[PAA-Discuss] Minutes of KPFT meeting on program changes-from TedWeisgal

[Paul Myers]

Hello Bill and Ted,

Thanks for sharing the information.  Now what do I do with it?

Being quite enterprising and interested in what others have to say, I have read  the note from Ted and, naturally have more questions than answers with just a few statements and thoughts that are based on Ted's notes.

It is not totally clear what happened here, for one who tries to stay away form the conflict at KPFT, but I would guess the author of the minutes has very strong feelings about what transpired at the meeting.   

It appears that a relatively small group of folks have control over the programming changes of what is truly a public station, and an even smaller subset, a group within a group, has the real power.

Why are meetings closed?  If the meetings where the decisions are made all deal with "personnel issues" then perhaps there is a bigger problem than many of us perceive.  Wow, is that possible?

Why is there a need for secrecy? Does this relate to national security or just info that some don't wish to share? Does the Freedom of Information Act apply here?

Why is there no procedure for meetings, quorums and minutes? Is there such a thing as consensus at KPFT and it's boards, councils and committees?

Why is there no discussion on the methodology? 

Isn't the methodology something that the contributors to the station deserve to know - how decisions about programming are made?? 

Don't the Pacifica Bylaws, below, suggest that the methodology of how programming decisions are made is important?

How else can a member of Pacifica feel comfortable that the bylaws have been complied with? (read the applicable sections from the bylaws below)

Is this about the means justifying the ends?

Don't comments about decisions made in closed session because of "personnel" issues suggest that some folks are sitting in judgment of others, and exercising power over them rather than exercising power with them?

According to the bylaws meetings are to be open to the public. If a closed meeting is held, an explanation is to be provided to the public.  Isn't suggesting the number of meetings held in secret is due to "personnel" matters a stretch? 

What does this mean: "The survey that is distributed has assimilated results."?

What survey?  Calls to listeners?  Why wasn't I called?  But wait, the input from listeners was not used to make program change decisions?  How were decisions about the program changes made?  Is this why the methodology is a secret? ( I must admit, as a frequent, but sporadic listener, I am disappointed in the last set of program changes and I am not overly excited about the upcoming changes.......and what is happening to Flashpoints)

The portions of the bylaws that Ted was kind enough to send us suggest that at least a portion of how programming decisions are made (methodology) is not only important, it is a requirement.  If these decisions and how they are made are secret, how can a member of Pacifica feel comfortable that the bylaws have been complied with?   Sounds like George Bush, "trust me".  I suggest "trust, but verify"

The proposed changes to programming,  mentioned below, do not include all of those reflected on the link sent to this list serve within the last week.  

>From the minutes below, I get the impression that most of the talking and presenting was done by people other than the Program Council, since the minutes below suggest the PC are the ones that reached some sort of consensus.  I find that somewhat surprising.  It also appears that certain members of the LSB are more in the loop than others?  Why are some folks invited "in" and not others?  Some say groups within groups are not real healthy and point to concerns about leadership.

While the bylaws are clear that "The (Program) Council shall be the body authorized by KPFT Management to work collaboratively with the LSB.to facilitate all on-air programming at the station", it appears that the PC is working with KPFT management and only a portion of the LSB .

While the word consensus is used, I think, to describe the position reached by the PC, it does not appear that the entire LSB is included in the consensus.  As mentioned above, they, the LSB, are to collaborate with the PC. Is there or was there a problem with the collaboration between the PC and LSB?

While the Community Advisory Board is mentioned in the bylaws as having input, there is no mention of their input in the meeting minutes.

The bylaws imply that minutes of meetings are to be taken.  If there is a reason why this meeting was a closed meeting, the public is to be advised why, according to the bylaws.  If the meeting is not closed, it would appear that the leadership of this and other KPFT meetings is required by the bylaws to get minutes taken and to share them with the public.

If Ted's notes are not accurate, and I am not implying that they are not, or if they are slanted to express his feelings at the expense of other's, (not suggesting that either) perhaps the KPFT management can ensure that minutes of meetings are taken and distributed to the public.

Anyone else have any thoughts about Ted's notes?

Paul
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bill Crosier<mailto:paa at crosierbiomed.com> 
  To: PAA Discussion List<mailto:discuss at paa-tx.org> 
  Sent: Friday, April 14, 2006 10:47 AM
  Subject: [PAA-Discuss] Minutes of KPFT meeting on program changes-from TedWeisgal


  Ted Weisgal, member of the KPFT Local Station Board (and PAA), asked me to send the information below to this list.

  Bill
  - - - - - - - - 

  Friends:

  I hope you will read these minutes/notes of KPFT General Manager Duane Bradley's meeting last week. I have tried to produce a dispassionate, accurate report of what happened. A number of things were said and they are noted here. Examples: providing the LSB with the full questionnaire and answers; the experts who helped in developing that instrument. Please also note the laws, rules, bylaws, agreement, and dictionary definitions at the end (in footnotes of a kind).

  Ted Weisgal
  Member, KPFT LSB

  - - - - - - - -

  Minutes of Duane Bradley's Meeting on Program Changes (4.5.6)

  Dear Members of the KPFT LSB,

  The following are my minutes of the meeting called by Duane Bradley that was held at the Alliance Francis on Wednesday, April 5, 2006. This closed meeting had no established rules except those established along the way by Mr. Bradley and others to whom he deferred.

  Present are members of the KPFT Local Station Board, Susan Young, chair; Melinda Isley-Dohn, Lee Taylor, Evelyn Bethune, Sandra Rawline, Burt Samples, Michael Woodson, Wendy Schroell, Teresa Allen, Ken Freeland, Joe Montes, Sandy Weinmann, Deb Shafto, and ex-officio member and station board General Manager Duane Bradley and myself, Ted Weisgal. Also present are Program Council members Massoud Nayeri, KPFT Program Director Ernesto Agular, Hank Woji, Natalie Jay. Richard Uzell is also present. It is not clear as to whether he is an official member of the KPFT Local Station Board since Page Keller's resignation has not been officially announced at an LSB meeting. 

  This meeting, announced to begin at 7pm, begins at 7:21.

  Duane Bradley announces the order of the meeting; Susan Young will tell the history, Evelyn Bethune will describe the PC's process and Massoud Nayeri will also speak. Mr. Bradley begins by telling us the new schedule will roll out on Easter Sunday.

  Susan, not a member of the PC, says "we" thought it was a good way to bring everyone up to speed with how the process began. She announces the people who helped create the PC. She explains that many details were anguished over and that none are necessarily right.

  Evelyn says we, the PC, took it upon ourselves to tweak the document that created the PC and gave it to management and says it's now "a pretty good document." She adds, "Ernesto was very, very helpful." Decisions were made in closed meetings, she notes, because they were "personnel issues; we tried to host open meetings one time every quarter and the minutes are on the web site" later in the meeting, acknowledging that attendance at these "open meetings" (with no quorum since the PC has established it's own rules) is very poor. She says that instead of small changes we did what was possible within the limitations of the station. It's not all we would like to do. When asked what the PC would have liked she says, we got "99%" of what we wanted. She also announces, "We'll talk about results but not about methodology." 

  Hank Woji says, "Susan Darrow [the former chair of the KPFT Local Advisory Board that dwindled to six members appointed by former General Manager Garland Ganter before the interim Pacifica National Board forced it to merge with a group of 18] put the questions together and Massoud produced the report. Susan is now a part-time volunteer programmer. 

  We are told that the survey "has no bearing on the final report" and it has a margin of error of 11%. 

  The PC and some members of the LSB called listeners. Their comments indicated that listeners want debate. The program schedule that is later unveiled shows no significant increase in debate. We are told we will be given the listener comments as well as the questionnaire that will be emailed later. 

  The survey that is distributed has assimilated results. At this time, we are told we will be given "a couple of minutes" for questions. Sandy Weinmann states, "75 people is too small a sample" for a radio station with 10,000 members. Evelyn responds, "We'll get more by the end of the year. This is to show you what we have." Susan announces, "We're not here to discuss methodology." Wendy says she's "glad you're doing this," and then says the "Listener Assessment" should be called a "Listener Members Assessment" since the people called are all current donors. The survey focuses on issues related to news because the PC decided they "wanted to see if people really listen to our news."  They also found out how listeners feel about other stations. At this point that we are told, "we did not use this to make any programming decisions. It was not a tool. We wanted to show you what we were doing," says Hank Woji. When asked, "why?" the answer is, "If you like it fine." We're told that experts on surveying were consulted and Susan Darrow can provide the information. 

  Richard Uzell applauds the democratic process and announces, "This is progress. Be proud. You get an A for effort." 

  Deb Shafto announces, "I was one who made a number of phone calls. People were flattered. This is how we build audience."

  Mr. Bradley hands out the existing schedule. Wendy demurely states, "Quit stalling!" He goes on to state, "most people are satisfied" (based on the survey). He then distributes the projected schedule. (Ken Freeland leaves the meeting) Ernesto announces that there are still four or five programmers or future programmers to be called.

  The "changes," though still tentative: Living in Rhythm" has been cancelled. We are told that this is because neither Tierney Malone nor Oseye Mandlebe are willing to accept a slot after midnight on Saturday. Joe Montes seems dismayed and says it's really sad that we no longer have any jazz programs on KPFT. After the noon Open Journal is a 1-2pm news and public affairs block with Music Beyond Boarders, at one time receiving 10 hours of airtime per week has been reduced to two. Two associated music shows will also air from 2 to 3pm. From 3 to 5 is music with the news at 5:30 moving to 5 and Free Speech Radio News moving from mid-afternoon to 5:30. We are told that there will be no changes to the morning schedule from 6 to 10 am. 

  Innerside, a program that previously aired during the middle of the night on Sunday has been moved to Thursday night at midnight. Saturday at midnight introduces a show co-hosted by Leighza Welch a Local Station Board member (from the listener pool) called "Hot and Bothered." We're told it will be an open and honest discussion of woman's issues including a frank discussion of sex. Abati Doe, who had been lobbying at LSB meetings and elsewhere for a men's show, rejected alternating with this program because of the time slot.

  At this point Evelyn says, "we got 99% of what we wanted but not at the time we wanted."

  Duane announced, "Susan and I were invited back into the process last month. Susan said she expressed her opinion but did not vote. We are not told what her opinion was.

  Evelyn says, "the buck stops with the GM." We are told that listeners want "news at a time that is most accessible to me" 

  Melinda announces, "Voting to create the PC was collaboration. Like in business, we should not micromanage. We should select them and then let them go." Susan says, "we're inventing this over time." Massoud says "how the PC voted and what they came up with is a legitimate question; how we reached the decision is not important.that they reached consensus is. He goes on to say the PC has to make sure there's quality and to bring the best from the community to our airwaves; the bottom line is marketing; that's the most important." Marketing is not discussed at this meeting. No one questions the assertion that process is not important.

  Hank thanks the LSB for giving the PC an extension of time. He says this is a good accomplishment. First we saw the election of a new government (the LSB) and then we saw a passing of power. He tells us that what we saw this night is "how the PC operates and this is how we feel." 

  Natalie says, "Thanks for letting us be heard without a war." This is a closed meeting that is not being tape recorded, as all LSB and PNB meetings are.

  Mr. Bradley lists the names of all the members of the PC, the people who were involved in reaching consensus. 

  We adjourn shortly before 10pm.

  As far as I know, these are the only minutes of this meeting. I respectfully submit them.

  --Ted Weisgal


  The following rules, laws and definitions are provided so all who read the minutes/notes of the "meeting" of April 6, 2006 may weigh them in relationship to what was reported that night. I have tried to cite that which is applicable and omitted what is not.

  --Ted Weisgal

  Pacifica Bylaws (applicable section):
  Specific Powers and Duties of the Local Station Board"To work with station management to ensure that station programming fulfills the purposes of the Foundation and is responsive to the diverse needs of the listeners (demographic) and communities (geographic) served by the station, and that station policies and procedures for making programming decisions and for program evaluation are working in a fair, collaborative and respectful manner to provide quality programming.

  The KPFT Program Council agreement (applicable language):
  KPFT Management and the KPFT Local Station Board (LSB) have come together.
  The (Program) Council shall be the body authorized by KPFT Management to work collaboratively with the LSB.to facilitate all on-air programming at the station.

  CPB Community and Advisory Board Requirements (applicable sections):

  I. The Law

  A. Section 396(k)(8) of the Communications Act provides that:

  "(A) Funds may not be distributed pursuant to this subpart to any public broadcast station.unless such station establishes a community advisory board."
  "(B) The board shall be permitted to review the programming goals established by the station. The board shall advise the governing body of the station with respect to whether the programming and other policies of such station are meeting the.needs of the communities served by the station.
  "(C) The role of the (CAB) shall be solely advisory in nature except to the extent other responsibilities are delegated to the board by the governing body of the station. In no case shall the CAB have any authority to exercise any control over the daily management or operations of the station.

  B. Nature of the Community Advisory Board

  The law provides that "the role of the board shall be solely advisory in nature." It also stipulates that the board shall advise the governing body of the station and therefore must be distinct from and independent of the governing body. The purpose of the advisory board is to provide a vehicle for effective community input to the station's governing body about station programming.

  C. Relationship of the Community Advisory Board to the Governing Board of the Station

  1. The law segregates the management and operational functions of the governing board from the functions of (sic) advisory board."

  III. MINIMUM COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

  A. Each station must.

  1. establish a community advisory board that is independent of the.governing body; 

  5. advise the governing board of the station whether the programming and other significant policies of the station are meeting the specialized educational and cultural needs of the communities served by the station. The advisory board may make recommendation to the governing board to meet those specialized needs.

  OPEN MEETINGS REQUIREMENTS

  I. THE LAWS

  A. Section 396(k)(4) of the Communications Act provides that:

  "Funds may not be distributed pursuant to this subsection of the Public Broadcasting Services.or permittee of any public broadcast station, unless the governing body of any such organization, any committee of such governing body, or any advisory body of any such organization, holds open meetings preceded by reasonable notice to the public. All persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the board, or of any such committee or body, and no person shall be required, as a condition to attendance at any such meeting, to register such person's name or to provide any other information. Nothing contained in the paragraph shall be construed to prevent such board, committee, or body from holding closed sessions to consider matters relating to individual employees, proprietary information, litigation and other matters requiring the confidential advice of counsel, commercial or financial information obtained from a person on a privileged or confidential basis, or the purchase of property or services whenever the premature exposure of such purchase would compromise the business interest of any such organization. If any such meeting is closed.the organization involved shall thereafter (within a reasonable period of time) make available to the public a written statement containing an explanation of the reasons for closing the meeting."

  B. Section 397(5) of the Act provides that:

  The term 'meeting' means the deliberations of at least the number of members of a governing or advisory body, or any committee thereof, required to take action on behalf of such a body or committee where such deliberations determine or result in the joint conduct or disposition of the governing or advisory body's business, or the committee's business, as the case may be, but only to the extent that such deliberations relate to public broadcasting."

  IV. SUGGESTONS FOR COMPLIANCE 

  Each station is encourage to fashion its own maximum involvement of the community beyond the minimum requirements. It is the CPB's position that only through enthusiastic and vigorous efforts can the intent of the Congress, as reflected in the law, be fully realized. Therefore, CPB recommends that stations make copies of the minutes of all open meetings available to the public website, by mail, or at the stations office upon request. A reasonable change to cover copying. If a member of the public wishes to inspect the minutes at the station, it would not be unreasonable to require an appointment with the station be made as long as the process is not burdensome to the public.

  B. Certification

  1. CPB currently requires each recipient of a CPB station grant to certify its continued compliance with the open meetings requirement. The annual certification.must be filled out by each CPB station grantee.


  col·lab·o·rate 
  intr.v. col·lab·o·rat·ed, col·lab·o·rat·ing, col·lab·o·rates 

    1.      To work together, especially in a joint intellectual effort.


  del·e·gate 
  n. 1.   A person authorized to act as representative for another; a deputy or an agent.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20060414/eddce719/attachment.htm>