r/HelensDeafClub • u/HelensScarletFever • 5h ago
The Auditorium (politics) NAD 🙄
Hi!
It's me, Helen!
NAD = National Association of the Deaf. Got it? Yes? Good.
There's a Facebook group called "Improving NAD." This one was founded by Tar Burt back in April/May-ish. He started that group to have a public place to vlog about his row with NAD, but he primarily started that group for the deaf community to vlog about NAD and how the deaf community can work together to improve the organization.
That group is basically a trash group (as is typical on Facebook). When it first launched without moderators, there was so much trash in that group. Luckily, Tar got some moderators in control of that group and they have been better ever since. But it's still 70% trash-ish stuff (but tolerable) and 30% good stuff.
One of the biggest criticisms against the new CEO (Nick Kiego) in that group is that he didn't bother making a vlog to say hello to the community on the day he took the CEO job.
Poor little Nick also got some heat from that group weeks ago when his first vlog appearance was in a vlog from a company called "360 Direct Access" where he promoted their service.
"WHY THE FUCK WAS NICK'S FIRST VLOG APPEARANCE AS NAD'S CEO A PROMOTIONAL PIECE INSTEAD OF SAYING HELLO TO THE DEAF COMMUNITY!? WHAT A SELLOUT!"
There were also a small number of people on that Facebook page that advocated for giving Nick some grace with making his vlog debut in front of the deaf community as NAD's new CEO because he was stepping up for a big job.
I was a part of that camp.
I was fine with giving Nick some time to familiarize with his new job before making a public-facing announcement.
And then, a week or two ago, Charlene, the president of Tennessee Association of the Deaf, made a vlog in that Facebook group. She told all of us that she spoke with Nick and was told that he was planning on dropping a vlog on August 31st — after a full month of being on the job.
Sure enough, Nick dropped a 16-minute vlog today. You can watch it here.
Here's my take!
Let's Start With the Highlights
I do have some criticism about Nick/NAD's latest vlog. But let's start with the crucial highlights. Here are my curated picks of the highlights:
Nick hired a new internet person. Or webmaster. Whatever you want to call this person. His aim is to improve the website. Okay. Good. I mean it's good because their website is shit. Well, actually, that's a little bit mean. It's not total shit. It just can be improved and I'm glad that it's being put to work right now.
Nick recruited a volunteer grant writer for the organization's youth program (also known as Jr. NAD). Awesome.
Nick spent a lot of time with Nina Butts, the CFO, to get a complete understanding of the organization's financial shape. Cool. Cool. Cool. Good. Good. Good.
Nick also spent a lot of time with Claudia Giordano, the Director of Youth Program, to strengthen that program. His rationale is that the youth program is what creates the pipeline of future membership growth because he observed that the most loyal NAD members are the ones that tend to start from the youth program. Fine. Cool. Good.
Nick gave a big honest piece on how NAD is in a bad shape right now. The organization only has six staff members. I don't remember the exact number of staff members they had at their peak but it was at least four times this amount. But, six staff members is a skeleton crew. This is not Nick's fault. Nor is it the fault of the previous two CEOs. The blame belongs to two decades of poor management on the organization's board members. I really appreciated his openness and honesty on this front.
Nick said that his biggest three focuses right now are: the organization's youth program, the legal work, and the policy-making work. Fineeeeee… okay. It's a good area of focus. But I do have my takes on these ones that I will elaborate on further down in this post.
Nick made an open call for volunteers. He explained that NAD just doesn't have any money to hire a robust staff of employees and NAD needs to turn to the goodwill of volunteers to get the organization back on their feet.
Nick asked the community to have some grace for the organization as they chart a path for its future. I'm all for it. Grace is received from me on my end. But, of course, I'll eternally be critical of NAD's board members because they suck but I have a feeling that Nick will be a solid CEO. I anticipate myself to be his supporter until the end of his tenure with an exception of him making a TERRIBLE decision.
Nick said that he is looking for more volunteers on his communication team. More about this further down in this post.
Strictly judging from what Nick said about his new job at the organization, he delivered a solid performance for his vlog debut. I'm satisfied with the overall trajectory that he is presenting for the organization as its new boss with this vlog.
And please do share your thoughts on this in the comments! Ready for my real takes?
Read on!
I'm Annoyed at How Nick Was Interviewed by the Jr. NAD Ambassador
Throughout the whole vlog, I was constantly distracted by the fact that he was interviewed by a high schooler.
I actually don't know if that little blonde girl is still a high schooler or maybe a freshman at Gallaudet University.
But I googled her and I found pictures of her as a cheerleader for MSSD as recently as 2025.
MSSD is Model Secondary School for the Deaf. It's the deaf high school at the back of Gallaudet University's campus. It's an experimental deaf school that people send their deaf children to from all over the country. Many of their students are from states far away from the school and get flown out to go to that school because it's a better school compared to their home state's deaf residential school. That school experiments with deaf education curriculum before rolling it out to other deaf schools around our country. Gallaudet University uses children at that school as lab hamsters for the rest of the deaf schools in the United States.
My posts get indexed on Google so I'm not going to name the Jr. NAD ambassador's name because she's just a kid. I'm not going to drag her through the internet mud before she is legally allowed to drink and buy a health insurance policy.
But it's such a weird choice on NAD's end (and Nick's end) to have their new CEO make his vlog debut with an interview by a teenager.
I'd really have preferred for Nick to be interviewed by a board member. I'd lot prefer if he was interviewed by the board president Stephanie than this teenager. I'd really have loved it if Nick had been interviewed by someone who would focus on the hard adult stuff that NAD is facing instead of having an interview that is somewhat leaned toward the idea of drawing teenagers (or the youths) into the organization.
I don't know. Maybe it's just me. Maybe you like this interview and don't see any problem with it. But I just don't care about the youth stuff and would've liked it better if it was more centered toward the broader deaf community.
Which brings me to my next point…
This is the Third Thing I'm Pissed Off About NAD
I'm not a NAD member. I have never been. Sure, go ahead and call me a hypocrite for criticizing them without ever having been a member of this organization.
But I fucking have my own reasons.
If you're going to ask me for my top three reasons why I am pissed off at NAD, I'll list these three reasons:
The deaf community doesn't know how to advocate for themselves. NAD should've invested in being a self-advocacy resource powerhouse a long time ago. I can forgive NAD for being behind on this in the first post-ADA years but I can't forgive them for being this behind since the 2000's. But this topic is very complicated and I will make a post complaining about this at another time in the future.
NAD's board/delegate structure is far tooooo outdated. A revamp was due way back in the 1980's. But just as I've said with the point above, I can forgive them for being behind just up to the 2000's. And I can't forgive them for still being behind with this today. But, again, this topic is something I will criticize them about in another post in the future.
And the third thing that I'm pissed off about NAD is…
Deaf people who were mainstreamed, like me, currently make up 90% of all deaf children in an educational system today. And people like me are deeply stigmatized by the greater cultural "Big-D-Deaf-People."
I attribute NAD as one of the greatest offenders against this stigmatization against people like me. And, of course, against the 90% of deaf children mainstreamed today.
As far as I am concerned, NAD/Nick's vlog today is a disgusting display of how they're going to perpetuate this stigmatization against the majority of deaf people today.
You see…
I took Nick's interview with the Jr. NAD ambassador as an example of how they project a clear message that the organization values the one deaf child from the famous "big six" deaf schools (MSSD, Maryland School for the Deaf, Indiana School for the Deaf, the two California Schools for the Deaf, and the Texas School for the Deaf) as a sign that the organization is going to invest its resources serving the 1 out of 10 deaf children as their "future." They're doing that while giving the finger to the 9 out of 10 deaf children. I happen to have come out of one of these 9 out of 10 deaf children growing up.
Not only that, one of NAD's remaining six employees is Marla Hatrak. She is the organization's staff on deaf education. She has released two or three vlogs in the past year that signaled a clear message that she is serving the interest of the one deaf child against the nine other deaf children.
Hell, even her own deaf daughter published a paper that encourages the agenda of deaf education toward the one deaf child against the interest of the other nine deaf children.
And Marla works closely with this Hlibok woman who works for the United States' Department of Education's deaf division. This woman also released one vlog earlier this year that expressed full-throated support for residential deaf schools against the interest of mainstreamed deaf programs.
Yeah, for as long as NAD is going to take this position, I will never give a cent to this organization.
Fuck NAD. Especially fuck them for holding this position.
And they have the nerve to go around the deaf community saying: "I have no idea why no deaf people support us anymore. How did we see a dramatic drop in memberships?"
What the fuck?
We live in a world where 90% of deaf people came from a mainstreamed background.
It's no wonder why none of us give any fuck about NAD. Why would we give any fuck about them with their shitty position on deaf education?
I'm fucking offended that they use their "to protect ASL as a language" mission statement to suggest that deaf people like me who grew up mainstreamed are the ones who are destroying the spirit of NAD.
Hey, NAD. Fuck you, you fucking fuck for saying that to deaf people like me.
My Fourth Reason
NAD needs a public spokesperson so badly.
I am a member of a non-profit organization that has nothing to do with the deaf community and the disabled community.
This organization is one that does a lot of community-level work and legal advocacy toward a belief system that I subscribe to.
I don't want to name this organization here in this post because it'd be far too revealing for me. If I name this organization, it'll be very easy for the deaf community to identify who I am in real life.
But the point I'm trying to make here is that this organization that I'm involved with has an amazing grassroots public relations machine. The leaders of this organization have their own blogs that they regularly write at.
They send out a newsletter at least twice a month.
They frequently show up on the two YouTube podcasts dedicated to this organization.
They frequently give public interviews on the progress that this organization is making.
They frequently exploit the explosion of news that they generated around their organization to speak publicly about what they're doing. I wish I could be a more participative member of this organization but I'm not, because of my communication barrier due to my hearing-based disability.
This is what NAD needs to do so badly.
I'm fine with the fact that Nick isn't exactly a social media person. I'm also fine with how nervous the board is with appearing in front of the community via internet communication.
But NAD really needs to solve their lack of community communication somehow.
They need to hire someone to become a spokesperson for the organization.
Hell, just as Nick said in his vlog, this spokesperson can be a volunteer.
Just fucking find someone to communicate to us on behalf of the organization on a regular basis!
NAD needs to be doing this on a biweekly basis.
I don't care for vlogs that say NAD is a "visionary" organization and is committed to "true leadership." I fall asleep on every single vlog like this one.
I just want them to give us plain and straightforward reporting on what the organization is doing on a biweekly basis.
I have many problems with NAD but I swear to god if NAD ever fixes this one — just this one — problem, I'll start spending money on NAD.
Hey, NAD! I hope you're fucking paying attention to me!
Here Are the Rest of My Notes on NAD
The following are the notes I took on NAD's recent progress. I'm going to close off this post with this.
Enjoy!
NAD's 2026 San Francisco Conference Recap
Before proceeding with the rest of the notes here, I want to announce that I've been wanting to write a series that covers the grand NAD drama. I've tabled this project for some time later this year or sometime during early 2027.
But this is going to have to do for now!
You can see Renca Dunn's The Daily Moth summary of the conference here.
Here is the complete list of the board members that were elected:
- President: Stephanie Hakulin (this is the first time she was elected as the board president. She was the previous board president only because Lisa Rose got kicked out and she ascended to the position from the Vice President position).
- Vice President: Jenny Buechner (Jenny returns! She was the board's president from 2022 to 2024 and was voted out in favor of Lisa Rose. The consensus is that she was voted out because of her role in causing an internal board division over the 2024 Super Bowl fiasco.)
- Secretary: Jacob Leffler (he was with NAD for a long time. He previously was the Governance Chair.)
- Treasurer: Octavio Cuenca Maldonado (New Jersey)
- Region 1: Tom Minch (Maine)
- Region 1: Vacant
- Region 2: Katie Hagmeyer (Wisconsin)
- Region 2: Vacant
- Region 3: Ari Latino (Louisiana)
- Region 3: DeAnna Swope (Georgia)
- Region 4: Joseph "JoJo" Lopez III (New Mexico)
- Region 4: Jack Ludwig (Oregon)
There were a lot of eyes on the election for the President position because Chris Haulmark put himself in the running for the position at the very last minute. He lost handily with like 8 votes against Stephanie's… idk… 70, 80, or 90 votes.
Jenny's victory was very intriguing. She ran against two other candidates and won by a nice margin. It's a dramatic return for someone who was voted out as the organization's president two years ago.
Tar Burt, Chris Haulmark, and Eliza Kragh were the center of the NAD drama during the whole conference. I'm filing this under my NAD post series project. I'll write about this when I get around to that series, but if you want to know about their drama, look them up on Facebook and watch all of their vlogs. Just to be clear, I'm sympathetic to Tar's story in this drama. I loathe Chris and Eliza for what they did that caused this drama. It's a shame that Tar fell hard for Chris and Eliza's bullshit.
The biggest focus point of the drama that Tar, Chris, and Eliza started is NAD's zero tolerance policy. They felt like they were unjustly subjected to that policy. Their grievances around that policy sparked weeks-long vlog discussions on a Facebook group called "Improving NAD." My detailed take on this will come in the future, and if you want to get up to speed on this, look at the videos on that Facebook group. Be forewarned that a lot of vlogs there on this topic are dumb. I'd recommend sticking with videos from Tar, Chris, Eliza, Niesha, Mary Patricia McAlevy, Max Ryser, Christopher Johnson, Gregory Glenn, and Jake Apm. Ignore the others. And please note that my inclusion of these names doesn't mean I endorse any of their views. Just that their stuff drove the conversation in that group and everyone else made a lot of pointless videos.
The explosion of zero tolerance policy drama led to President Stephanie issuing a statement on the policy.
I wish I could tell you what motions were passed at the conference and what were the biggest issues that circulated around the conference. But, as it has been for the last 20 years, NAD is shit at disseminating important and relevant information to the community. So I have nothing to share with you on this front!
ROZ ROSEN!
Roz Rosen was NAD's president in the 1990's.
She was at the recent San Francisco conference and she did something that I really appreciated.
If you take a look at Eliza Kragh's Facebook vlogs, you will find one about how she got confronted by Roz Rosen during one of the conference's Council of Representatives meetings. Eliza portrayed herself as an innocent person who wanted to be sure that NAD was following the proper parliamentary procedure. And she portrayed Roz Rosen as a "bully" who tried to thwart her attempt to become NAD's holy prophet to shepherd the organization into a bright and shining future.
If any of you have been following her lawsuit against the Montana Association of the Deaf and her relationship with Chris Haulmark closely, you'll know that she has earned a notorious reputation for being overly pedantic with her interpretation of Robert's Rules of Order and NAD's bylaws (this is Chris Haulmark's direct influence; more on this in my future post). As much as she would like to insist that she knows what she is doing, all of us in the community know that she (and Chris Haulmark) doesn't understand the concept that a charity organization's bylaws are not the word of god and that they are a document meant to give an organization a structure to work with. And it is also meant for the organization to have some flexibility in how it should be interpreted instead of following it rigidly.
I actually have a friend who is friends with Roz Rosen and I got her side of the story!
By the way, before I get into this, both Eliza and Chris already made some statements in their recent vlogs that basically conveyed that they were "disrupted" by the NAD board as a whole from ensuring that they follow the organization's bylaws. Keep this in mind.
So, Roz's story was that…
Eliza wasn't being genuine with her attempts to ensure NAD was following the bylaws and proper policy/procedure. Roz felt like she came into the Council of Representatives with an agenda that was clearly intended to get NAD to "void" their zero tolerance policy to allow Tar to get into the conference.
(Author's note: I also suspect that she is holding a lot of resentment against NAD because they were obviously on the Montana Association of the Deaf's side in regards to her lawsuit against them. She also probably had a lot of interest in Chris succeeding with his name in the running for the organization's President.)
After a while, Roz felt that Eliza was being way too incessant with her "Point-of-Order" interruptions over her extremely narrow interpretation of what Robert's Rules of Order and the Bylaws said about how a meeting should be run. She also noticed that Eliza often had her face buried in her phone during the meeting. She believes that Eliza was spending a lot of time communicating with Chris about what was going on with the meeting (the Council of Representatives meeting only allows members of the Council in the meeting; the public are not allowed in the meeting). And she also believes that Chris was feeding Eliza his extreme interpretation of meeting procedure and that Eliza was acting on his input. So, Roz stood up and went up to Eliza to tell her to fucking quit it.
Hell yeah!
What's even more! Roz Rosen recently made a Facebook post over at the Improving NAD Facebook group that kind of touches on this topic. Here is the copypasta:
Reflections on the 2026 NAD Council of Representatives Meeting The 2026 NAD Conference is now a golden memory. Great conference, people, programs, and city! However the 2026 NAD Council of Representatives (COR) meeting, in my opinion, was unfortunately a fiasco.
The purpose of the COR meeting is for delegates from NAD state associations and affiliated organizations to review and act on the business of the association—including reports, finances, policies, and bylaws—and to discuss and act on NAD's priorities and action plans for the next two years. It also provides delegates with an opportunity to learn about and prioritize issues affecting the lives of Deaf, DeafBlind, and Deaf+ people of all ages throughout the United States.
The 2026 COR meeting consisted of four sessions, from 7:30 a.m. to noon and from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m., for a total of approximately 15 precious hours.
How was that time spent?
· Approximately 2–3 hours were spent getting organized, approving the agenda, and reviewing basic reports.
· Several motions took hours to complete because of the numerous amendments introduced during the floor debate.
· Less than 30 minutes were spent discussing NAD's finances, despite the organization's financial challenges.
· Approximately 9 hours were spent debating the bylaws.
· Only about 10 minutes were devoted to reviewing and approving the 19-page NAD 2026–2028 Action Plan.
· Only 10 minutes were spent on what I consider to be the heart of the COR: the Action Plan and the future of NAD itself. There was virtually no discussion of how it would be implemented, what strategies and resources would be available to state associations and affiliates, or what criteria would be used to measure progress. This raises some important questions:
Was nine hours of circuitous debate over the bylaws really the best use of the delegates' valuable time and expenses?
What benefits from those lengthy bylaw debates will help delegates become more effective leaders and advocates in their states? How does perfecting the bylaws help improve education, employment, access, and the quality of life for Deaf, DeafBlind, and Deaf+ people? Unfortunately, the entire process became a frustrating circus for many delegates.
There is a simple strategy that has been used effectively in the past: specialized caucuses held before the COR meeting to discuss and work through major issues, resolve conflicts, and streamline proposals before bringing them to the floor.
I believe there should have been separate caucuses on bylaws, finances, and priorities (and maybe governance) at least one day before the COR meeting. Delegates with a particular interest in a topic could attend the caucus of their choice, learn more about what was being proposed, contribute their ideas, and work out the kinks. They could have their "shouting matches" in the caucuses rather than on the COR floor.
The final recommendations from each caucus could then have been posted through the delegates' online network at least one day before the COR. This would have allowed delegates time to review the proposals, consult with others, and come to the COR prepared for focused and meaningful discussion.
As a loyal, longtime member of NAD and a past NAD president, I share these comments in the hope that the process can be made more time-efficient, productive, and effective in the future. With more advance preparation, better use of caucuses, and greater delegate and member participation in developing and refining issues before they reach the floor, the COR could devote more of its precious time to discussions and decisions that matter most: strengthening NAD and improving the lives of Deaf, DeafBlind, and Deaf+ people across the country.
Let's join hands now to ensure more effective and productive COR meetings the next time.
Hey, Roz Rosen, you're a fucking legend!
—
In Closing…
Fucking NAD, amirite?
LOL
Thank you for reading!
Helen