Blind vendors target state

Grace Leong

Monday, April 1, 2002 | 11 a.m.

The state agency that helps blind people operate vending businesses at public locations is being criticized by some of the blind vendors amid allegations of mismanagement of the program.

The agency, called the Bureau of Services to the Blind and Visually Impaired (SBV), was criticized by legislative auditors a year ago for failing to ensure the blind vendors paid the correct amount of monthly fees to the state. The SBV was also criticized for failing to introduce policies that were developed in June 2000 to correct this problem, which had been identified in previous audits.

The fees cover SBV's costs of finding and renovating vending locations and helps offset costs to run the program. These fees are based on the blind vendors' revenues and varies by location. Blind vendors are given priority to operate in public buildings and are exempt from making lease payments.

SBV, which oversees the 20 vending stands including snack bars, cafeterias and vending machines in Carson City, Clark and Washoe counties, responded to the legislative auditors' criticism with new audit and regulatory measures.

This regulatory crackdown is drawing complaints from the Nevada Committee of Blind Vendors, a five-member team of blind business people that advises SBV.

The vendors say the SBV overreacted to the audit, which found some vendors were overstating their expenses, reducing the amount of fees paid to the SBV. The vending stands reported $8.3 million in sales and the state received $748,059 from the blind vendors in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, 2000.

Barbara Legier, chief of the bureau, said she is still investigating how much the program would have received from the vendors if not for the "inappropriate reporting."

Bert Hansen, vice chairman of the vendors' committee and operator of the Highscaler cafe -- formerly called Snacketeria -- at Hoover Dam since 1975, disputed the legislative audit's findings. He said vendor's expenses were approved by Mike Becker, the bureau's former chief, and the committee was upset by the SBV's response to the legislative audit.

"Before the committee had a chance to review the legislative audit report, the bureau came out with five or six new policies to monitor the program without our participation," he said. "This increased emphasis on monitoring vendors means other areas of (the) program including finding locations for more vendors may be neglected."

Legier said the bureau stepped up its monitoring efforts by starting monthly on-site business practice reviews of the vendors in October and plans biennial audits of 11 vendors that have annual revenue of more than $150,000 on a more regular basis starting April.

Legier, who said the bureau also conducted three-year back audits in June, said its findings supported those of the legislative audit.

Hansen said two vendors have left the program since the SBV's "heavy-handed" audits began in June.

Hansen, who accused the bureau of improperly using the program's funds to defray the agency's overhead costs, also said seven vendors, including the five committee members, were improperly threatened with license revocations in September by the bureau when they withheld about $200,000 in funds from the program in July and August.

But C.V. Johnson, the operator of a snack bar at the Department of Motor Vehicles at 2701 E. Sahara Ave., is disputing Hansen's claims and those of the other committee members.

He said a majority of the other 15 blind vendors believe the committee improperly withheld monthly fees and accused it of misusing the funds.

"The monthly set-aside (fees) should have gone to building the vending facilities, repairing existing equipment or buying new equip ment. Instead the committee spent the $200,000 on expenses such as paying for an apartment and vehicle for the executive director and attorney fees for filing grievances," he said.

These issues came to light after the committee filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court on March 8 challenging the bureau's proposal for new elections among the 20 vendors to choose five to make up the commit tee that advises SBV.

The SBV proposed a new election for April 7 to replace an election that was held Feb. 24.

archive