Duluth Lighthouse for the Blind Embroiled In Controversy

Duluth Lighthouse for the Blind Embroiled In Controversy

                                      By Curtis Chong

For many years, the Lighthouse for the Blind in Duluth has been regarded by many people as the premier agency for the blind in the Arrowhead region.  So entrenched in the mind of the community is the Lighthouse that once a public official was heard to proclaim with pride that the Lighthouse was the most wonderful employer of blind people in the area.  In short, the Lighthouse has been viewed traditionally as a benevolent and charitable benefactor for people who suffer from the tragedy of blindness.

This is not how the Lighthouse is regarded by many blind people.  Instead, it is often criticized, traditionally disliked, and generally viewed as a repressive, paternalistic agency.  Blind people in the Arrowhead area who couldn't find employment anywhere else have turned in desperation to the Lighthouse for help and accepted work in the agency's sheltered workshop as a last resort.  Instead of providing the necessary training to help these individuals find meaningful employment elsewhere in the community, the Lighthouse has typically kept the more productive workers to continue receiving government contracts while laying off those workers not deemed to be useful.

Perhaps the most infamous attempt by the Lighthouse to expand its business was the acquisition of contracts to produce toilet tissue for the Federal government.  This project was not favorably regarded by the blind community.  Yet, the Lighthouse could squeeze the State of Minnesota for more than $150,000 in grant money, which the state permitted it to spend without any proper checks and balances.

In mid November, a three-part investigative report on the Lighthouse was aired on Channel 6 in Duluth.  Prepared by television reporter, Barbara Reyelts, the report showed the public that the Lighthouse is just as paternal, repressive and discriminatory as blind people have maintained for years.  Here are some interesting tidbits of information from the story.

The acting director of the Lighthouse is Nick Thul.  Mr. Thul was appointed to fill that position after the "resignation" of Michael Conlan, who still serves as a consultant.  The Director of Communications (Public Relations) for the Lighthouse is Nancy Roche, who just happens to be Mr. Thul's daughter.  We, the public, are expected by the Lighthouse to believe that Ms. Roche did not get her job because of any relationship with her father.

Sandy Wilmot is a blind woman who, for seventeen years, worked at the Lighthouse as a liaison between shop workers and the administration.  Two years ago the Lighthouse management eliminated Ms. Wilmot's position, ostensibly for financial reasons.  She was then fired.  When Reyelts questioned Thul, he said he had never heard of Sandy Wilmot.  Citing his eleven years on the Board, Thul said,"If she was an employee that was mistreated, I think as an active board member I would have known about it."

Shortly after Thul took charge of the Lighthouse, the press was invited to a reception and news conference.  During the two‑hour event, reporters were not introduced to a single blind shop employee.  They could film production workers on the line, but they were not given a chance to meet or talk with any of them.

Nick Thul was reported to say that the Lighthouse had every intention of advertising for and hiring a blind person to work at the reception desk.  Blind people in Duluth expressed a different view: why not hire a blind person as executive director of the Lighthouse.

Recently, the Lighthouse doubled its shifts, going to round-the-clock production.  Not one of the new people hired was blind, and no one in the blind community knew about any job openings until after they were filled.

To win lucrative government contracts, the Lighthouse must ensure that 75% of its direct production labor force is blind.  In administrative and management positions, the Lighthouse employs only two people who are blind.  Additionally, the Lighthouse has apparently found a way to sidestep the 75% direct labor requirement by setting up a separate for‑profit corporation.  This corporation has yet to hire anyone who is blind.

Today, the Lighthouse finds itself embroiled in controversy with the very people whom it is supposed to serve--namely, blind people themselves.  Current and former blind employees have signed and distributed a petition calling upon the Lighthouse to make reforms.  We hear that a lawyer has been retained and that the entire matter is also being investigated by Services for the Blind.  We know that longtime Lighthouse director Mike Conlan is no longer in charge of the agency.  But instead of leaving in disgrace, Mr. Conlan is now serving as a "consultant," meaning that he is still being paid by the agency.  If the television reports we have seen are accurate, Nick Thul hardly represents an improvement.  Blind people are still expected to keep quiet and accept with gratitude everything that the Lighthouse dishes out to them.  As a token gesture, the Lighthouse plans to hire a blind receptionist.  To add insult to injury, the Lighthouse sets up a subsidiary for-profit corporation to sidestep the federally-mandated 75% direct labor requirement.

How will all of this shake out in the end?  We hope that matters will work out in favor of blind people in the Arrowhead region.  The public image of the Lighthouse has already been tarnished.  Victory for the blind is certainly possible.

(Editor's note:  We will continue to follow developments in Duluth.  Our members there will keep us informed, and the Services for the Blind investigation will be a matter of public record under the Minnesota Data Practices Act.  This reminds me of the upheaval at the Minneapolis Society for the Blind (MSB) in 1970.  MSB acted the same way the Duluth Lighthouse is now acting, including the same statements and public-relations ploys.  Although the struggle lasted for 12 years, the outcome was overwhelming loss of public confidence in MSB and public recognition of the rights and true abilities of blind people.  MSB no longer exists.  It had to merge with the St. Paul Society for the Blind and change its name to survive.  The Duluth Lighthouse for the Blind is following in MSB's footsteps.)