[PAA-Discuss] The Drama continues

[Paul Myers]

Interesting string of messages.  

As suggested in the last message below, "absurd and improper", while somewhat judgmental expresses the shock of the actions planned. 

Now tell me there is no conspiracy.

Forget about impeaching the president, how do listeners impeach LSB members?

Why can't KPFT attract folks that express themselves as clearly as Mr. Goodman, and why haven't the LSB members on this list spoken out about such absurdities?     


-----Original Message-----
From: Susan Young [mailto:susan at southmainalliance.org] 
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2007 9:54 AM
To: lsb at kpft.org; 'Duane Bradley'
Cc: 'Richard Uzzell'
Subject: FW: motion to have management present

Fellow Board members --

Please note that the following motion has been offered by Sandy Weinmann and will be listed on the agenda under new business.

Susan

cc:  Richard, Secretary.



From: augwest at aol.com [mailto:augwest at aol.com] 
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 8:29 PM
To: susan at southmainalliance.org
Subject: motion to have management present

I hope that this will be a time is of the essence idea and that we will hear this issue right after roll call at our next meeting.... Your feedback on this proposed resolution would be appreciated.  Also you might want to consult with Mike M about this ... When we are ready could you have Richard add this to the agenda...

garcias
sandyw

"In that members of the LSB have filed suit against Duane Bradley and in that Mr. Bradley's council has instructed him to have no interaction with those who have filed (by name Robert Graham and Ken Freeland) including time spent at critical meetings of the board, its committees and other important infrastructure such as the program council... And in that it is vital for collaboration between management to occur at many levels and in that collaboration is impossible with one party absent...

Be it resolved that both Ken Freeland and Robert Graham be absent during;

1.  Meetings of the LSB
2.  Meetings of the Finance Committee
3.  Meetings of MSRC
4.  Meetings of the Program Council

Until such time that the legal matters which prevent management from participating while said members are present are settled."






----- Original Message ----
From: Terry Goodman <tiji at flex.com>
To: fulcrumsofchange at lists.riseup.net
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2007 7:59:01 PM
Subject: [fulcrumsofchange] Re: FW: motion to have management present


On Mon, 9 Apr 2007. Ken Freeland wrote:

>No comment (but I'm sure that major domo Terry Goodman will twist some passage of the Bylaws to support this latest repressive effort)

The KPFT LSB is under no obligation to pay attention to this legal advice given to Duane Bradley by his individual counsel.  It is for Duane to consider that advice in deciding whether or not to attend the meetings in question.

The LSB controls the membership of its committees and can remove one or two committee members for the convenience of management if it wishes.  However, the LSB does not control the membership of the LSB, since all elected Delegates are assigned a seat by the bylaws.  Of course, this hasn't stopped the KPFT LSB from illegally denying Ken Freeland his LSB rights as a Delegate in the past.

Sandy's motion that Robert Graham and Ken Freeland "be absent" is both absurd and improper.  It is absurd because the attendance of committee members at meetings is up to those individual members and the attendance of the public at public meetings is up to the public.  If  the LSB doesn't want Robert or Ken on their committees they should simply remove them without prejudice.  If the LSB doesn't want Ken to attend meetings, then they can probably get away with scheduling those meetings at the station while a no-tresspass order is in effect, at some slight risk of increasing the award of damages (if any) in the current suit.  The LSB has no basis upon which to restrict the rights of Ken Freeland or Robert Graham, in my opinion, unless a member is prepared to present charges of conduct adverse to the Foundation calling for their removal as Delegates, and the Delegates must then meet as a body and give the persons so charged a fair hearing.  Any motion specifically designed to prevent a member from exercise of their rights outside of proper disciplinary procedures is improper on its face, violates fundamental principles of parliamentary law, and should immediately be ruled out of order.     

Moreover, in that Mike Martin is representing the GM in the current case and is on the LSB, the LSB should avoid any related action without Mike Martin's guidance and approval, since they risk providing additional evidence useful to the Plaintiff.

--Terry Goodman, KPFK Delegate

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://paa-tx.org/pipermail/discuss_paa-tx.org/attachments/20070411/a96fba8b/attachment.htm>