1. education
2. graduate school
3. college

Mark P. Donaldson
103 Deerwood Court
Roscommon, MI 48653
Date: April 27, 2015
Mary Jo Kunkle
MPSC Executive Secretary
Lansing, Michigan
Re:
Mark P. Donaldson against Kirtland Community College
U-17871
Dear Ms. Kunkle:
Enclosed in the above captioned case is a six page complaint being commenced under the Michigan
Telecommunications Act with 2 exhibits.
An issue has come up involving the appropriate complaint processes that are to be used involving this
MTA complaint which is noted in 1 through 6 in the complaint including the required use of the APA
contested hearing procedures which governs the practice & procedure involving this complaint and not
MAHS Administrative Hearing Rules Part 4 as indicated in R 792.10403 rule 403 (1).
Unless, I hear from you by the end of the business day on Wednesday, April 27, 2015, I’ll arrange for
personal service of this complaint on the respondent, Kirtland Community College on Thursday April 30,
2015. I’ve obtained an e-docket account and proof of service will be filed timely in this docket. Also,
once I know who is handling the complaint for the respondent, discovery will be served on the person
who is handling this complaint.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any issues and/or questions at (616) 401-9859.
Sincerely,
Mark P. Donaldson
STATE OF MICHIGAN
BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
In the matter of this complaint of
)
Mark P. Donaldson
against
)
Kirtland Community College for violations )
of the Michigan Telecommunications Act
)
____________________________________)
Mark P. Donaldson
103 Deerwood Court Roscommon,MI 48653
____________________________________/
MPSC Case No. U-17871
COMPLAINT
Mark P. Donaldson makes this Complaint pursuant to 1991 PA 179, Section 203 (2),
MCL 484.2203(1) against Kirtland Community College for violations of the Michigan
Telecommunications Acts, MCL 484.2101 et seq. and says in support there of as follows:
1.
This complaint, (which is not a formal complaint, an informal complaint, or a refiled complaint), is being
commenced under the Michigan Telecommunications Act pursuant to statute MCL 484.2203 sec. 203 (1).
2.
Mr. Donaldson establishes in this complaint that the statutes under the Mich. Telecommunications Act &
the Administrative Procedures Act, (hereafter referred to as “APA”), governs the practice & procedure involving
this complaint and not MAHS Administrative Hearing Rules Part 4 as indicated in R 792.10403 rule 403 (1).
3.
Mr. Donaldson establishes in this complaint pursuant to MCL 484.2203 sec. 203 (1) that “the contested
hearings provisions of the Admin. Procedures Act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328" involving this
complaint are to be used along with the applicable statutes under the Michigan Telecommunications Act.
4.
Mr. Donaldson establishes in this complaint that the MPSC is to hold a contested case hearing, issue its
findings, and order(s) under the contested hearings provisions of the “APA” of 1969, 1969 PA 306.
5.
MPSC pursuant to MCL 484. 2203 sec. 203 (1) has specific statutory authority that upon receiving this
complaint is limited to specifically “conduct an investigation, hold hearings, and issue its findings and order”.
6.
Mr. Donaldson requests pursuant to MCL 484.2203 sec. 203 (7) that this complaint is not to be
dismissed, (and if needed only to be suspended), since the complainant Mr. Donaldson requires information that
is in the possession of the respondent Kirtland Community College, hereafter referred to as “KCC”.
7.
MPSC pursuant to MCL 484. 2203 sec. 203 (1) must use the “APA” contested hearing provisions when
it comes to this complaint and the “APA” Chapter 4 Procedures In Contested Cases which clearly states when
agency rules involving a contested case, including this complaint, are to be used in which MCL 24.274 sec. 74
(1) allows an agency in a contested case including this complaint to use agency rules that provide for discovery.
8.
MPSC pursuant to MCL 24.274 sec. 74 (1) in a contested case, which this complaint is, can use agency
rules that provide for discovery which pursuant to MAHS Part 4 R 792.10423 are the Michigan Court Rules.
9.
Mr. Donaldson request pursuant to MCL 484.2203 sec. 203(7) & MCL 24.274 sec. 74(1) that the MPSC
allow Mr. Donaldson “a reasonable opportunity for discovery” involving “KCC” under the Mich. Court Rules.
complaint page 1 of 6 apr 2015
10.
I, Mark P. Donaldson, have a right of action and/or an interest as a “KCC” student, cell phone user,
Internet user, a U. S. Citizen, and a full time resident of AuSable Township in Roscommon County.
11.
“KCC” is the respondent in this complaint and is an educational institution pursuant to MCL 484.2307.
12.
“Michigan Telecommunications Act”, (hereafter referred to as “MTA”), and pursuant to MCL 484.2201
(1), the MPSC has the jurisdiction and authority to administer the “MTA” including “KCC” violations of MTA.
13.
Venue is proper in this matter since the MPSC is a State of Michigan agency with statutory authority
under the “MTA” and Mr. Donaldson lives within Roscommon county in Michigan.
14.
This complaint as set forth in MCL 484.2203a involves more then a $1,000.00, is not a dispute under sec.
203(14), and there is no consent by Mr. Donaldson to attempt alternative means of resolving this complaint.
15.
As set forth in MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (3), “KCC” “may only sell telecommunication services required
for, or useful in, the instruction and training, including worker training, of students and other people utilizing the
institution's educational services, the conducting of research, or the operation of the institution.”.
16.
“KCC” students, “KCC” students with disabilities, “KCC” employees, “KCC” trustees, “KCC staff”,
“KCC” volunteers, and/or “KCC” family members are hereafter referred to as “KCC personnel”.
17.
“KCC personnel” are an “End user” of “KCC” telecommunications services.
18.
“KCC” and “KCC personnel” involve all “KCC” campus locations including Roscommon Michigan, West
Branch Michigan, and/or Gaylord Michigan.
19.
“KCC” past, current, and continuing violation(s) of the “MTA” have occurred within the last 2 years.
20.
Pursuant to MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (3) “KCC” has entered into a cooperative agreement with Verizon
Wireless, exhibit A.
21.
“KCC” is an Authorized User, as set forth in exhibit A, section numbered (2).
22.
“KCC” sells telecommunication services to “KCC personnel” in which “KCC” requires the completion of
exhibit B, the MIFI Rental Information/Agreement, by “KCC personnel”.
23.
“KCC” does not sell but provides free, for no charge, the same telecommunications services to “KCC”
employees for work related purposes only which “KCC” includes wireless modems as noted in exhibit B.
24.
MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (3) specifically limits “KCC”, “may only sell telecommunication services
required for, or useful in, the instruction and training, including worker training, of students and other people
utilizing the institution's educational services, the conducting of research, or the operation of the institution.”
25.
“KCC” has been for years and is still violating MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (3) since at least January of 2013.
26.
“KCC” is an Authorized User, (exhibit A section (6)), in which an “Authorized User will ensure that this
User Agreement will be used only in support of government, not for profit or private education business”.
27.
“KCC personnel” have within a minimum of the last two years or even longer knowingly changed and/or
complaint page 2 of 6 apr 2015
cancelled telecommunications services from Custom Software Inc., (also DBA as M-33 Access and Michigan
Access Inc.), telecommunication services and/or other companies to “KCC” telecommunications services.
28.
“KCC” is required to and is legally responsible when “KCC” is selling telecommunications services to
provide information, educate, notify, document, and/or inform “KCC personnel” on their access and/or use of
“KCC” telecommunications services are to be done in accordance with MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (3).
29.
“KCC” has for years and is still continuing to sell telecommunications services to “KCC personnel” in
which “KCC personnel” use “KCC” telecommunications services to access the Internet for personal non
operation(s) of the institution “KCC”.
30.
“KCC” has for years and is still continuing to sell telecommunications services to “KCC personnel” in
which “KCC personnel” use “KCC” telecommunications services that are not required for, or useful in, the
instruction and training, including worker training, of students and other people utilizing the institution's
educational services.
31.
“KCC” has for years and is still continuing to sell telecommunications services to “KCC personnel” in
which “KCC personnel” use telecommunications services that are not for conducting of research.
32.
“KCC” has for years and is still continuing to not specifically inform, provide information, notify,
document, and/or educate “KCC personnel” involving “KCC personnel” access and/or use of “KCC”
telecommunications services to access the Internet for personal non operation(s) of the institution, “KCC”.
33.
“KCC” has for years and is still continuing to not specifically inform, provide information, notify,
document and/or educate “KCC personnel” involving “KCC personnel” access and/or use of “KCC”
telecommunications services that are not required for, or useful in, the instruction and training, including worker
training, of students and other people utilizing the institution's educational services.
34.
“KCC” has for years and is still continuing to not specifically inform, provide information, notify,
document, and/or educate “KCC personnel” in any way involving “KCC personnel” access and/or use of “KCC”
telecommunications services that are not for conducting of research.
35.
“KCC” has for years not stopped and is still continuing not to stop “KCC personnel” access and/or use of
“KCC” telecommunications services in which “KCC personnel” access and/or use “KCC” telecommunications
services to access the Internet for personal non operation(s) of the institution, “KCC”.
36.
“KCC” has for years not stopped and is still continuing not to stop “KCC personnel” access and/or use of
“KCC” telecommunications services in which “KCC personnel” access and/or use “KCC” telecommunications
services that are not required for, or useful in, the instruction and training, including worker training, of students
and other people utilizing the institution's educational services.
37.
“KCC” has for years not stopped and is still continuing not to stop “KCC personnel” access and/or use of
“KCC” telecommunications services in which “KCC personnel” access and/or use of “KCC” telecommunications
services that are not for conducting of research.
38.
“KCC” has for years allowed and is still continuing to allow the “KCC” bookstore to sell “KCC”
telecommunications services in which “KCC personnel” access and/or use “KCC” telecommunications services
to access the Internet for personal non operation(s) of the institution, “KCC”.
complaint page 3 of 6 apr 2015
39.
“KCC” has for years allowed and is still continuing to allow the “KCC” bookstore to sell “KCC”
telecommunications services in which “KCC personnel” access and/or use “KCC” telecommunications services
that are not required for, or useful in, the instruction and training, including worker training, of students and
other people utilizing the institution's educational services.
40.
“KCC” has for years allowed and is still continuing to allow the “KCC” bookstore to sell “KCC”
telecommunications services in which “KCC personnel” access and/or use of “KCC” telecommunications
services that are not for conducting of research.
41.
“KCC” has for years and is still failing to ensure that any contracts and/or agreements with “bus(s)” are
only used in support of non profit education, “KCC”.
42.
“KCC” has for years and is still selling telecommunications services in violation of MCL 484.2307 Sec.
307 (3) to “KCC personnel” including “KCC” students since at least January 1, 2013 to the present date.
43.
“KCC” has the capabilities to create, delete, monitor, save, limit, adjust, and/or log the access and/or
usage of “KCC personnel” of “KCC” telecommunications services including bandwidth monitoring and limiting.
44.
“KCC” receives compensation from “KCC personnel” for selling telecommunication services.
45.
“KCC” sells the exact same “KCC” telecommunications services under MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (3) to
“KCC personnel” at two very significant and more importantly different monetary monthly rates, (1) for “KCC
personnel” except “KCC” students at a rate of $50 a month and (2) $72.50 month for just “KCC” students.
46.
“KCC” specifically discriminates against “KCC” students, (which includes but is not just limited to
those “KCC” students who pay monthly payments from federal educational funds), by charging and/or not
adjusting for usage “KCC” students far higher monthly rate for the same exact “KCC” telecommunications
services that are provided to “KCC personnel” whose monthly rate is far lower then just “KCC” students.
47.
“KCC” has been selling telecommunication services for years and is still continuing to receive monthly
payment from students that are being used to cover, to keep lower, and/or to maintain lower monthly costs of
“KCC personnel” telecommunications services except for “KCC” students monthly telecommunications services.
48.
“KCC” has been selling telecommunication services for years and is still continuing not to provide and/or
charge a “reasonable rate” to just “KCC” students for “KCC” telecommunication services.
49.
“KCC” telecommunications services including rates for “KCC” students is excessive.
50.
“KCC” telecommunications services including rates for “KCC” students is unreasonably discriminatory.
51.
“KCC” telecommunications services including rates for “KCC” students with disabilities is unreasonably
discriminatory.
52.
“KCC” telecommunications services including rates for “KCC” students with disabilities is excessive.
53.
“KCC” has not and did not take into account, hold meetings, provide a forum, and/or allow decisions
involving telecommunications service rates for “KCC” students to be presented to and decided by the “KCC”
Board of Trustees in an open forum, (including under the Open Meetings Act), prior to charging “KCC” students
with an excessive and/or unreasonably discriminatory “KCC” telecommunications service rates.
complaint page 4 of 6 apr 2015
54.
“KCC” has not and did not take into account, hold meetings, provide a forum, and/or allow decisions
involving telecommunications service rates for “KCC” students with disabilities to be presented to and decided
by the “KCC” Board of Trustees in an open forum, (including under the Open Meetings Act), prior to charging
“KCC” them with an excessive and/or unreasonably discriminatory “KCC” telecommunications service rates.
55.
“KCC” telecommunication services are being accessed and/or used by “KCC personnel” outside of “KCC
personnel” homes and “KCC” campuses in Roscommon MI, West Branch Michigan, and/or Gaylord Michigan.
56.
“KCC” has for years and/or is still continuing to violate MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (5) when the rates for
“KCC” telecommunication services were not determined by an open bid process by “KCC”.
57.
“KCC” has for years and/or is still continuing to violate MCL 484.2307 Sec. 307 (5) when the selected
provider involving telecommunication services was not determined by an open bid process by “KCC”.
58.
KCC” is selling telecommunication services that are not being offered in subsection (3) thus violating
MCL 484.2307 sec. 307 (3) and in doing so “KCC” is subject to regulation(s) under the “MTA” by the MPSC.
59.
“KCC” is violating MCL 484.2307 sec. 307 (3) and in doing so “KCC” is subject to regulation(s) under
the “MTA” including but not just limited to MCL 484.2307 sec. 307 (3) by the MPSC.
60.
“KCC” is violating MCL 484.2307 sec. 307 (5) and in doing so “KCC” is subject to regulation(s) under
the “MTA” including but not just limited to MCL 484.2307 sec. 307 (5) by the MPSC.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Pursuant to MCL 484.2203(1), Mr. Donaldson requests now a contested case hearing, findings, and
orders under the APA contested hearings provisions and the following relief to include but not just limited to
MCL 484.2601 sec. 601:
A.
MPSC enter cease and desist order(s) to stop “KCC” violation(s) of the “MTA”, MCL 484.2101 et seq.;
B.
MPSC enter cease and desist order(s) to stop “KCC” violation(s) of the “MTA”, MCL 484.2307 Sec.
307 (3);
C.
MPSC enter cease and desist order(s) to stop “KCC” violation(s) of the “MTA”, MCL 484.2307 Sec.
307 (5);
D.
MPSC require “KCC” to initiate an open bid process involving rates and/or providers for services
pursuant to 484.2307 Sec. 307 (5);
E.
MPSC require “KCC” pay a fine for the first offense of not less than $200.00 or more than $500.00 per
day for past and/or continuing violation(s) of the “MTA” Sec. 307 (3);
F.
MPSC require “KCC” pay a fine for the first offense of not less than $200.00 or more than $500.00 per
day for past and/or continuing violation(s) of the “MTA” Sec. 307 (5);
G.
MPSC grant any and/or all costs and/or fees on behalf of Mark P. Donaldson;
H.
MPSC assess penalties against “KCC” including fines, fees, and/or costs for past and/or continuing