<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Paul, I admire your concern and your persistance, but I already told
you that I would not talk about this lawsuit. When you think about it,
you have already forwarded my response to your queries beyond the venue
in which it was offered, and when you then combine the issue that I was
talking about (specific code of conduct complaints) with the lawsuit,
(not at all related), it makes me feel as if I am being baited.<br>
<br>
I am happy to talk about all of this after this case is settled.<br>
<br>
wendy<br>
<br>
Paul Myers wrote:
<blockquote cite="midBAY109-DAV2639F3A5DCE935699579EB06F0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<title></title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3059" name="GENERATOR">
<!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->
<div>
<div>Thank you Wendy for you response. I appreciate the time you
have taken to write it, and yes I am aware of much of what you
have written because I have read much of the meeting minutes and
information found on the KPFT web site.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I just have a few observations and questions that are not
necessarily in order that might help explain my concerns.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The Code of conduct as posted on the KPFT web site does not
differentiate between LSB members and others.</div>
<div><a
title="http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=code_of_conduct"
href="http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=code_of_conduct">http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=code_of_conduct</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>The posted Code of conduct certainly places responsibility for
enforcement on the station manager.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The posted code also provides for an independent fact finder
chosen and paid for by KPFT for a final binding decision in the event
charges are disputed. I believe that Mr. Freeland's recent note
announcing the lawsuit states the reason for his action as not being
able to resolve the issue and a lack of due process. Has Mr.
Freeland's dispute of the the station manager's action been reviewed by
an independent party?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>About process and having had some interface with KPFT, I can say
that the processes that I encountered, certainly not all, have not be
executed as advertised. At the public portion of the February meeting
( I heard on the audio recording of the meeting) an observer suggested
that KPFT engage some sort of executive management advice group that
could interview staff and others and make some recommendations. If the
LSB and management has not done that I recommend that they do.</div>
</div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>The comment about the LSB having "no jurisdiction other than to
consider how it was handled at performance review time" might make some
sense, to me, if performance reviews were conducted regularly, or if
the LSB provided frequent feedback to the station manager. When was
the last performance review conducted of the Station Manager? Has it
not been more than several years since an evaluation of the station
manager was conducted?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>I believe that any Human Resource Manager will tell you part of
an evaluation process is frequent feedback to the evaluated person, and
not, repeat not waiting for the time of a performance review to provide
feedback, especially for significant issues and concerns.</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>Since there is a documented process to appeal decisions made by
the station manager, it is not out of order for the LSB to inform
the station manager of the signed mitigating witness statements and the
need for prompt resolution of the incident including the required third
party intervention?. Could the LSB also urge the station manager, in
writing, to quickly and peacefully resolve this situation by using the
documented Code of Conduct process and, if not, it will be reflected in
his job performance appraisal and could lead to termination?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Working with station management to help ensure that the station
procedures are complied with does not take away any of the station
manager's responsibility or authority. But isn't not doing so an
omission of the LSB's oversight responsibilities and does it not
support of the unitary executive concept, just as the United States
Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility for the past six
years?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>If a lawsuit has been filed because the station managers has
failed to utilized existing KPFT procedures to resolve an issue with
the full knowledge and silent consent of those tasked with monitoring
the station managers performance, have you not made yourselves
vulnerable, at the very least to criticism? Not to mention court costs
and damages from KPFT funds?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>About legal advice, it is just that - advice, not orders.
Didn't our current Attorney General provide legal advice to the
president that it is okay to torture folks?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Speaking of legal advice, my lawyer has suggested that comments
made about Mr. Freeland that are either false or are not based on
factual personal observation could result in those making such comments
being included in the lawsuit.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>If there is a special code of conduct process for LSB members,
then why has the current incident not been handled by the LSB? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>Below it is mentioned that the Code of Conduct violations
submitted by Mr. Freeland and handled by the LSB were "frivolous in the
big picture". Are there witness statements to that effect? What is
the big picture? Who and what determines what is frivolous? The
points, for me, to be made here are </div>
<div>1. a motion is made by a subject of the claim and </div>
<div>2. LSB agreement to this motion to dismiss the claims regardless
of the merits of the claims. </div>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Does part of this LSB process allow motions by LSB members that
are subjects of the proposed code violations? Are members that are
subject to the accusation allowed to vote or be party to the decision
about the violation? Does the process allow for dismissal of charges
regardless of the merit of the charges? Would you be willing to share
a copy of this process and post it with the other code of conduct
document on the KPFT web site? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Would you be willing to answer any of the questions in this and
my last message?</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Paul</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<ol>
----- Original Message -----
</ol>
</div>
<blockquote
style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: ;"><b>From:</b>
<a title="mailto:wendy@radio4houston.org"
href="mailto:wendy@radio4houston.org">Wendy Schroell</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: ;"><b>To:</b>
<a title="mailto:discuss@paa-tx.org"
href="mailto:discuss@paa-tx.org">PAA Discuss List</a> </div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: ;"><b>Sent:</b>
Sunday, March 25, 2007 10:02 PM</div>
<div
style="font-family: arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: ;"><b>Subject:</b>
Re: [PAA-Discuss] Mainstram media coverage</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Paul, the LSB has had meetings with two different attorneys in this
matter - it was made very clear that the GM has the absolute
responsibility to provide a safe workplace, and that the board has no
jurisdiction other than to consider how it was handled at performance
review time. I can't talk to you about the lawsuit at all and won't.<br>
<br>
I would like to clarify the thing about the board voting to dismiss all
pending code of conduct complaints regardless of merit. I do not agree
with Sandy Weinmann on much in KPFT governance, but as you can see from
those minutes, I supported the motion. Ken likes to bring up this
whole thing as evidence that there is a huge conspiracy against him,
but what he doesn't do is tell you what those code of conduct
complaints were. I will try to get them (lost a hard drive since then)
but from memory five of them were about how so and so talked in an
email. "this person called me a name." "that person questioned my
motives" IN EMAIL! The other one was someone storming out of a meeting
and bumping him with her purse<br>
<br>
Technically, the Code of Conduct does say that discussions should be
centered around issues, not people - even on the internet. I have
always disagreed with this as Pacifica's whole reason for being is the
First Amendment, and who the hell can enforce what happens on the
internet?!!! <br>
<br>
So the board has a process for its own members violating the code of
conduct - I think it sits for 30 days after everyone is notified and
then the board meets in executive session to consider it. Well, at
every meeting the lsb runs out of time - much of that is a direct
result of this same guy point-of-ordering every little thing, whether
it makes a difference in the outcome or not - no, I'm not blaming it
all on him but he has played a bigger part than anyone in making the
meetings long and frustrating [as I read that sentence I can just hear
Ken's response - that I am misrepresenting or participating in the
conspiracy because I said EVERY little thing, and he sometimes does not
say anything. I'm leaving it in - the gist is correct]<br>
<br>
So with the regular business, the time wasting, the urgent whatever
that comes up, the LSB had accumulated 6 COC complaints that were all
brought by one guy, and that were frivolous in the big picture. He did
not have the votes to get action on even one of them, and as much as
Ken likes to play the victim, 2/3 of a body that size is not completely
wrong (maybe even 3/4) - this board is not organized in any way except
that it is a frustrating experience for all.<br>
<br>
The motion to dismiss all COC complaints should have really come from
Ken, (one was a year old!), but that is not how he works. It does not
matter that the votes are not there or that 24 board members' time
(including his!) is valuable. After that motion to dismiss them all
passed overwhelmingly, Ken decided to offer his resignation, if the
board would agree to certain terms - that is a whole 'nother chapter
that is quite bizarre and took the board on another 4 month journey
into the ludicrous - not ALL of that was his fault, to be sure. It
started out badly with a long ridiculous discussion about putting his
statement into the minutes because they didn't know what he might say -
again that silly first amendment!~<br>
<br>
I hope that this helps at least a little. I don't need to explain
groups to this list - you kinda gotta work with each other if you call
it a group.<br>
<br>
wendy<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Paul Myers wrote:
<blockquote cite="midBAY109-DAV229F58E57A9F5892F8FD5B0680@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<style></style>
<meta content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3059" name="GENERATOR">
<!--[gte IE 5]><?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->
<div>
<div class="bodycopy">
<p><span class="timestamp"><b>After reading the Chronicle article
yesterday that is inserted below in its entirety, I took the time to
catch up and listened to the two KPFT LSB meetings, for January and
February, that are currently available on the KPFT web site. </b></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><b><a
title="http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LSB_Meetings_Archive"
href="http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LSB_Meetings_Archive">http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LSB_Meetings_Archive</a></b></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><b>Would those interested in KPFT
listen to this material? For those who don't have time to listen to it
all, would you be willing to listen to the January meeting, "file 1"
from about 51 minutes to 63 minutes, to hear more about the situation
and the general presentation, professionalism of various members? Would
you then be willing to then determine for yourselves the validity of
the banning of the LSB member from the station and the validity of the
civil suit brought by that member?</b></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><strong>A review of the files on the
KPFT web site reveals inconsistencies between by-laws, practice and
documented agreed decisions and what actual transpires, which are a
major focus of points raised by Mr. Freeland that include a lack of
transparency at KPFT.</strong></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><strong>A review of the goings on at
KPFT cannot help but to observe an effort, by some, to isolate,
exclude and ignore Mr. Freeland and to minimize claims that he has
made. He was removed from the LSB and then re-elected</strong></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><strong>This is not to condone nor
condemn any of Mr. Freeland's strategies and tactics, but to observe
that the effort against Mr. Freeland continues.</strong></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><strong>I have some empathy about the
situation having recently been asked for forgiveness by someone that
admitted to me that over three years ago, without familiarity with me,
that she started and maintained a concerted effort to exclude me from
participation in a group due to her desire to work with women and due
to her dissatisfaction with a form submitted by my wife about me. It
is, therefore, clear, to me, that the effects of a conspiracy do have
effects on people that stimulate behavior that is not in their best
interest.</strong></span></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><strong>I have to question the action
to prohibit Mr. Freeland from the KPFT station, when in the June 28,
2006 meeting minutes the LSB voted to dismiss six </strong></span><span
class="timestamp"><strong>Code of Conduct Complaint claims made by Mr.
Freeland including physical aggression against Mr. Freeland. It is
also clear that the person that made the motion to "dismiss the six
...Code of Conduct complaints regardless of merit" was the subject of
one of the complaints. Isn't that called a conflict of interest? See
link </strong><a
title="http://houston.kpft.org/site/DocServer/lsb_Minutes_2006.pdf?docID=5021"
href="http://houston.kpft.org/site/DocServer/lsb_Minutes_2006.pdf?docID=5021"><strong
title="http://houston.kpft.org/site/DocServer/lsb_Minutes_2006.pdf?docID=5021
CTRL + Click to follow link">http://houston.kpft.org/site/DocServer/lsb_Minutes_2006.pdf?docID=5021</strong></a><strong>
pages 38 to 41 of a pdf that displays pages 4, 5 and 6 of the June, 28,
2006 LSB meeting minutes.</strong></span></p>
<p align="left"><strong>At the very least, are there not two
different standards here?</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>The concept of something or someone being
a "threat" is not only used here, it is used by our military to justify
the killing of Iraqis and by our police to justify killing of citizens
of this country. Have not members of this list serve, those in the
Houston "peace and justice" community and those in other parts of this
country complained about extreme reactions to such claims, the most
recent in New York?</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>I, therefore, in light of all of the
above find that it difficult to totally understand the Station
Manager's action and do question his judgment. I do not question if
Ms. Bradley experienced fear any more than I would appreciate anyone
rejecting my claim of fear of what someone might do to me when they
refer to my comments as "bull_ _ _ _" and worse or when someone attacks
me when they don't care for what I have written. Comparing Ms.
Bradley's and Mr. Freeland' stature, it is debatable who would have
a physical advantage.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>One member of this list serve, just
yesterday, wrote on another discussion group, "<font color="#000000">Ken
screamed 'Shut up, shut up, shut up' at her with his face so close he
was spitting on her and hitting her with his cap. Ken, not Tucker, was
out of control." While it is clear and I understand that many have
emotion around this event I was compelled to responded, </font></strong><strong><font
color="#000000">"<span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: navy; font-family: Arial;">Would you be
willing to tell us if you were ever "guilty" of speaking with
enthusiasm and passion and had something besides words come from your
mouth? </span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: navy; font-family: Arial;">Would you be
willing to tell us if you were there? </span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: navy; font-family: Arial;">Would you be
willing to tell us if you witnessed what you have written? </span><span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: navy; font-family: Arial;">Would you be
willing to tell us if you believe that the Chronicle article and the
publicity about this event, where no legal charges had been filed, is
positive for KPFT? <span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: navy; font-family: Arial;">Would you be
willing to tell us if you .....really believe that Ms. Tucker was, in
fact, in any danger from Mr. Freeland's hat, voice and accoutrement?" </span></span></font></strong><strong><font
color="#000000"><span
style="font-size: 10pt; color: navy; font-family: Arial;"></span></font></strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>There has been no response to my
questions.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>I hear and read plenty of personal
criticisms about Mr. Freeland, but little about the substance of his
positions, just as the mainstream press criticizes Mr. Kucinich and
neglects to focus on the substance of his proposals. Listening to this
year's LSB meetings somehow I find it difficult to single him out for
focusing on insignificant issues.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>I find it very odd that those LSB members
that are members of this list serve keep their silence here and in the
audio of the two LSB meetings held this year on what are clear
inconsistencies, and possibly a lack of fairness and injustices not to
mention different treatment for different people.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>I find it confusing that, as members of a
LSB that is tasked with oversight and governance, according to the
by-laws, there was not a demand for immediate action and
resolution before the law suit was filed by the LSB member, as the
possibility was mentioned in the January meeting. Yet some of these
same folks complain that the congress of the United States has not
acted fast enough in their governance duties because they have
not passing a bill to for immediate US withdrawal from Iraq. </strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>Why? Pretexts of "legal issues" or
working within the system to correct it or dislike for Mr. Freeland or
abdication of oversight responsibilities or acceptance of the unitary
station manager concept? </strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>So whatever one things or feels about Mr.
Freeland, does baring him from the station and the resultant law suit
help KPFT?</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>Let the LSB and the Station Management
answer that question.</strong></p>
<p align="left"><strong>Paul</strong></p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><strong></strong></span> </p>
<p><span class="timestamp"></span> </p>
<p><span class="timestamp"><b>March 22, 2007, 9:10PM</b><br>
</span><span class="storyheading3">Activist files suit against
KPFT-FM <a
title="http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LSB_Meetings_Archive"
href="http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LSB_Meetings_Archive">http://houston.kpft.org/site/PageServer?pagename=LSB_Meetings_Archive</a><br>
</span></p>
<p class="copyright"><span class="author">By DALE LEZON<br>
</span>Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle </p>
<p>A Houston peace activist and board member of public radio
station KPFT-FM (90.1) filed suit this week after the general manager
of the station barred him from its Montrose studio.</p>
<p>Ken Freeland alleges that Duane Bradley unfairly prohibited
him from coming to the station after Jane Tucker Bradley, no relation,
accused Freeland of assaulting her.</p>
<p>Freeland, a member of Houston Coalition for Justice Not War,
denied the accusation.</p>
<p>Duane Bradley said he banned Freeland from the station to
protect Jane Bradley and other staff members.</p>
<p>Jane Bradley said she feared Freeland after a confrontation
with him during a forum for candidates seeking election to the station
board in October. She said Freeland "jumped into my face" and yelled at
her about the forum's organization.</p>
<p>He didn't hit her, she said, but she filed a complaint against
him with the Houston Police Department.</p>
<p>"His baseball cap was bumping into my forehead," she said. "I
felt he was a threat to me."</p>
<p>Freeland said he didn't touch Bradley, and said he yelled at
her only after she had yelled at him.</p>
<p>Duane Bradley said he filed a trespass affidavit against
Freeland with police after the confrontation.</p>
<p>Freeland could be arrested if he goes onto station property.</p>
<p>Freeland contends that the prohibition curtails his ability to
fulfill his duties as a board member and disenfranchises the people who
voted for him.</p>
<p>State District Judge Tony Lindsay is scheduled to consider a
temporary injunction against the ban on March 30.</p>
<p>Jane Bradley and Lester Radke, who hired her to organize the
KPFT board election, also are named in the lawsuit. Radke worked as the
national election supervisor for the Pacifica Foundation, the station's
parent organization.</p>
<p>The lawsuit also claims that the three defamed Freeland by
telling others about the alleged assault.</p>
<p><em><a title="mailto:dale.lezon@chron.com"
href="mailto:dale.lezon@chron.com" s_oc="null">dale.lezon@chron.com</a>
</em></p>
</div>
</div>
<pre wrap=""><hr size="4" width="90%">
---------------
Progressive Action Alliance <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
title="http://progressiveactionalliance.org/"
href="http://progressiveactionalliance.org/">http://progressiveactionalliance.org/</a>
Discuss mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
title="mailto:Discuss@paa-tx.org" href="mailto:Discuss@paa-tx.org">Discuss@paa-tx.org</a>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on this list, go to:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
title="http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org"
href="http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org">http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org</a>
To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply All".
Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes to the correct address.
</pre>
</blockquote>
---------------<br>
Progressive Action Alliance <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://progressiveactionalliance.org/">http://progressiveactionalliance.org/</a><br>
Discuss mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Discuss@paa-tx.org">Discuss@paa-tx.org</a><br>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options
on this list, go to:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org">http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org</a> <br>
<br>
To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".<br>
To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply
All".<br>
Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it
goes to the correct address.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
---------------
Progressive Action Alliance <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://progressiveactionalliance.org/">http://progressiveactionalliance.org/</a>
Discuss mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Discuss@paa-tx.org">Discuss@paa-tx.org</a>
To subscribe, unsubscribe, access the archives, or change your options on this list, go to:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org">http://paa-tx.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_paa-tx.org</a>
To reply only to the person posting this note, use "Reply".
To reply so that everyone on this list receives your note, use "Reply All".
Check the "To:" field in your message, before sending, to ensure it goes to the correct address.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>