KPFA Elections Debate Issue #2 - Program Director or Not

Nazreen, I don't think anyone running, anyone sitting on the board, or anyone working at KPFA thinks the station shouldn't have a Program Director. The only possible point of contention is how much power that person should have.

... are you relying on? A point of contention that's left unresolved for 5 years?

Trying to glean SOMETHING more about KPFA LSB candidates, I appreciate someone ASKING questions!

Anonymous may be right, but there are worse things than asking. Thanks, Nazreen Kadir.

The Program Director is mandated by the By-Laws.

The duties of the Program Director are as assigned by the General Manager as an employee of the station, in accordance with the governance policies of the LSB and the hiring directives of the national board.

The LSB cannot be involved in programming, it can only set policies. The Program Director, in accordance with those policies and as directed by the General Manager or the Executive Director, has only one other duty, and that is to be evaluated by the LSB. The General Manager and the Program Director determine how to best meet the governance policies and still effectively do their jobs.

Please know what you are running for before you apply as a candidate; this way you don't have to learn on the run and let people find out that you know nothing to begin with.

Subject says it all, but text required here.

Originally, the Program Council was solely members of KPFA staff, paid and unpaid.

During my term on the KPFA Local Advisory Board, I was part of a committee that worked with the Program Council to develop a means of opening the PC to "outsiders".

The initial compromise was to seat an LAB member, with two listener alternates...and see how it went. The ultimate goal was to have the LAB elect its own members out of the general membership, and eventually drop LAB members from the PC.

However, there does not seem to be any impetus to remove the LSB from the Program Council, and replace them with people from the general membership. Somehow, that bit of democracy has gone by the wayside of those who most loudly demand it.

Such a change really needs to be made before we can expect to get a Program Director that can make a difference.

I believe that the Program Director should be the Chair of the Program Council, and have a vote; I believe that the LSB should not have any members sitting on the PC, but that it should elect listeners who apply to be seated (if reasonable).

I believe that the Program Director should implement the decisions of the Program Council, but that the Program Director can veto a decision if the General Manager agrees *and* the reason involves preservation of the station (slanderous material that opens KPFA/Pacifica to legal action, or obscenity that open KPFA/Pacifica to losing the broadcast license, or similar).

I also believe that the Program Director should have the ability to act on programming matters when the Program Council is unable to meet on short notice; breaking news events, "moments of opportunity" (a person or event comes becomes available but on short notice), and other matters of immediacy.

I also believe that the LSB should not be involved in programming matters beyond the general trend that a community needs assessment points towards; I also believe that the actions of the Program Director to implement these general trend policies, and the level of support given by the General Manager, should be used as the 'yardstick' to measure their performance on programming, as the Pacifica By-Laws mandate the LSB evaluate their employment annually.

The LSB governs, it does not manage; it is a committee of the Pacifica National Board, and is barred from 'day to day operations' or 'micromanagement' of KPFA.

Unfortunately, the search for a Program Director has been stalled for a year now, and shows no signs of being completed unless there is a change at the LSB for a more cooperative body, and less of the "my way or the highway" confrontationalism.

Mark Hernandez
Candidate/Member, KPFA Local Station Board
Former Member, KPFA Local Advisory Board
Director, Fresno Free College Foundation/KFCF

I have a life and work that preclude me from running.

However, I've seen enough internal and external action at KPFA to realize that Nazreem is not at all qualified to govern a radio station, let alone KPFA.

Having to ask questions in a forum like this shows that she is doing research "off the cuff", probably without having done any research prior to her recruitment by Peoples Radio or Alliance, whatever name it goes by this week.

The only intelligent action she has taken so far is to go independent; at the same time, she has not repudiated her connection with them.

As a Peoples Radio insider yourself, Virginia, is Nazreem still one of your drones?

Nice to see someone actually *thinking* about how to integrate a program director into the existing structure.

... Bay Area Insider, but I have never met Virginia and I was not recruited by anyone. Whatever your beef is, I suggest you chew, swallow and let it run its course.

... in programming. How to do this effectively is the challenge. Either directly via LABs or indirectly via listener-reps on the LSB, needs to be re-visited. The Program Director represents staff/line management with accompanying duties and responsiblities. This person should not also chair the Program Council. Seems to me his/her role would be to process recommendations from an advisory Program Council, and together with the GM, determine the feasibility of implementing balanced listener and staff recommendations, taking into consideration overall program mix, KPFA's mission, reaching out to under-served/under-represented listening areas, FCC and resource constraints, etc.

Currently, there is much confusion about the role, composition and authority of the Program Council. This is because the the by-laws are silent on this, and the resolution creating it lacks this level of specificity. In addition, who is it accountable to? If it were purely advisory in nature, and not a decision-making body, it wouldn't matter to whom it's accountable. It can be an independent, self-regulating group.

The Program Council and Program Director, in essence, are the checks and balances needed to ensure listener voices are heard in programming decisions.

To Mark,
I don't think it's correct to say that "the LSB ... is a committee of the Pacifica National Board." That would be a top-down view. The LSB is elected by listeners and station staff and then sends delegates to the PNB. So it's very much a bottom-up approach.

The physical structure of the Pacifica Foundation is indeed that the local LSB's are committees of the Pacifica National Board. That's not an opinion or a philosophy, it's a legal fact. The license of KPFA (and that of the four other stations) are owned by the National Board. The Local Board owns nothing, has no legal liability and has (only) the powers vested to it by the Foundation bylaws, which can be changed, revoked and/or revised by National per the bylaws.

The program council has existed in some form or another at KPFA for over 35 years. It came out of the "people of color" strikes that roiled KPFA in the early 70's and led directly to the founding of the old Women's Department and the old Third World Department (now somewhat reinstated as the New World Center). It's purpose was to add internal democratic input into programming decisions and was a direct response to the rather long reign of Elsa Knight Thompson as program director for much of KPFA's early history - and to bring alternate perspectives to what many saw as an overly intellectual and elitist tinge to KPFA's programming. The turmoil of the 1990's led to an expansion of the program council to include unpaid staff (or volunteers) and later (2) community representatives, and later exppanded even more to include (6) representatives from the community - 3 listener-sponsor members of the local board and three non-board members to serve as community representatives.

The program council is unlikely to serve as much of a check and balance to anything if it is advisory. Where's the check and balance? What it does is make sure that the perspectives of paid staff members (and anyone who has worked in an organization knows that things *always* feel and seem a little different when you're on the payroll and when you're not) - regularly butt up against the perspectives and listeners and all get heard and acknowledged in the decision making process re: programming. It's current compositon assures that decisions require cross-platform support between some paid, unpaid and listener votes in order to carry the day.
Making its decisions advisory removes that requirement - which is contrary to the spirit of the
the original 70's movement that brought it into being.

While clearly the advent of a program director (sooner or later) will cause some changes, Mark's formula makes a lot of sense - requiring decisions to have some level of buy-in from those not on the payroll is sensible, while retaining a veto process with clear limitations protects the ability of management staff to act when necessary.

Programming can't be done entirely by polling. Listener input is valuable and listener input is all over the map. Community-elected boards can and should perform a valuable service in soliciting, codifying and organizing listener input on programming. Then it is up to a program director to come up with specific ways to implement that feedback - ways that should be endorsed, supported and run by representatives of all the larger consituencies - management and operations staffers, volunteers and unpaid workers, board members and listeners. That's how you have a democratic programming process.

Who is the Program Council accountable to? Why was this "formula" not incorporated into the by-laws? The PNB does not "populate" the LSBs, it is the reverse. The LSBs are not committees of the PNB. This language in the by-laws does not reflect the reality and is one of the many contradictions in the by-laws.

It makes no sense, nor is it necessary, for a Program Director to chair the Program Council.

!!!! Alliance for a democratic KPFA !!!!!
FUN-RAISER

Join Dennis Bernstein and members of the Flashpoints team
at a Fun-Raiser for the Alliance for a democratic KPFA candidates!

Regina Carey
Bob English
Sasha Futran
Dave Heller
Henry Norr
Akio Tanaka
Steve Zeltzer*
Maxine Doogan (Staff representative, to be elected by KPFA staff)

The KPFA Local Station Board (LSB) election currently underway is a
watershed event that may define the direction of station and the
network for years to come. Dennis and Miguel Molina will discuss
their perspective on internal dynamics at KPFA in relation to the LSB election.

Tell all your friends!

Enjoy surprise guests, chamber music and food.

BRING YOUR BALLOT AND WE'LL HELP YOU FILL IT OUT!

October 28, 2006
7:30pm (until the wine runs out)
$15-25 sliding scale
corner of Third Street and Filbert Street (watch for the signs)
Oakland
RSVP 510 832-7999 or 510 326-3268

*Steve Zeltzer's name will not be on the KPFA listener ballot. Details will be discussed.

... Jane Jackson, an independent candidate, would like to know if this event is wheelchair accessible. Can someone please let her know.

But, I would rather we keep one stream where substantive issues are being discussed. You have already posted your AD on at least 2 other streams, no need to pollute this one.

The radio station licenses are owned by the national board. The legal owners of the foundation assets is the national board. The local boards are committees of the national board. That's the legal structure of the foundation. It's not a debate point. It's reality. A foundation's bylaws are the law of the land unless and until they are changed by the national board and/or a vote of the members. It is not for local board members or potential board members to announce what parts of the bylaws they will obey and which parts they won't.

Program councils aren't in the national bylaws because at the time of their drafting, not all the stations had program councils and bylaws apply to all five stations, not just one. KPFA, which in many ways has followed a very different path than some of the other stations, is the one with a 35 year established precedent of using a committee to vett programming decisions - during the intervals when it has not had an autocratic program director (which has been off and on through the years). Why you would have programming staff and programming committees and not have them work together is a bit baffling. Are they not working on the same thing?

Program council members are accountable in obvious ways: departmental heads are accountable to the general manager, unpaid staff representatives are accountable to the UPSO Council, LSB delegates are accountable to the rest of the LSB, and community reps are accountable to the LSB as well, since they select them. What's so confusing about that?

1. The primary debate question in this stream is Program Director or not. I think, based on the few commentaries, the concensus is yes. And I don't hear any arguments about this person's authorities. Good.

2. Five x 24-member LSBs that each send 4 delegates apiece to create a 20-something member PNB, cannot possibly be "committees" of the PNB.

3. The fact that the PNB members are "trustees" of the foundations' assets has nothing to do with the fact that 120 people cannot be called "committees" of 20-something member board which it creates. It's not semantics, it's illogical.

4. At KPFA LSB Program Committee is not the same as the Program Council. Since this 4th point is taking things in a new direction, I will take up separately, later.

1. The local boards are committees of the national board. That's all there is to it. It's a legal structure.

SECTION 1. LOCAL STATION BOARDS

There shall be a standing committee of the Board of Directors for each Foundation radio station which shall be known as the Local Station Board ("LSB"). The powers, duties and responsibilities of the LSBs shall be those set forth in these Bylaws and such other powers, duties and responsibilities as the Board of Directors may from time to time delegate to them.

2. Committees of the LSB have extremely limited powers in the bylaws. Their only ability is to advise the LSB.

SECTION 10. LOCAL STATION BOARD ADVISORY COMMITTEES

A. An LSB may, by resolution, designate one or more advisory committees, to serve at the pleasure, direction, and supervision of the LSB. Any such advisory committee shall include, at least, two (2) LSB members. Members affiliated with that radio station shall be eligible for appointment to a committee. Station Advisory Committee members shall not be considered agents of the Foundation or the radio station and shall not have the authority to bind the Foundation or the radio station with which it is affiliated.

C. The general duty of advisory committees shall be to advise the LSB on the issues for which the committee was created. Advisory committees shall have only those duties and powers set forth by resolution of the LSB, which powers shall not include the power to: (1) approve any action which, under the California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law or these Bylaws, requires the approval of the Members, Directors, the LSB, or the Delegates; (2) fill vacancies on the Board, LSB or on any committee; (3) amend or repeal these Bylaws or adopt new bylaws; (4) amend or repeal any resolution of the Board or the LSB; (5) create any other committees of the Board or LSB; (6) approve or execute any contract or transaction; or (7) incur any indebtedness, or borrow money, on behalf of the Foundation or any LSB.

... weasel language in legal drafting? Try to enforce that in a court of law. That langauge was either wishful thinking or oversight. It contradicts the reality of listener-elected representative Local Station Board. The PNB doesn't "appoint" anyone. The LSBs sends delegates to make up the PNB.

Nazreen, it's now clear that you don't have any knowledge about how Pacifica or KPFA is run, if you are not aware of the by-laws or the corporations code.

Here's another fun bit for you that you will not be able to comprehend...

In order for any change to be made to the by-laws, you must have the approval of a majority of both staff and listeners.

You can vote all you want to remove staff from anything in Pacifica, but if staff doesn't vote it in by a two-thirds majority, then any approval by the listeners is ineffective and a waste of time.

You've allied yourself with a group that wants to beat down management and staff for some mythical listener democracy; if you don't include staff with the listeners, you are in violation not only of the by-laws but also state law.

Please do yourself a favor; drop out of the race and attend a few meetings of the LSB, on the web or in person. Talk to LSB members, especially the ones that you don't agree with, so you can at least discover another point of view than the one you see in your blindered vision.

Right now, your candidacy will only embarrass you without that foreknowledge and experience. You have been wrong at every statement, and your video at the press conference confirms it.

This debate started with a question regarding program director, and ended with my pointing out contradictory language in the by-laws. Where did I say staff need to be left out of anything? If you cannot stay focused on the issues, perhaps you should limit your comments to the slander streams which seems to be your goal.

The bylaws were quoted to show you that your version of reality contradicted what the bylaws of the foundation actually said. You didn't quote the bylaws - you didn't know what they said - and when you found out they said the opposite of what you said - you responded by saying the foundation bylaws were "weaselly" (if that's even a word).

Now let's move on to your arguments about why the moon is made of green cheese. I can't wait to hear them.

... was that the LSB was not, in reality, a "committee" of the PNB, even though I know that is what the by-laws say, and I went on to explain what I mean. I have read the by-laws. It's a poorly written document. Period. So are the scriptures. We don't hang on every syllable they say, unless we are fools.

XXX

In my view, the KPFA PC is a sham. It's just another programmers/management staff mtg where they invite a few listeners/reps, whose recommendations they override. That's why some are saying it should be chaired by the PD. What a crock.

I suggest it should be re-structured to reflect the listener-rep:staff ratio i.e. 3:1 to correspond with the LSB. Of course, that will start a fight, but who's afraid? Certainly not the listener-donors/sponsors.

I think we should start drafting a resolution to rectify the defects in the April 2004 one. I know this is a long-run proposition.

In the short run, the LSB can fire the iGM! We have to start some place to clean up this bully-pit.

What do you say?

Nazreen.

To the question is the lack of recent history for this position being vacant for some 10 years now and what has happened to programming in the time frame. Answer? Not much but what has happen is that programming has grown into this huge territorial mind field where everyone claims a piece and a self select few manage large chunks but all agree to just hold and maintain what they got. the PC acts like a turnstile that manages traffic onto and off of the air. (which is why it suits many to have the PC members secret otherwise with public meeting "the people' might have something to say and who wants that mess. On the other hand a unencumbered, dynamic creative and inclusive PD willing to spark new ideas and brave new worlds may be just what the Dr prescribes for this sick and increasingly insular and deluded patient. Apparently the IGM has succumb to the usual suspects ethos which always prefers blinders. Don't forget with the loss of the PA position as an outward directed position the station clearly continues to build that wall where the same old people seem to always be the ones selected and anyone who even hints at a different direction is suppressed but hey look at the bright side NY building a boat instead of a wall and is in the process of drifting away from Pacifica. DC where blues and smooth jazz has won the battle over progressive content, discussion and activism. LA is a bright star but has learned to stay out of the national limelight and Tx reverting back to pre-96 so stop complaining?