intrinsic relational differences, the pairings revealed more about each participant’s attitudes towards, assumptions about, and behavior regarding vision loss rather than any relationship distinctions. That is, how each sighted partner felt about and treated their vision loss partner, and how each vision loss partner saw themselves and behaved within the relational dynamic, centered on and was ramified by the fact of the vision loss, rather than the overall interpersonal construct.
So, what did we learn? Well, we learned that the sighted partners generally underestimated the skills and abilities of their vision loss partners, who, in turn, either generally overestimated their skills and abilities or had a rather fuzzy notion of what they could learn and accomplish. In all cases, a lack of direct communication seemed to foster counterproductive patterns and mutual resentments. In short, the vision loss partners seemed to self-limit so as not to “overburden” their sighted partners – a self-limiting that directly affected their self-advocacy (i.e., speaking up for oneself) and self-reliance (i.e., achieving equality within the partnership, with each partner contributing strengths and offering support).
We also learned that driving was a big issue for all four partners. No matter how much the sighted partner acknowledged the vision loss partner’s need for transportation and promised to provide transportation for their vision loss partner, over time, driving became a big deal and a constant source of friction, discord, and disjunction. In short, the vision loss partner, confronted by increasing resistance and diminishing satisfaction, learned to placate the sighted partner’s animus, reduce expectations, and only ask for rides when it was absolutely necessary. Not surprisingly, this caused the vision loss partner to feel trapped, demeaned, and resentful. In the end, both partners experienced mutual resentment that colored the entire relationship.
So, what to do? Well, the vision loss partner could explore and exploit all alternative transportation options, including other sighted people outside of the relationship, para-transit, and, if in a pinch, a ride service like Uber/Lyft. However, it is essential that the partners sit down, discuss, acknowledge the issue, and come up with mutually-satisfactory options. Beyond driving, this basic approach is recommended for all issues that might arise, fester, and go unresolved within the relationship.
Depending on the severity of the disjunction, maybe just scheduling a time for open and nonjudgmental dialogue will be sufficient, but, if things have gone too far, maybe involving a trained therapist is required, i.e., establish a safe place with a neutral arbitrator who can manage the dialogue and recommend solutions. No matter the issue and no matter the severity, dialogue, mutual respect, calm reflection, and a willingness to be humble, compromise, and adapt for the good of the other and the relationship is essential.
We say that self-reliance starts with self-advocacy and self-advocacy starts at home. This is true if you are a child living at your parents’ house, a partner in a committed relationship, or a colleague in a corporate setting. Only you, the person with vision loss, knows what you are feeling, knows what you are confronting, and knows what you need. This doesn’t mean that it’s all up to you, but it does mean that you have to be clear about where you are and what you want to be. So, take the time to do a personal inventory of your life: what is working, what is not working, how can people, things, and services better serve you in getting from here to there?
Once you have a pretty clear picture of your existential snapshot, take a deep breath and start reaching out to the people, services, and organizations you have identified as possibly providing solutions to your requirements. Be calm, be clear, be confident, be consistent, and be constant. You will encounter ignorance, You will meet resistance, and you will need to work through the explicit and implicit arguments that inform and enthrall their opposition to change.
As with all advocacy, you will probably end up playing many roles, ambassador, teacher, and role model. It can be exhausting, but it’s the only way you can grow in self-reliance and empower yourself to affect meaningful changes in your life. Be bold, be gentle, and be not afraid!
A recording of the Game, along with a Question Guide designed to facilitate group discussion, will be posted on the PCB website shortly.
Making Dog Laws: Is It All in the Name?
By William H. Grignon
Across the country, legislatures are wrestling with thorny issues surrounding the conduct of and towards dogs. On one side, are the advocates for strict laws governing dogs that bite and otherwise cause a public nuisance, and, on the other side, are equally fervent advocates working diligently to craft laws that give dogs greater protections under the law.
In all these battles, a trend has become abundantly clear: the law, no matter it’s orientation, has a much better chance of passage if it’s named after a specific individual (human, preferably a child, or a dog, preferably non-threatening and photogenic) and that individual has suffered some horrific event (a child attacked by a neighbor’s dog or a dog suffering horrendous abuse). And so, vital legislation that could fix legal loopholes, gets hyper-emotionalized and, in the end, we have to ask: Is this such a bad thing?
In the sausage-making that is legislation, emotionality works. It generates interest, contributions, support, and, in the end, lawmaking momentum. Making laws is a human endeavor and those humans who craft the laws only have so much political capital to go around, hence, they tend to hoard it, dole it out where it will do the most good (as defined by each politician), and only spend it when there is a greater likelihood of success. In this political calculus, fervent advocacy can ignite, sustain, and impel statutory fruition. And, so, we get laws named after people and, in this case, dogs.
Laws named after dogs fall into three general categories: to prevent and punish cruelty to dogs, to provide protections for law enforcement dogs, and to give dogs rights in various public situations.
The first kind tend to be the most emotionally-driven, often involving detailed stories of the abuse suffered by the titular namesake. These are the stories you can’t bear to read, that make you sick, that make you so mad you are impelled to donate to animal rights organizations, write letters to your politicians, and even join public hearings, marches, and rallies.
Examples of laws named after dogs and based on human mistreatment of dogs are all too prevalent: Buddy’s Law (MS), Loco’s Law (TX), Logan’s Law (MI), Misty’s Law (WI), Nitro’s Law (OH), Oscar’s Law (Baltimore County), Patrick’s Law (NJ), Ponce’s Law (FL), Susie’s Law (NC), Tommy’s Law (VA), and Winnie’s Law (UK).
Pennsylvania: Libre’s Law: In 2017, Pennsylvania’s animal cruelty laws were amended after a case involving a young Boston Terrier puppy named Libre. Libre was just eight weeks old when he was rescued from a dog breeder in Lancaster. He was left outside, suffering from numerous medical issues including a severe skin infection. Luckily, Libre was found by a good Samaritan who nursed him back to health, but his story made headlines around the world. (emphasis added). In July 2017, Comprehensive Animal Cruelty Act 10, better known as Libre’s Law, was signed into law. This law added many new aspects to Pennsylvania’s animal protections law, most importantly, strengthening the charges that can be filed for animal neglect and cruelty.
The second kind of dog-named law almost always tells the story of a law enforcement dog heroically performing its duty and being ruthlessly injured or killed by the bad guys. Here, the dog is often honored with public commemorations with law enforcement officers gathered in full regalia and the dog is treated as an equal within this brotherhood. Notwithstanding legal arguments that such laws do not actually work to deter the statutory crime, i.e., harming the law dog in the course of its official duties, public sentiment is nevertheless galvanized to want to see the perpetrators further punished and politicians often see this kind of law as a quick win with lots of upside and almost no downside – after all, who dares to deny our canine heroes recognition and protection?
Examples of these kind of laws include: Aron’s Law (NJ), Fang Memorial Law (FL), Finn’s Law (UK), Joker’s Law (TN), Nero’s Law (MA), Nyx’s Law (WY), Quanto’s Law (Edmonton), and Robby’s Law (US). Some laws focus on training law enforcement officers to handle situations involving dogs, e.g., Candy’s Law (TX).
Pennsylvania: Rocco’s Law: This law is named after Rocco, a Pittsburgh Canine Officer who was stabbed in the line of duty while assisting police to apprehend a suspect and eventually died of his wounds. The law, unanimously passed by the PA Senate in June 2014, raises penalties for injuring or killing a police dog.
The third kind of dog-named law is a kind of grab-bag, usually not involving hurt or dead dogs, and focusing more on domestic or civil law scenarios. Here, the dog is praised for its special helpmate qualities, either assisting the disabled or providing comfort to witnesses or victims of natural disasters. Here, the arguments tend to center on the property rights of the dog’s owners and the owner’s rights to have their dog with them in various public settings.
Examples include: Aziz’s Law (NJ), Candy’s Law (TX), Charlie’s Law (NJ), Congo’s Law (NY), Desmond’s Law (CT), Gracie’s Law (NJ), Lucy’s Law (UK), Oscar’s Law (Australia), and Rosie’s Law (NY).
Pennsylvania: Victoria’s Law: After a decade in a Pennsylvania puppy mill, a German Shepard named Victoria was finally rescued, although she had developed Degenerative Myelopathy, an incurable and paralyzing disease that was passed on to the more than 150 puppies she was forced to continuously breed. She became the face of Senate Bill 44, or Victoria’s Law, which would prohibit the sale of dogs, cats, and rabbits in pet stores throughout Pennsylvania. The bill has stalled in the legislature, mainly due to the opposition of certain breeders and retail concerns.
And, on the other side of these pro-dog laws there are the people-named laws (known as “Dangerous Dog Laws”) that seek to curtail the breeding, possession, and conduct of “vicious” or even “potentially dangerous” dogs and rely on truly hideous instances of dog violence. The stories usually involve children and usually involve one of the “more violent” breeds (e.g., Pit Bulls, German Shepherds, Rottweilers, etc.). Proponents of these laws know that the public already harbor a fear and a mistrust of these kinds of dog breeds and also know that publicizing the death or horrible mutilation of an “innocent” child by such dogs stimulates the most visceral responses within the average citizen.
Examples of these kinds of laws are: Angel’s Law (NM) Emily’s Law (AL), and Milo’s Law (ND). A variation of these laws is a law that uses an instance of dog-on-dog violence to pass and enforce stricter dog laws: Benny’s Law (NY), Fabian’s Law (AZ), and Louie’s Law (IL).
Breeders who raise, train, and love dogs like Pit Bulls, Alsatians, and Rotties know they have an uphill climb in changing public attitudes and misconceptions, especially when confronted with a truly heart-rending instance of dog violence. Breeders, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), and The Humane Society work to focus on the conduct of the dog involved and work hard against what are called “breed-specific” laws that tar all dogs of a certain breed with the same brush.
Breed-Specific Legislation (BSL) targets certain “dangerous” breeds of dogs and places restrictions on their freedoms or even ban their ownership outright. Anti-BSL advocates argue that “any dog can bite,” noting that 4.5 million people (many of them children and most of them involving family pets) in the US are bitten by dogs each year. They further argue that such laws are difficult to enforce, especially when the breed of the dog is difficult to determine. Moreover, they argue that such laws discriminate against responsible dog owners and fail to punish and correct irresponsible dog owners, i.e., the ultimate cause of dog misbehavior due to lack of training or consistent control and reinforcement.
Instead, anti-BSL advocates propose that focus be placed on: passing and enforcing generic, non-breed-specific, “dangerous dog” laws with focus on irresponsible dog owners; enforcing animal control laws (e.g., leash laws) by trained animal control officers; prohibiting all dogfighting; encouraging neutering of dogs not intended for breeding; and developing school-based and adult education programs that teach pet selection strategies, pet care and responsibility, and bite prevention.
Let’s finish up on a lighter note with 25 silly (but true) dog laws that demonstrate that the sausage-making process can certainly go awry:
- You’re not allowed to give alcohol or tobacco to any animals (including your own dog) in public parks (AL).
- The well-being of dogs must be considered in all divorce actions (AK).
- It’s illegal to tie a dog to the roof of your car (AK).
- Dogs may not bark after 6 p.m. (AR).
- “No dog shall be in a public place without its master on a leash” (CA).
- Dog owners may not bring their dogs into elevators in public buildings – service dogs are exempt (CA).
- Animals are not permitted to mate within 500 yards of a church (CA).
- Dogcatchers must notify dogs they’re about to be impounded by posting a notice on a tree in the city park and along a public road (CO).
- Any dogs bearing tattoos must be reported to police (CT).
- Educating dogs is illegal (CT).
- It’s against the law for couples to make out, or even hold hands, while walking a dog (DE).
- No person is allowed to sleep in a dog kennel (ID).
- It’s illegal for a dog to bark longer than 15 minutes (IL).
- French Poodles are banned from the opera (IL).
- It’s illegal to give a dog whiskey (IL).
- Smelly dogs are illegal (IL).
- It’s illegal to give lighted cigars to dogs (IL).
- You aren’t allowed to keep more than two dogs of six months age or older, at least not without a special permit (KS).
- Dogs aren’t allowed to molest cars (KY).
- It’s illegal to allow your dog to chase a deer (MA).
- It’s illegal to tether a dog, or any other animal, to a post, pole, or tree inside city limits (MN).
- Cats are not permitted to chase dogs up telephone poles (MN).
- It is against the law for dogs and cats to fight (NC).
- You can’t have more than five dogs living in your house (NC).
- Human cremated remains may be buried in pet cemeteries (NJ).
- Unlike most states, the cremated remains of pets may be buried alongside their owners in human cemeteries (NY).
- A police officer may bite a dog to quiet him (OH).
- People who make ugly faces at dogs may be fined or jailed (OK).
- Dogs need a permit signed by the mayor to congregate in groups of 3 or more on private property (OK).
- If your dog is seen chasing you by someone who doesn’t quite understand the dynamic, that person can legally shoot your dog (PA).
- Dogs are forbidden to “worry” squirrels in the public park next to the capital (WI).
- Dogs can be requisitioned to propel army vehicles (Belgium).
- On April 8, 2020, dogs were reclassified from “livestock” to “companion animals,” but the law does not constitute an explicit consumption ban (China).
- Dog owners can be fined up to 600 EUR for not taking their dogs on a walk at least 3 times a day (Italy).
- Walking a dog in public is illegal (Saudi Arabia).
- All indoor animals must be able to see out a “sunny window” (Sweden).
- It is illegal for a city cab to carry a rabid dog (UK).
- If a police officer asks you not to, you are not allowed to incite a dog to bark (UK).,
- Your dog may not mate with a dog from the Royal House (UK).
- Angels will not enter a house if there is a dog present, but angels don’t seem to mind if dogs are outside, and dogs used for herding, hunting, and guarding appear to be exempt (Islam).
Contributions are encouraged to support the accessible formatting of The PCB Advocate in braille, DAISY audio cartridge, large print, and electronic Word file. Donations are tax deductible. Gifts can be made by credit card either online at pcb1.org or by phone to 877-617-7407. Donations by check can be mailed to PCB, PO Box 68, Volant, PA 16156-0068.
PCB TEAMS AND LEADERS
Advocacy: Chris Hunsinger
(Meets Third Monday 7:30 p.m. in odd months and Advocacy for All Calls in even months.)
Awards: Will Grignon
(Meets as needed for a couple of months before a convention)
Communications: Will Grignon
(Meets Second Tuesday at 7:30 p.m.)
Conference Program and Planning
[Looking for a Team leader.]
(Meets Second Thursday at 7:30 p.m.)
Finance: Michael Zaken
(Meets Third Thursday at 7:30 p.m.)
Fund Development: Mary Ann Grignon
(Meets Third Wednesday 7:30 p.m.)
Peer Engagement: Suzanne Erb
(Meets 1st Wednesday at 7:30 p.m.)
Parliamentary: Carla Hayes
(Meets Fourth Tuesday 9:00 p.m.)
Technology Access: Joe Fagnani
(Meets First Thursday 8 p.m.)
Vision Loss Resource: Jule Ann Lieberman
(Meets Third Tuesday 8 p.m.)
Cumberland County, [in process]
Golden Triangle, Tom Burgunder, 412-502-6931
Hank Bloomberg, Michael Peterson,
- F. K, David Lee Shaw, 215-747-4886
Keystone, Cathy Long, 717-732-5265
Lehigh Valley, Elizabeth Oleksa,
C: 610-392-9551, email@example.com
Oil Valley, Ron Montgomery, 814-365/2475, firstname.lastname@example.org
PAGDUS, Rose Martin, 215-756-1624
Philadelphia Regional, Shirley Brotman,
Washington County, Carla Hayes,
York County, Wendy Shope, 717-675-0452
PCB BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Christine Hunsinger, President, 412-881-9328
Mary Ann Grignon, 1st VP, 570-807-1276
Rosemary Martin, 2nd VP, 215-756-1624
Jacqueline Wissinger, Secretary, 814-765-6768
Michael Zaken, Treasurer, 412-655-1234
Sue Lichtenfels, Past President, 412-429-1727
Donald Dunn, Director, 215-483-6935
William Grignon, Director, 727-564-9759
Deborah Hill, Director, 412-742-4288
George Holliday, Director, 484-343-2722
Doug Hunsinger, Director, 412-512-4268
Sandy Marsiglia, Director, 717-635-9937
Robert Shingleton, Director, 484-529-4911
Roger Simmons, Director, 717-885-3055
Free Matter for the Blind
(Handle as 1st class Mail)
Domestic Mail Manual Sec. 135.7