Cocktails & Popcorn: The Rape Of LARA - Michigan Business Regulatory Database Has An Invalid Hostname Moment

The Rape of LARA by the rogues of the
Michigan Office of Attorney General

Earlier on Cocktails & Popcorn, Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs site went dark, then it went back up with a notice about an hour and half later that it was updating.

Now, the last time I checked, when a government site is updating, it typically does not go dark.

LARA went dark and was raped by the privateers who sailed in from their UCC Public Private Partnerships to pilfer our most precious treasures, the Children's Trust Funds.

A definite sign of hacking.

I was having erotic fantasies that the feds had initiated Phase Six - Michigan goes into federal receivership, but thought it only best to bridal my lust and wait for a DOJ FBI Conjugal Collaborative presser.

There was that moment of a fleeting thought that someone, somewhere, up in LARA was bleachbitting history, again, destroying federal evidence in those fake ass LLCs, NGOs and INCs they may, or may not have on file that took out federal mortgages from TARP, NSP2 and a myriad of other federal land and housing grant programs, but, alas, Bill *Smooches* Schuette is no longer Attorney General.

Then, I began to wonder if Microsoft had some of those "occidental backdoors" intellectual property issues going on, which would mean they were hacked because it went dark and did not have the notice up until later.




Oddly enough, it also crossed my mind that someone may have hired some of those *russian/israeli/ukrainian* Smarty Pants (The Global Collection) who sit in the Ivory Tower on the Hill to "ethically hack" LARA, but then I said, Meh. I will wait for the news because I know someone read my post.

Behold, the beauty of the public record!

I believe Dana is about to uncloak the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and its deep, dark history in Michigan.

Dana plays in the forest of The Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed, who watches from afar, to see if Dana is going to dig up the dead kids and the two boys who survived, to give their legacies proper honors and make them whole again, which shall never, ever happen, especially if you have died, came back, died again, came back, as she knows well of how this works, being in possession of the public record, and all.

There is no monetary amount that can be assigned for justice to be served.

I want to see Ricky Holland's entire family achieve justice, Dana.

The over prescriptions are not just limited to opioids to adults, as children in foster care are the big pharmaceutical cash cow of Medicaid.

Just look at the expenditures.

I did.

Ben did, too.

I dedicate this to post in honor of My Sensei, Ben Hansen.

Much love.

#maytheheavensfall

#sayhisname

Michigan's top Medicaid doctor accused of over-prescribing opioids

David Neff

The top doctor for Michigan's Medicaid program has been placed on paid administrative leave as state officials review allegations that he over-prescribed opioids to patients in his private practice.

The state Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs filed a complaint with the Michigan Board of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery on May 1, alleging that Dr. David Neff over-prescribed controlled substances to some patients in his part-time medical practice.

The complaint accuses Dr. David Neff of failing to exercise due care, conform to minimal standards of practice or utilize the MAPS system. He also allegedly requested data for other than a legitimate medical purpose from the Michigan Automated Prescription System, which tracks all controlled substance prescriptions written in the state.

On same day the complaint was filed, Neff was placed on leave from his $194,184-a-year position as Michigan's chief medical director for Medicaid, said Lynn Sutfin, spokesman for the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services.

"Dr. Neff is on paid administrative leave as we await a resolution of the administrative complaint issued by LARA," Sutfin said in a Thursday email to The Detroit News.

LARA investigators based the complaint on data from MAPS. They also reviewed the medical records Neff kept on 10 of his patients.

A call Thursday to Neff's private practice office in Okemos was not answered.

The complaint alleges that Neff prescribed higher doses of opioids to some patients than recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The federal agency urges doctors to limit most patients to no more than 50 morphine milligram equivalents per day for most patients or "avoid or carefully justify" doses of 90 MMEs or more. 

Neff told LARA investigators that he currently treats about 85 patients in his part-time practice. He provides family medicine services to about 75 percent of them, but provides palliative care to the remaining 25 percent. Palliative care patients often have complex conditions or terminal illnesses that require higher-than-usual doses of controlled substances.

One of his patients, Jane Doe 1, was on a "high MMEs" regimen "that fell below the standard of care for the patient's conditions," according to the complaint.

A patient, Jane Doe 2, was prescribed 1,500 MMEs daily of Fentanyl patches.  The patches didn't adhere well, Neff said, so this patient would remove them before the full dose was used.

In another case, Neff rapidly decreased Jane Doe 4's dose from 980 MMEs to 420 MMEs without adequately documenting a reason for the reduction, according to investigators.

The complaint also alleges that Neff failed to run urine screens on any of the patients and failed to run MAPS reports on several patients, but ran three MAPS reports on Jane Doe 1 after she died.

Michigan doctors have been required since June 1, 2018, to run MAPS reports before writing any prescription for more than a three-day supply of a controlled substance.

Neff has 30 days to respond to the complaint from the date it was filed by LARA. He could seek a compliance conference where he could provide testimony and evidence to a LARA representative and a member of the Disciplinary Subcommittee of the state Board of Osteopathic Medicine and Surgery. Or he could request a hearing before a state administrative law judge.

Punishments for the charges, if substantiated, are at the board's discretion and could range from a reprimand to probation, suspension or other sanctions.

Michigan Peremptory Mandamu... by on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

SCOTUS U.S. v. Department Of Commerce - Privatization Of Citizenship Question On Census For Violations Of Voting Rights Act & Administrative Procedures Act

In short, the U.S. is petitioning to take the issue of putting the citizenship question on the next 2020 Census as a mandamus to stop violations of the Voting Rights Act & Administrative Procedures Act.

It seems, Steve Bannon may have assisted Kris Kobach and Wilbur Ross, under the financial direction of private political interests, through propaganda, to have citizenship on the census, for the purposes of securing electioneering data and, dare I say, the implementation of a national absentee voting ballots scheme. involving real estate.

But hey, what do I know?

I know there are many more SCOTUS Petitions for Certiorari in the pipeline and they are all legally symbiotic.

I also know to put the citizenship question on the census is an act of privatization because policymakers, the Executive Branch, cannot make law, only the Congress makes law.

Happy National Adoption Month: SCOTUS - DHS v. States Children's Trust Funds On Trafficking Tiny Humans - DACA, DAPA Privatization Policies Of Fraud

Happy National Adoption Month: TRUMP v. NAACP Petition For Certiorari To SCOTUS On Trafficking Tiny Humans - DACA, DAPA

And, I also know Willis Hartman, Kansas oil industry, dropped more than 50% of campaign funding into Kobach's failed 2018 Kansas gubernatorial campaign, which comes to about $1,000,000.

This is about predictive modeling crap.

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether, in an action seeking to set aside agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 701 et seq., a district court may order discovery outside the administrative record to probe the mental processes of the agency decisionmaker—including by compelling the testimony of high-ranking Executive Branch officials —when there is not a strong threshold showing that the decisionmaker disbelieved the objective reasons in the administrative record, irreversibly prejudged the issue, or acted on a legally forbidden basis.

SERRANO: Should political parties and campaign politics ever factor into what is asked of every household in the country on the census? 

ROSS: No political party has asked us to do anything on the census. We have had a request, as everyone is aware, from the Department of Justice, to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census. 

SERRANO: * * * I was very disappointed to see yesterday that the Republican Party campaign to reelect the president put out an appalling e-mail specifically noting that the president wants a new citizenship question added to the census * * * . Do you disavow this campaign e-mail? * * *

ROSS: I’m not familiar with the e-mail. I’m not part of the Republican campaign committee. So, I have not seen it. I have heard about it, this morning. We are responding solely to the Department of Justice’s request, not to any campaign request, not to any other political party request. We are listening to stakeholders. Many have written to us. Some have come in to talk with me.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ET ... by on Scribd

Besides, what the heck is a third party administrator going to do with all that data?

I thought it only fair to report what Tom Perez, DNC Chair is up to when it comes to his activities of securing voter data profiles, strictly for the purposes of monetization, of course.

Hey, at least Tom was open and obvious in the DNC's intentions of selling voter data profiles to private, foreign, third parties.

DNC Chair Tom Perez goes to war with state parties

Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez launched an attack on his own party’s state organizations Saturday with a long and angry email over the future of the party’s most valuable asset — its voter data file.

Just days before an important Tuesday meeting in D.C. on the future of the data operation, Perez sharply criticized a new proposal from state party leaders and singled out prominent state officials by name.

“For some inexplicable reason, this proposal would tear down just about everything about our current data structure, reversing so much of the progress we made over the past decade,” Perez wrote.

The national chairman, describing his own reaction to the state proposal as “disappointed” and “dumbfounded,” accused the president of the Association of State Democratic Committees, Minnesota’s Ken Martin, of undermining the DNC by not keeping other state party officials “in the loop,” prompting withering criticism of Perez from state party leaders.

It‘s the latest fight in a quickly escalating war over the trove of Democratic voter information — a conflict that broke into the open at a gathering of the state parties and the DNC in Puerto Rico late last month. The party’s data are largely owned by the state parties, but a considerable amount of other data being collected by outside groups like labor unions and super PACs could be leveraged to benefit Democratic candidates and the eventual 2020 nominee.

COUNTDOWN TO 2020

The race for 2020 starts now. Stay in the know. Follow our presidential election coverage.

The DNC wants to gather all the data points on voters into a new, massive for-profit database but needs to convince state parties on the idea. The state parties have been wary, accusing the DNC of conducting a power grab that could financially benefit a few elite party figures.

In response to the DNC plan, Martin on Friday circulated a counterproposal designed to better integrate data from outside groups within the existing infrastructure. It was this proposal that prompted Perez’s email.

Perez’s email — with the seemingly innocuous subject line “UPDATE on data” — immediately triggered an uproar Saturday among state party leaders, who held conference calls and communicated with a flurry of emails and texts. The DNC chairman was referred to in a call as “a bull in a china shop,” according to one state party official. Another state party official called him “petulant,” via text message.

The backlash threatens to splinter the state parties and the national committee — technically separate entities — just as Democratic contenders are preparing to launch presidential campaigns.

Perez argued in his Saturday email that “Ken’s new entity...amounts to having State Parties effectively going alone on technology and data.” He threatened to cut off access to campaign tech tools like VoteBuilder, an online organizing platform, if state parties go forward with their plan.

“You would have to find a replacement for VoteBuilder — either building or buying — as the DNC has sole rights to the platform,” he wrote.

“The reality is the state parties own the voter file. At the end of the day, we hope to move forward with the DNC, but if the DNC continues down this path, we’re just not interested in that,” Martin told POLITICO. “It’s clear that the DNC is not interested in any other proposals or in negotiating.”

Of the email, Martin said that “it’s highly disappointing that Tom would make it so personal.”

Party chairs in the early 2020 presidential primary states also criticized Perez for personalizing the dispute.

“I was very disappointed, and I felt we could have continued to have conversations at a better level than the tone of that email, and I find it very unfortunate,” said Ray Buckley, chairman of the New Hampshire Democratic Party. “I think that’s how negotiations are, and for [Perez] to be surprised that there would be alternative suggestions is disappointing.”

Trav Robertson, the South Carolina Democratic Party chairman, said Saturday’s email prompted him to “spit out my sweet tea.”

“His email was wholly inappropriate and wholly in the wrong spirit of our conversation,” he said. “For them to say that Ken Martin and Brad Martin [president of the state party executive directors group] have misled us and have not operated in good faith is just not true. In fact, it’s a lie.”

The fight is likely to deepen the intraparty gridlock on how best to prepare a data operation for the eventual 2020 nominee — a goal both sides share but over which they are in deep disagreement on the means.

Ken Martin added that Perez’s email could imperil future negotiations: “I don’t know how you put the genie back in the bottle at this point after Tom’s email.”

DNC officials see a chance to update their tech and pool their data quickly with cash from liberal donors and Silicon Valley tycoons. Republicans have this capability already — although in practice the Koch brothers-backed outside groups and the Republican National Committee have feuded over sharing their data — which has many Democratic leaders worried about being at a competitive disadvantage in 2020.

“It is also time to take critical steps to modernize our data infrastructure. The other side has already done this, so time is of the essence,” Perez wrote to the state parties. With several state parties staunchly opposed, DNC officials have discussed potentially integrating just some states at first, with the hope of eventually persuading all of them to sign on.

The counterproposal offered by Martin and additional state party officials — most state parties received copies on Friday, with a briefing scheduled for Monday — would largely build on the existing infrastructure utilized by the state parties and data vendor TargetSmart. Proponents argue that the goal of integrating all the progressive world’s data is achievable without creating an entirely new organization.

“TargetSmart has provided key data services to the DNC for more than a decade,” Tom Bonier, TargetSmart’s CEO, told POLITICO. “The fact is that there are no shortcuts in this work. Handing over our data to an outside entity could hurt our candidates in 2020 and put our party at a disadvantage for years to come.”

Although most state parties hadn’t publicly weighed in on the new state party-centric proposal by Saturday morning — many hadn’t even read it yet — Perez’s email caused officials to rally behind Martin, the veteran Minnesota chairman.

The executive director of the Alaska Democratic Party, Jay Parmley, emailed a response directly to Perez telling him he was being “petty.”

“To insinuate that that these individuals haven’t been completely transparent and open with the ASDC membership simply because much of the ASDC membership doesn’t trust what the DNC is ‘peddling’ when it comes to a Data Trust is just wrong,” he wrote in an email obtained by POLITICO.

Parmley, who has served in state party leadership in numerous states, confirmed he authored the email.

“I like Tom, but I think this was really poor judgment. It read like a letter from an 8th grader,” Parmley told POLITICO.

Other state party chairs also supported Martin.

“I think Ken’s doing a good job,” said Troy Price, chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party. “It’s disappointing for a fight like this to become so public. Obviously, our [2020 presidential] caucus is coming up here in 14 months, and that data conversation is very important.” 

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 114.4 Drug Ring in Congress - The Blackberry Twenty

Slowly it comes to Detroit.

REVEALED: Three Democrats Attended Private Dinner With Iran’s President And Louis Farrakhan

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission Sucks

The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission sucks and this is why:

To begin, in Michigan, Supreme Court Judicial Candidates are exempted from disclosing campaign contributions.

SCOTUS handed down a wishy-washy ruling on judicial candidates soliciting campaign contributions.

Judicial lobbying is something that goes on everyday, meaning that a judge can sit on the board of a child welfare organization while presiding over a case where the chid welfare organization is in front of the court.

The Madame Maura Corrigan used to do it all the time.

But then, there is this particular situation.

I have not checked lately but, back in the dark ages of Michigan Child Welfare, members of the Judicial Tenure Commission used to sit on the boards of child welfare organizations, like St. Vincent Sarah Fisher Residential Center, where, if one was to file a grievance against a presiding judge in a child welfare case like St. Vincent Sarah Fisher Residential Center, the chances were 100% that the grievance would be dismissed.

Dude would not even give the chance to recuse himself when a case was brought to his court, where the defendant was St. Vincent Sarah Fisher Residential Center.

He refused to "entertain" the filing.

Michigan Mandamus Denial by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Before anyone decides to dismiss this blatant conflict of interest, let me tell you a little story about the Michigan Court of Appeals.

See, back in the 1980s, Michigan came up with this brilliant plan to stop the bottle necking of cases going to appeal.

Instead of providing due process for all citizens, the Michigan COA decided to filter cases it deemed worthy upon the reading of "a clerk", not a judge.

These judges were well aware of the questionable operations in the lower courts so the COA restructured to only take cases that would benefit their own personal interests/investments.

So, what had happened was...

The moment I realized
Judge Michael Kelly was mad at me

According to the Michigan court rules, it says that you can file in the COA anything against a public official.

So, I did, but I did it my way.

I filed an ex-parte writ of Mandamus.  

See, this means that I am asking the court to make a decision on whether a public official has to follow a specific statute, and if they do, the court has to make the decision whether to make the public official do it, or make them show up in court and give a good reason why they are not upholding the
law.

So, the clerk actually calls me to tell me that I had to serve the public official.

I told him I did not, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Michigan Court Rules because it was an extraordinary writ.

Needless to say, I made him and Michael Kelly mad because no one had ever identified this error in the restructuring of the COA.

Michigan Mandamus Denial by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Of course, I did not bother filing a Michigan Judicial Tenure Grievance because he would have denied that one, too, just like he did all the others.


JUDGE MICHAEL J. KELLYCOURT OF APPEALS

Of Bloomfield Hills, born 1929 in Cleveland, OH, admitted to bar 1956; trial practice tri-county area; founding partner Kelly, Oster, Brennan, Tatham & Solner; attended John Carroll University, Kent State University and the University of Detroit undergraduate schools (no undergraduate degree); JD University of Detroit 1956; LL.M. University of Virginia (Master of Laws in the Judicial Process) 1982; Korean War Veteran, Eighth Army, Seoul, Korea, 1953-1954; married 1957, four children, Michael, Timothy, John and Kathleen; remarried 1988 to Marilyn E. (Ramirez) who is a practicing R.N., Waterford, Michigan, three stepchildren; former member American Legion, VFW, Knights of Columbus, Board of Advisors of the Saint Vincent and Sarah Fisher Center, Board of Directors of Boysville of Michigan; present member of Detroit Athletic Club, Michigan Handball Association, Trout Creek Condominium Association, Harbor Springs; Director of Incorporated Society of Irish/American Lawyers; professional affiliations include ABA, IJA, AJS, Fellow of the Michigan State Bar Foundation and member of the Michigan Supreme Court Historical Society, Inc.; elected member of Judicial Tenure Commission June 13, 1977 through December 31, 1985, past Chairman 1981-1982.

So, if you have a case, or know of a case, where you find out a judge did something jacked up like sit on a board or have financial interests with a party of a case, where that particular party committed fraud upon the court, and continues to rule in their favor, you, and the public, are just out of luck.

The Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission just sucks.

And so does Kelly Ramsey.

State Supreme Court considers limits on judicial misconduct probes

LANSING, Mich. (WXYZ) - A new rule being considered by the state's highest court could limit complaints of misconduct against judges. Michigan's Supreme Court justices are considering adding a three-year statute of limitations to complaints filed against judges with the Judicial Tenure Commission.

According to the proposed rule, “any complaint filed more than three years after the grievant knew…or should have known...shall be dismissed.” Since 2014, 34 judges across the state have faced some sort of action that began at the Judicial Tenure Commission, which can range from a letter of caution to being removed from the bench entirely.

 "There’s just all kind of reasons why trying to defend something three years after the fact is difficult," said Brian Einhorn, an attorney in support of the rule change.

Einhorn has represented dozens of judges accused of misconduct, from former Judge Wade McCree—who carried on an affair with a litigant—to ex-Justice Diane Hathaway, who was sent to prison for bank fraud.

"If a person knows that a judge did something three and a half or four years ago, I don’t think it’s fair to the judge to have to defend himself," Einhorn said.

But not all attorneys agree. Peter Henning is a former federal prosecutor and today is a law professor at Wayne State University.

 "You’re talking about an individual who has immense power and can be quite intimidating," Henning said.

"If you have certain types of cases, say for example a sexual harassment case, that may take years to surface because the individual who was harassed is going to be intimidated and might not have the strength to come forward for four or five years."

 The proposed rule allows for claims outside of the three-year statute of limitations to be considered for "good cause," but critics fear the term is vague and could lead to prolonged legal battles.

 "Should the judge be able to get off simply because (misconduct) happened more than three years ago?" asked Chanel 7's Ross Jones.

 "But we’re dealing with something that’s probably not going to happen very often,"  Einhorn responded.

 But there have been past examples of misconduct that could have been thrown out with a statute of limitations.

 In Wayne County, Judge Bruce Morrow was disciplined for misconduct that happened years before a formal complaint was filed, including giving bond to a man after he was convicted of rape, even though state law didn’t allow it. Morrow was suspended for two months.

 Today in Livingston County, Judge Teresa Brennan is under fire for her affair with a state police officer that testified in a murder trial in her courtroom.

His testimony helped to send a man to prison.

Their affair happened more than three years before it was finally discovered.

It’s unclear if the JTC is investigating Brennan.

 Still, attorney Brian Einhorn says judges shouldn’t have to defend themselves from years-old allegations, after memories fade and evidence becomes stale.

 "There’s timing for doing everything," Einhorn said.

"And there’s nothing different about a judge being accused of misconduct to a lawyer being accused of malpractice to a doctor being accused of malpractice."

 Except in Michigan, there is no statute of limitations for complaints against lawyers or doctors, either.

Giving judges special protection would be unique and improper, argues Carl Marlinga, who is a judge himself.

 "The unintended effect, certainly, is to offer a level of protection for bad judges," Marlinga said. "With the judiciary, maximum integrity is the minimum qualification.

Anything that would protect or shield a judge from scrutiny I just think is wrong."

 A decision on the proposed statute of limitations and scores of other rules currently being considered by the Michigan Supreme Court could come any day.

 "What is the benefit?" asks Wayne State's Peter Henning.

"What is the upside, other than what appears to be giving judges added protections?"

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Senate Committee Might Discuss Medicaid Fraud In Child Welfare

Michigan Senator
Jim Marleau

Do my eyes deceive me?

It seems we have a brave soul in the Michigan Senate who is willing to throw on the public discussion table, the issue with audits and reporting violations in child welfare.

Slow, my beating heart.  I believe I am in love with Senator Jim Marleau.

The Gentleman has recently introduced legislation to allow, and I quote:

 A FEDERAL OR STATE GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY THAT MAY, BY LAW CONDUCT AN AUDIT OR SIMILAR REVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT'S ACTIVITIES UNDER THIS ACT.

The Act is the Michigan Child Protection Act.

This is historic and this is going to be messy.  Here is why:

Child welfare administration and policy in Michigan sucks.

Even if there are found violations of law and policy does not necessarily mean that these questionable actions and inactions will be referred to the Attorney General, state or federal, for sanction, contractual disbarment, license revocation, prosecution or recovery.

The operations of a state child welfare program are so secretive that even if there are found, substantial material violations in under GAGAS and OMB Circular A-133 guidelines, there are no mechanisms to go after Medicaid fraud in child welfare for the State Medicaid Fraud Control Unit or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The reason is that child welfare is protected under the exclusions and exemptions of child welfare privacy law and policy.

Federal may financially penalize, but the state is left with its hands tied as the matter will only be addressed behind closed doors of the backrooms of administrative meetings and super special child welfare committees, not privy to the Open Meetings Act.

Then, there is that rather pesky factor of the Office of Children's Ombudsman never referring found, or even questionable violations of law and policy to the Attorney General for investigation, even though there was an official opinion stating the Office did have the authority.

For your viewing pleasure, and a bit of constructed history on the lack of addressing Medicaid fraud in child welfare, I present a couple of my art projects to inspire a spirited discussion in the Michigan Senate Committee of Families, Seniors and Human Services.

Notice how "children" are excluded from the original purview of the committee.

Michigan Peremptory Mandamus Petition by Beverly Tran

Just as a side note, this writ went no where because there was an error is the court rules for the Court of Appeals and I just wanted to put it on front street.

You cannot file ex-parte in the Michigan Court of Appeals, which is one of the most crucial components of the mandamus, to have the court issue a show cause or its alternative.


Even the Auditor General is limited in reporting and referring found violations in child welfare programs.

Beverly Tran's State of Michigan proposed bill to amend 2003 PA 1, entitled "AUDITS AND EXAMINATIONS" (MCL... by Beverly Tran

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Michigan Governor Snyder Is Duped With His Child Abuse Task Force

Yo Rick, sweety, baby, come over here and let mama have a little heart-to-heart with you.....


Why the hell do you have folks such as William J. Johnson on a task force to review and evaluate himself?  Come on....


Then, please explain to me how it is that non-attorneys can represent state activities?  You either need to change the language or change the focus.  I have a better idea..


Appoint me.  I will represent all the foster children who have been raped, tortured, beaten, drugging, chained up, locked up in deprivation cells... all recommended, approved and paid for by the folks appointed to this task force.

Governor's Task Force on Child Abuse and Neglect

The charge of the Governor's Task Force on Child Abuse and Neglect is to review and evaluate Michigan's investigative, administrative and both civil and criminal judicial handling of cases of child abuse and neglect, particularly child sexual abuse and exploitation, as well as cases involving suspected child maltreatment related fatalities and cases involving a potential combination of jurisdictions, such as interstate, Federal-State, and State-Tribal. Make recommendations and award grants to develop, establish and operate programs in each of the following categories:  A. Investigative, administrative, and judicial handling of cases of child abuse and neglect, particularly child sexual abuse and exploitation, as well as cases involving suspected child maltreatment related fatalities and cases involving a potential combination of jurisdictions, such as interstate, Federal-State, and State-Tribal, in a manner which reduces the additional trauma to the child victim and the victim's family and which also ensures procedural fairness to the accused. B. Experimental, model and demonstration programs for testing innovative approaches and techniques which may improve the prompt and successful resolution of civil and criminal court proceedings or enhance the effectiveness of judicial and administrative action in child abuse and neglect cases, particularly child sexual abuse and exploitation cases, including the enhancement of performance of court-appointed attorneys and guardians ad litem for children, and which also ensure procedural fairness to the accused. C. Reform of State laws, ordinances, regulations, protocols and procedures to provide comprehensive protection for children from abuse, particularly child sexual abuse and exploitation, while ensuring fairness to all affected persons. Governor's Task Force on Child Abuse and Neglect Homepage Statute Executive Order 2010-18 Members Kathleen Lacko, Ludington Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child advocates and individuals experienced in working with children with disabilities Pamela O'Sullivan, Chesterfield Township Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys William Lansat, Farmington Hills Term expires 9/1/14 Represents Child Advocates Gregory Pittman, Muskegon Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Shauna Lou Dunnings, Lansing Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys David Wolock, Royal Oak Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Sandra Lindsey, Lathrup Village Term expires 9/1/14 Represents mental health professionals Patricia Sorenson, Okemos Term expires 9/1/14 Represents parents' groups Tracey Yokich, St. Clair Shores Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Lisa Sullivan, Dewitt Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Judy Hartsfield, Detroit Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Lawrence Rochardson, Adrian Term expires 9/1/14 Represents law enforcement Frederick Johansen, St. Joseph Term expires 9/1/14 Represents health professionals Julie McMurtry, Madison Heights Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and lawyers Jennifer Leppien, Alma Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child advocates Elizabeth Weaver, Glen Arbor - Chair Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Donald Owens, Williamston Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Eugene Moore, Oxford Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Nancy Diehl, Detroit Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Mary Gillespie, St. Joseph Term expires 9/1/14 Represents mental health professionals Honorable Linda Hallmark, Bloomfield hills Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys JoAnn Monaghan, Lakeport Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child advocates Elias Escobedo, West Bloomfield Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Wayne Beerbower, Farmington Hills Term expires 9/1/14 Represents law enforcement Honorable Susan Dobrich, Dowagiac Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Judith Labovitz, Haslett Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child advocates Euphemia "Sue" Franklin, Royal Oak Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child advocates JoAnne Gasco, Northport Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Daniel Adams, Allendale Term expires 9/1/14 Represents law enforcement John Ange, Port Huron Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys John Monaghan, Port Huron Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys Jeanette Colella, Grand Haven Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child advocates Cheryl Follette, Traverse City Term expires 9/1/14 Represents judges and attorneys William Johnson, Lansing Term expires 9/1/14 Represents child protective service agencies Michigan Peremptory Mandamus Petition