[PAA-Discuss] Should I run for KPFT's LSB?

[Paul Myers]

What you can look forward to:

And I thought it was only detainees that could not see classified evidence against them - see item 2 below.

Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:59 am  In ourkpft at yahoogroups.com<mailto:ourkpft at yahoogroups.com>, "Ken Freeland" <kenfree at ...> wrote:
>
> Last night's KPFT LSB meeting pushed the envelope of illegality even
> farther than it has been pushed before, if anyone can believe that: 
>  
> In executive session to review and approve executive session minutes:   
>  
> 1) Ted Weisgal eloquently states the case why the session should be public:
> the original matter of these executive sessions was not subject to closed
> session:  it did not meet the criteria outlined in our bylaws or in CPB
> open meetings requirements, thus it would put our grant at risk to hold
> this session in secret.  To no avail.  Only a couple of Board members
> grasped the import.
>  
> 2) As he was handing out copies of the previously unpublished or otherwise
> undistributed to members copies of the draft minutes for three executive
> sessions, two of which took place AUGUST 2005 (these were the ones where my
> illegal suspensions from the LSB were hatched), KPFT LSB Secretary Richard
> Uzzell first handed each member a clipboard, requiring their signature to a
> legal statement that waived the right to retain the copy.   Both Ted
> Weisgal and I refused to sign, arguing that this requirement had not been
> passed by the Board, and such a measure could only be adopted in open
> session.   As a consequence, we were not permitted to see a copy of the
> minutes we were expected to approve.  I requested of Chair Susan Young that
> the minutes be read allowed, but she denied this request as well.  When the
> Board voted to approve these minutes, with no discussion whatsoever about
> their content, or any further about the innovation of requiring Board
> members to sign a legal statement in order to review the minutes of
> meetings they themselves had participated in, I left the meeting, stating
> that my inability to participate in this approval process and not to access
> the minutes of a Board meeting was unsatisfactory, and therefore did not
> meet the conditions according to which my resignation from the Board could
> take effect ("a satisfactory resolution of the business pending in
> executive committee" in order to make the minutes of the executive session
> of a year ago "accessible." )    I then left the meeting.  I am told that
> in my absence, Susan Young stated to the Board that she considered my
> resignation effective anyway, and was supported by a majority vote.
>  
> Susan Young continues to drag the KPFT LSB from one legal morass to the
> next.  It is not only that she appears ignorant of the content of the
> bylaws and Robert's Rules, she actually appears to be acting under a
> compulsion to abrogate the rights of opposition Board members as much as
> possible.  It is hard to imagine a better recipe for a dysfunctional Board.
>  
> In any case, the Board's decision is illegal, since resignations must be
> voluntary, and only a properly noticed meeting of the delegates can remove
> a member.    Will the PNB do anything about these latest abrogations of the
> bylaws by Chair Young?  It is unlikely.  The PNB has been alerted to her
> illegal behavior several times over the course of the last three years.  In
> no case has it chosen to intervene to protect the bylaws.    This suggests
> that the corruption of the PNB follows from the corruption of the LSB's,
> since it is mostly those in the corrupt majority cliques who are elected to
> the PNB.  For KPFT, in any case, three out of four of the PNB reps are of
> the Majority Faction.  So what chance is there that the PNB will put its
> fiduciary interests above those of its individual members?  (Just about
> every LSB has skeletons in its closet, I've noticed, and the deal seems to
> be:  we won't rock your boat if you don't rock ours." )  Meanwhile, the
> participatory democratic model of Pacifica is increasingly mocked by the
> concerted erosion of the rights of elected Board members, and everyone
> focuses on the next election without giving thought to the fact that no
> elected member's rights are any more secure than anyone else's, and if the
> KPFT LSB officers can tyrannize over the rights of elected delegates in
> Houston, the same can (and probably sometimes does) happen in the other
> signal areas.   
>  
> I think that the bylaws assume that those chosen for the PNB will consider
> it a primary task to assure that the LSB's operate within the framework of
> the bylaws.  Although when I served as PNB member I did truly focus my
> efforts in this direction, it does seem to be the case in general that PNB
> members consider the legal rights of LSB members, if at all, a very low
> priority.  But the Foundation depends on the LSBs for the performance of
> certain necessary tasks, which can never be fulfilled if the rights of
> their elected members (such as, the right to view or hear minutes of
> previous meetings prior to their approval) are constantly abrogated.
>  
> Peace,
> Ken Freeland
> Still a member of the KPFT LSB despite Susan Young's illegal ruling!
>

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bill Crosier<mailto:paa at crosierbiomed.com> 
  To: PAA Discussion List<mailto:discuss at paa-tx.org> 
  Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 3:27 PM
  Subject: [PAA-Discuss] Should I run for KPFT's LSB?


  Several of you are already planning to run for the Local Station 
  Board in KPFT's upcoming elections.  Thanks to each of you who are 
  doing that.  The LSB is an important part of KPFT, and is the only 
  group that is elected by listener members to provide governance for 
  the station.

  If any others of you are interested in running for KPFT's LSB, please 
  see http://kpft.igc.org/elections/<http://kpft.igc.org/elections/>

  Several of you have also suggested that I run for the LSB.  I'm 
  already a volunteer for the KPFT Outreach committee and have 
  volunteered for a number of KPFT events, and plan to continue.  So 
  far, though, I've said "no" to requests that I run for the LSB, 
  because I don't want the time spent on that to take away from PAA and 
  related activities.  And I've only been working part time (for paid 
  work, that is) for the last couple of years, so I could spend more 
  time on political activities.

  Remander of message deleted.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20060921/1ee3ea44/attachment.htm>