Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
KPFA's Election & Green Sunday
Ballots for KPFA's Local Station Board (LSB) election have been sent to listeners.
Green Sundays are discussion events organized by the Green Party. I attended the event on October 8th to hear candidates for election to KPFA's Local Station Board (LSB). One of the Greens' concerns was the amount of KPFA coverage third parties get, and that was apparently why they held this discussion, appealing to the LSB candidates whom they considered most likely to hear their concerns.
The event began with introductory talks by LaVarn Williams and Joe Wanzala. Both are on the LSB and in the People's Radio group, associated with the "Alliance for a democratic KPFA " slate.
The Alliance candidates at this forum included: Bob English, Maxine Doogan, Sasha Futran, Dave Heller, Henry Norr, Akio Tanaka and Steve Zeltzer. Another member of the slate, Regina Carey, wasn't able to attend. Two independents affiliated with this slate, Nazreen Kadir and Aaron Aarons, were also members of this discussion panel.
Among the issues put forward by the candidates were transparency and accountability--meaning that the LSB must continue to have access to KPFA's financial records. Other issues included KPFA's declining listenership and the extreme difficulty of getting the station to accept new, creative programs. Pacifica National produces an elections special program "Informed Dissent," but it's not being aired by KPFA. Other Pacifica programs are also available. Meanwhile, listeners complain that excessive airtime--about 65%--is devoted to music.
This spring a group of KPFA programmers who made shows on labor topics was banned from the station for a period of one year. That issue, a complicated one, has been coming up month after month at LSB meetings for half a year now, still without resolution.
Bob English attributed many of KPFA's problems to an ongoing legacy from the Lynn Chadwick/Pat Scott era which didn't really end with their departure. "Values, programming grid and multiple damages of the old regime continue in Pacifica and little has changed at KPFA." he said.
Nazreen Kadir expressed concern about KPFA's financial situation. KPFA is already spending too much airtime supporting itself through pledge drives, she said. At the same time, she warned against reliance on corporate funding--which would undermine KPFA's independence. She cautioned that KPFA could slip away from the listeners and come under control of wealthy donors.
"KPFA, with only a handful of relevant and high-quality programs, has become stymied by the pro-private corporate-funding undercurrent that never went away," she wrote in her leaflet.
The question of foundation money seems like it may become a major issue in the future. But it doesn't often get mentioned, and I wasn't fully aware of it till I heard Nazreen speak that evening.
Two opposition candidates were also there. Ernesto "Tico" Chacin, and Jim Weber. They weren't part of the panel, but since they were there, they were invited to speak. Candidate Jim Weber is notorious for his newsletter and inflammatory speeches, calling People's Radio members on the LSB everything from Hitler-like to Trotskyists. That evening he toned it down and came off rather low key.
Ernesto "Tico" Chacin is a good speaker and a dynamic person. I wondered if he understood the ongoing struggle with the culture of the bad old days at KPFA when the station was run by a handful of people who were accountable only to themselves. My impression was that he may not, and that worries me, but I would have to know him better before saying one way or the other about him. He's running on the "Concerned Listeners for KPFA" slate.
LSB member Brian Edwards-Tiekert was there too, and he's also with the opposition, but is not up for reelection this year. Brian is member of the KPFA staff, who campaign for the LSB in a separate election in which only staff participate. Staff candidate Maxine Doogan is running on the Alliance slate and spoke on the above panel. But only KPFA staff members can vote for her.
The meeting was held in a small upstairs room at the Niebyl-Proctor Library. I didn't count the number in attendance, but it may've been around 20, not counting the candidates.
After the candidates spoke, people there, who seemed to be mostly Greens, asked questions and made comments. As was mentioned above, one of their main concerns was that third party candidates don't get sufficient coverage by KPFA.
It at first appeared to me that the Greens were taking one side and the Democrats the other. But it's not at all that clear cut. While the "Alliance" slate includes Greens and Peace & Freedom people, one member of the slate, Regina Carey, is an activist in the Democratic Party. Although the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club has endorsed the opposing slate, the "Concerned Listeners for KPFA," some members of the Wellstone Club are objecting to their party's taking sides in the LSB election. As for the Greens, they haven't formally endorsed anybody. Meanwhile, Aimee Allison, the Green candidate for Oakland city council, has endorsed both slates.
For me what's at stake in this LSB election is transparency and accountability. Our representatives on the board need access to KPFA/Pacifica records.
Only because LSB members LaVarn Williams, Richard Phelps and others of the People's Radio group dogged the national office, they finally and for the first time ever, or at least since 1999, gained LSB access to Pacifica's financial records. This is significant. We listeners are the ones who pay the bills.
For their efforts they've repeatedly been maligned by anonymous posters on websites. Candidates on the above panel, for choosing to line up with People's Radio, have also come under fire, some of it pretty nasty. It seems to me that by taking the step to ally with current board members who have worked hard for financial transparency, they have shown a serious commitment to continuing the struggle for accountability at KPFA.
----------------
Virginia Browning contributed to this article. As KPFA listeners, she and Daniel Borgström have been attending the monthly public meetings of the LSB
----------------
KPFA LSB ELECTION RESOURCES
I urge everyone to read the info on the websites of both slates as well as the KPFA election site.
Alliance for a democratic KPFA
http://www.allianceforademocratickpfa.org/index.htm
Concerned Listeners for KPFA
http://kpfalisteners.org/platform.php
KPFA Meet the Candidates
http://www.kpfa.org/elections/2006/
IF YOU'RE FEELING THIS IS A LOT DO -- going from knowing nothing about 22 unknown candidates to ranking and voting for 9 of them in less than a busy month that also includes a national election -- you're certainly not alone. Questions such as why on earth is the election in OCTOBER will have to wait for another day. But listeners CAN call/write the station and lobby for even 10 or 20-second spot election reminders to play throughout the day and month. Why isn't it being done now? That's a story for a longer article.
I would emphasize that being able to meet the candidates in person, dialog and ask questions would go a long way toward being able to make this difficult decision. People can organize "meet the candidate" events and/or call/email the election supervisor to hold such events. Henry Norr and Conn Hallinan have both offered to discuss "debate" the issues from their separate viewpoints (and separate slates), but need a forum for this.
The KPFA Election Supervisor is Tracy Rosenberg. Email or phone her and ask for more airing of election announcements and "meet the candidates" events.
ballot [at] kpfa.org
(510) 848-6767, extension 266
For more information:
http://www.danielborgstrom.com
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
As a candidate for the KPFA Local Station Board, I was never contacted, informed nor invited to speak before the Alameda County Green Party at this event.
I have seen a message, apparently sent to the members of the ACGP, that has all the earmarks of an endorsement, and contains some highly inaccurate, if not libelous comments about myself.
It is a shame that certain members of the ACGP chose to subvert the democratic process, preventing their membership from seeing or hearing the words of all available candidates, from asking questions of those candidates and, frankly manipulating their membership into voting a certain way, rather than with all of the facts at hand to make an informed decision.
It is shameful, because these are the same charges made by the Greens and other "third party" political organizations about how the Democrats and Republicans often freeze them out from due consideration by the voters.
Have the Greens themselves gone mainstream in order to come to this point?
If the Greens are capable of doing these anti-democratic actions, what hope do we have of breaking the headlock such organizations have on our election process, locally and nationally?
I would ask that the members of the Alameda County Green Party rebuke the message sent out, especially with the libelous comments about myself and others.
I would also ask those same members to look long and hard at those responsible for presenting only one viewpoint, and actively excluding all others, that had the power to do this.
I would also ask that the Alameda County Green Party be fair and equitable in such events in the future, insuring that everyone involved has an opportunity to present themselves or their organization for evaluation by the Green Party members.
Mark Hernandez
Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
I have seen a message, apparently sent to the members of the ACGP, that has all the earmarks of an endorsement, and contains some highly inaccurate, if not libelous comments about myself.
It is a shame that certain members of the ACGP chose to subvert the democratic process, preventing their membership from seeing or hearing the words of all available candidates, from asking questions of those candidates and, frankly manipulating their membership into voting a certain way, rather than with all of the facts at hand to make an informed decision.
It is shameful, because these are the same charges made by the Greens and other "third party" political organizations about how the Democrats and Republicans often freeze them out from due consideration by the voters.
Have the Greens themselves gone mainstream in order to come to this point?
If the Greens are capable of doing these anti-democratic actions, what hope do we have of breaking the headlock such organizations have on our election process, locally and nationally?
I would ask that the members of the Alameda County Green Party rebuke the message sent out, especially with the libelous comments about myself and others.
I would also ask those same members to look long and hard at those responsible for presenting only one viewpoint, and actively excluding all others, that had the power to do this.
I would also ask that the Alameda County Green Party be fair and equitable in such events in the future, insuring that everyone involved has an opportunity to present themselves or their organization for evaluation by the Green Party members.
Mark Hernandez
Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
Mark,
Thank you for posting this with your name on it. Despite my receiving email from the Green Party list, I didn't receive anything that I recall with libel or insults about you.
I have wondered why you, as the current secretary of the LSB, have not forwarded messages to other LSB members that have been written by listeners to the board. I've been one of those listeners. Attending most of the meetings during the past year, I learned at one meeting that the vast majority of LSB correspondence is on an email list to which listeners can't post messages; and apparently the actual KPFA listener board address posted on the KPFA site is rarely if ever checked, and only by you. OR, other LSB members have lacked access to the site. Or perhaps you yourself lacked access, but didn't feel it was important enough to fix this. I can't remember the explanation you gave at the meeting where this issue came up, but I remember thinking your excuse was very lame. I have notes, and many of the meetings were taped by others, not yourself. I believe you yourself taped many of these meetings, if not all of them; however, access to the tapes seems to be impossible or next to impossible. I could be wrong. Working and working for other issues, I don't have time to keep trying to get access to this. But when I did try, it was not possible. Minutes aren't posted for many months usually. Ok I looked again just now. Wow!! August minutes are there! That's more recent than usual. However, considering the ins and outs of the meetings, one can tell next to nothing from the actual minutes posted. For example, the insults you either mutter or outwardly hurl at others on the board are left off. (Frequent).
Gotta go for now,
Virginia Browning
Thank you for posting this with your name on it. Despite my receiving email from the Green Party list, I didn't receive anything that I recall with libel or insults about you.
I have wondered why you, as the current secretary of the LSB, have not forwarded messages to other LSB members that have been written by listeners to the board. I've been one of those listeners. Attending most of the meetings during the past year, I learned at one meeting that the vast majority of LSB correspondence is on an email list to which listeners can't post messages; and apparently the actual KPFA listener board address posted on the KPFA site is rarely if ever checked, and only by you. OR, other LSB members have lacked access to the site. Or perhaps you yourself lacked access, but didn't feel it was important enough to fix this. I can't remember the explanation you gave at the meeting where this issue came up, but I remember thinking your excuse was very lame. I have notes, and many of the meetings were taped by others, not yourself. I believe you yourself taped many of these meetings, if not all of them; however, access to the tapes seems to be impossible or next to impossible. I could be wrong. Working and working for other issues, I don't have time to keep trying to get access to this. But when I did try, it was not possible. Minutes aren't posted for many months usually. Ok I looked again just now. Wow!! August minutes are there! That's more recent than usual. However, considering the ins and outs of the meetings, one can tell next to nothing from the actual minutes posted. For example, the insults you either mutter or outwardly hurl at others on the board are left off. (Frequent).
Gotta go for now,
Virginia Browning
Actually, I'm writing this too (Virginia Browning). I don't like to be a confrontational person. Sometimes I take that stance partly because I'm rushing, as I was earlier. Here's more of my experience and response to you, Mark:
I, like numerous others, hate the vituperative or even just sniping atmosphere at many of the LSB meetings. No news here. You're not the only one. Maybe not even the worst I don't think you're the most "namecalling" person there. However, others whom I respect very much (not People's radio regulars as you might expect to have "axes to grind" but just friends of mine attending with me to try to make some sense of things), have said things to me such as "didn't you hear Mark Hernandez? He was constantly sniping," etc. I myself may have been too busy writing polite notes to Steve Zeltzer asking him to please quit talking so I could hear.
I have to say I REALLY appreciate anyone willing to take on the task of note-taking secretary at the meetings, as you have. I take detailed notes myself, but rarely have time to re-read or type them up. You type as you go. It can be hard on the wrists, arms, fingers, as I know. So truly, "wishwash" that I may be, I have a hard time criticizing you for not getting the notes published somehow so others can see them. At least you took them. But why can't transcripts be available to listeners? Anyway, truly, this isn't my main problem with your work on the board.
I have a vague memory of details such as the exact ins and outs of these events, and other things as well. I know some have photographic memories, and I guess most of us have memories on a spectrum in between can't remember what happened 2 minutes ago and photographic. I guess my memory for some things is better than for these enthralling LSB vollies.
But the fact that I can't delineate at this second exactly why I finally came down on the People's radio side and not on yours doesn't make my experience invalid. I do remember this (correct me if I'm wrong). LaVarn and others from People's Radio, worked very hard to get financial information from the national office (this was before Greg Guma, the current ED's tenure in this position). You and others who nearly almost vote with you on the board, either voted against getting this information, or, through endless obstructing and filibustering, prevented these issues from reaching a vote by the board.
I LIKED the People's radio people for the most part, but that didn't seem to be a good reason to support them. That's partly why I kept coming -- to see what was true and what wasn't. Richard Phelps and I almost always get into some dispute or another. It kind of drives me up the wall, but as far as being a good steward for listeners on the KPFA board, I think he's very trustworthy. Every single person on the board has flaws and probably all have stellar qualities as well. The question for those of us called upon to vote now is -- will these board members help to produce engaging radio that will attract as wide an audience as possible and clearly communicate ways of encouraging stewardship of this earth and its people, or not. Will these board members support people like Max Pringle in the news department, who, during the Katrina disaster, termed people breaking into stores for water as "looters," or will these board members strongly encourage the news department at KPFA to use sources other than "the wire" as their primary sources of information? (I think I don't agree with Richard that Brian Edwards Tiekert relies mostly on the wire. Several times I have listened to important stories by Brian that were reported almost nowhere else, and definitely not on the wire. I HATE Brian's filibustering and arrogant anti-listener behavior on the board however. He and you usually vote in sync. Being a good news reporter doesn't make him a good board member.)
As far as the Green Party's being "undemocratic" by not inviting you, what about the Wellstone Democratic Club members who are also on the staff at KPFA and recruited completely from within, giving no one else a chance to enter those fora? And, by the way, I know many members of the Wellstone Club who knew nothing of this "endorsement" "THEY" supposedly gave.
I have another task now.
I do appreciate your apparent concern for KPFA, but I will not vote for you.
Virginia Browning
I, like numerous others, hate the vituperative or even just sniping atmosphere at many of the LSB meetings. No news here. You're not the only one. Maybe not even the worst I don't think you're the most "namecalling" person there. However, others whom I respect very much (not People's radio regulars as you might expect to have "axes to grind" but just friends of mine attending with me to try to make some sense of things), have said things to me such as "didn't you hear Mark Hernandez? He was constantly sniping," etc. I myself may have been too busy writing polite notes to Steve Zeltzer asking him to please quit talking so I could hear.
I have to say I REALLY appreciate anyone willing to take on the task of note-taking secretary at the meetings, as you have. I take detailed notes myself, but rarely have time to re-read or type them up. You type as you go. It can be hard on the wrists, arms, fingers, as I know. So truly, "wishwash" that I may be, I have a hard time criticizing you for not getting the notes published somehow so others can see them. At least you took them. But why can't transcripts be available to listeners? Anyway, truly, this isn't my main problem with your work on the board.
I have a vague memory of details such as the exact ins and outs of these events, and other things as well. I know some have photographic memories, and I guess most of us have memories on a spectrum in between can't remember what happened 2 minutes ago and photographic. I guess my memory for some things is better than for these enthralling LSB vollies.
But the fact that I can't delineate at this second exactly why I finally came down on the People's radio side and not on yours doesn't make my experience invalid. I do remember this (correct me if I'm wrong). LaVarn and others from People's Radio, worked very hard to get financial information from the national office (this was before Greg Guma, the current ED's tenure in this position). You and others who nearly almost vote with you on the board, either voted against getting this information, or, through endless obstructing and filibustering, prevented these issues from reaching a vote by the board.
I LIKED the People's radio people for the most part, but that didn't seem to be a good reason to support them. That's partly why I kept coming -- to see what was true and what wasn't. Richard Phelps and I almost always get into some dispute or another. It kind of drives me up the wall, but as far as being a good steward for listeners on the KPFA board, I think he's very trustworthy. Every single person on the board has flaws and probably all have stellar qualities as well. The question for those of us called upon to vote now is -- will these board members help to produce engaging radio that will attract as wide an audience as possible and clearly communicate ways of encouraging stewardship of this earth and its people, or not. Will these board members support people like Max Pringle in the news department, who, during the Katrina disaster, termed people breaking into stores for water as "looters," or will these board members strongly encourage the news department at KPFA to use sources other than "the wire" as their primary sources of information? (I think I don't agree with Richard that Brian Edwards Tiekert relies mostly on the wire. Several times I have listened to important stories by Brian that were reported almost nowhere else, and definitely not on the wire. I HATE Brian's filibustering and arrogant anti-listener behavior on the board however. He and you usually vote in sync. Being a good news reporter doesn't make him a good board member.)
As far as the Green Party's being "undemocratic" by not inviting you, what about the Wellstone Democratic Club members who are also on the staff at KPFA and recruited completely from within, giving no one else a chance to enter those fora? And, by the way, I know many members of the Wellstone Club who knew nothing of this "endorsement" "THEY" supposedly gave.
I have another task now.
I do appreciate your apparent concern for KPFA, but I will not vote for you.
Virginia Browning
To start, the claim that I "blocked" the vote on the Berkely Honda Worker resolution is
absolutely false; my actions and those of others were to bring this matter to a formal,
public vote, where the discussion and vote could be taken in open light of day, and a
full accounting of the vote could be made for the record and in front of witnesses.
A clearer explanation is posted here:
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/10/22/18322249.php
As to the other falsehoods about myself:
> I have wondered why you, as the current secretary of the LSB, have not forwarded
> messages to other LSB members that have been written by listeners to the board.
I do not receive messages from the listeners on behalf of LSB members, nor do I have
any desire to.
The website I created uses a process called "dot forward", which is an automatic mail re-router. If mail is sent to an alias with a "dot forward", the internet itself routes it directly to the target address without intermediary intervention. It works much like a 'forwarding address' does with the Post Office; if you have one filed, mail never goes to the actual address, but is instead forwarded to your new address.
However, in large part because of e-mail 'spam' filters engaged at internet providers (AOL, Comcast, and others), "aliased mail" (mail that has been re-routed by a "dot forward") is often misdiagnosed as "spam" and deleted by the internet provider. AOL is one of the worst offenders of this, believing that "all aliases are spam", when this is not true. The same is true on some of the bargain basement home spam filters you may get free with your computer. This is collectively called "relayed e-mail" by some computer experts.
If an e-mail you sent did not get through, it was likely caught in the spam filter at your computer or at your internet provider.
All of this information is readily available on the internet, since it is public information.
Unfortunately, there are some who use the universal ignorance of "how the internet works" to create irrational and false accusations of mail intercepts or hacking. To do what you are accusing me of, I would have to be working in conjunction with all thirteen of the global root-servers that direct internet traffic, and also with nearly every single internet provider that offers e-mail, and the several thousand individual servers in corporations, schools and homes that operate mail-servers...all to intercept your e-mail to an LSB member.
Sorry, but I don't have the time nor money to spend on that kind of effort.
> Attending most of the meetings during the past year, I learned at one meeting that the vast
> majority of LSB correspondence is on an email list to which listeners can't post messages;
> and apparently the actual KPFA listener board address posted on the KPFA site is rarely if
> ever checked, and only by you. OR, other LSB members have lacked access to the site.
> Or perhaps you yourself lacked access, but didn't feel it was important enough to fix this.
> I can't remember the explanation you gave at the meeting where this issue came up, but
> I remember thinking your excuse was very lame.
I have never had any control access to any KPFA related website, save that which I personally operate at http://www.kpfalsb.org.
What you are possible thinking of is the e-mail list operated out of TransBay, which is supposed to be a "back room" for the LSB that information is exchanged through and announcements are made. This and a previous list were established by Ted Friedman, when he was Secretary;
however, any passwords or controls to the list have ever been handed over to me, so I have
no administrative authority over these lists.
Unfortunately, it has devolved into a secret meeting room among LSB members, where votes are taken and decisions made outside of public view.
I and several other LSB members no longer actively participate in the list, due to its blatant violation of the Open Meetings Protocols; I have been waiting for the item to be allowed to be dicsussed on the agenda, so I can present the evidence of this illegitimate activity, and who has been responsible for it.
During the LAB, I had previously operated such a list from my employer's systems in Fresno, with the provision that it was not to be used as a 'secret meeting' room, and that it would remain confidential to the LAB members. The LAB agreed to these terms and abided by them.
Two members of the LAB then unilaterally declared that they did not have to abide by such rules, violated them, and in turn accused me of censorship when I shut down the list. One of those two members is currently serving on the LSB.
> I have notes, and many of the meetings were taped by others, not yourself. I believe you
> yourself taped many of these meetings, if not all of them; however, access to the tapes
> seems to be impossible or next to impossible. I could be wrong. Working and working for
> other issues, I don't have time to keep trying to get access to this. But when I did try, it
> was not possible. Minutes aren't posted for many months usually. Ok I looked again just
> now. Wow!! August minutes are there! That's more recent than usual. However, considering
> the ins and outs of the meetings, one can tell next to nothing from the actual minutes
> posted.
I am not responsible for what is or is not posted on the KPFA.ORG website; I am only responsible
for the website that I operate.
During Riva Enteen's tenure as Chair, it was established that it was the Chair and only the Chair who could authorize what to post, and what not to post on the KPFA.ORG website. To my knowledge, the only Chair to post the minutes and agenda was Rosalinda Palacios.
Let me make this clear again: I do not have access to post, nor control over the content of the KPFA.ORG website, not even the LSB page there. I only have access and control over the website at http://www.kpfalsb.org.
Minutes of a meeting record only the action taken by the body; all other information is extraneous and irrelevant. What you are expecting, from your description, is a transcript of
the meetings which, at $125/hour for the lowest rate I find, would be a rather expensive option.
At the same time, I am also the only Secretary of the LSB who has not had access nor
assistance from a hired KPFA staff member to produce the minutes and agenda on a timely basis.
On top of that, the agenda is supposed to be produced by the Chair and the Chairs of the LSB
committees ten days prior to any LSB meeting; once produced, it is my duty as Secretary to then
publish the agenda.
However, no agenda has been produced in nearly a year, and on the day that it is supposed to be due, I put out a call for agenda items from the LSB members, and voluntarily produce an agenda for the LSB.
Please bear in mind, neither producing the agenda nor the minutes are duties of the LSB Secretary under the Pacifica by-laws at:
Article 4, Section 9
Article 5, Section 3-A
Article 7, Section 5
Article 7, Section 6-C
There is no direct obligation, under the by-laws, for the LSB Secretary to perform any duties
aside from those listed above.
Contrary to your implication, the duties you presume are mine are, in fact, the duties of the Chair, as has been determined by LSB action.
As it is, I provide webcasts and audio archives of the LSB meetings, if all equipment is working, at no cost to KPFA or Pacifica, and assume all liability for slanderous remarks made during the meetings when re-transmitted. Consequently, updates to the website I control at <http://www.kpfalsb.org are made as I have time available to me between my other duties and employment. (I've asked for assistance, but have yet found a volunteer to assist me whom I can trust not to abuse the offer.)
This is in opposition to the intended expenditure proposed by Enteen and others which would have cost KPFA about $8000 to set up, another $500-700 per month to operate, and an unknown increase in the "E&O" ("Errors and Omissions") coverage in Pacifica's general liability insurance (I've been informally told that it would increase force E&O coverage to a $1million cap, with an attendant $1500 increase in monthly premiiums. If a court awarded more, the amount would be taken from Pacifica's coffers.).
> For example, the insults you either mutter or outwardly hurl at others on the board
> are left off. (Frequent).
Please feel free to catalog these for me; at least you won't have to worry about being sued by me, unlike others. It's one thing to accuse me of these acts, and it is another to provide evidence and proof of the accusation.
This is now colloquially known as "swift-boating", and I'm sorry to see you engaging in the lowest form of Republican/Conservative campaign strategies.
However, all of this is on the recordings of the LSB meetings that I make and post as available on the http://www.kpfalsb.org website.
Mark Hernandez
Member/Secretary/Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
Unfortunately, Virginia, you are the victim of either misinformation or a lack of concern.
I never opposed the access to the financial records.
I opposed the unfettered access to the Pacifica personnel files that you apparently are not aware of that was part of the effort to open the files.
Repeatedly, I tried to get an acknowledgement that the personnel files would be immune for any 'fishing expedition' unless there were specific and documentable concerns relating to financial improprieties. If it could be shown that someone was doing something untoward with the finances, I had no objection to pursuing the specific records of the person involved.
However, the same people who have consistently referred to staff as "entrenched" and have publicly indicated a need to "get them out" chose not to honor Union contracts and labor practices, and have full access to employment records without any safeguards or protections of the people who work for us.
I find it interesting that Sasha Futran's records, kept at the Pacifica National offices, were opened up and her resume posted on IndyBay for all to see. Only someone with complete and unfettered access could have obtained this document, and made it public, whether it was a director, an attorney, or a staff member in the National Office.
Your restatement of history is an example of what is wrong at Pacifica; the truth is hidden by people who want nothing but power and control.
All of my votes and actions have been with the idea of preserving and protecting KPFA from being controlled by any single group, including staff or political agents.
It would be appreciated if you did more complete research, or even simply *ASKED* me why I voted any specific way. In all the meetings you've been at, you've made assumptions that miss both the context and the purpose; I've been more than willing to explain my votes and actions to anyone who asks, and I've even done that with you on occasion.
I'm not clear on why it is that you come up with these accusations, because they are clearly not based in any sort of factual foundation.
I'm the only LSB member who has a public address for contact, located on the http://www.kpfalsb.org website; those who you support have demanded no contact with the public, directing the addresses to be taken down.
As to "confrontation", I would point out that confrontation is a vital part of democracy.
Democracy follows the process:
Discussion: Identifying an issue.
Dissent: Determining if an issue is valid.
Debate: Cataloguing the merits of the issue.
Decision: Voting on the issue.
Remove any one of these points, and there is no democracy.
Without a vigorous Dissent, how do you confront the merits of an issue in order to decide it?
Without an objection to 'fishing expeditions' into personnel files, how do you proceed to protect workers from abuse from their employers?
Whatever it is that you support, it isn't democracy, if you chose not to vote for me.
Mark Hernandez
Member/Secretary/Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
I never opposed the access to the financial records.
I opposed the unfettered access to the Pacifica personnel files that you apparently are not aware of that was part of the effort to open the files.
Repeatedly, I tried to get an acknowledgement that the personnel files would be immune for any 'fishing expedition' unless there were specific and documentable concerns relating to financial improprieties. If it could be shown that someone was doing something untoward with the finances, I had no objection to pursuing the specific records of the person involved.
However, the same people who have consistently referred to staff as "entrenched" and have publicly indicated a need to "get them out" chose not to honor Union contracts and labor practices, and have full access to employment records without any safeguards or protections of the people who work for us.
I find it interesting that Sasha Futran's records, kept at the Pacifica National offices, were opened up and her resume posted on IndyBay for all to see. Only someone with complete and unfettered access could have obtained this document, and made it public, whether it was a director, an attorney, or a staff member in the National Office.
Your restatement of history is an example of what is wrong at Pacifica; the truth is hidden by people who want nothing but power and control.
All of my votes and actions have been with the idea of preserving and protecting KPFA from being controlled by any single group, including staff or political agents.
It would be appreciated if you did more complete research, or even simply *ASKED* me why I voted any specific way. In all the meetings you've been at, you've made assumptions that miss both the context and the purpose; I've been more than willing to explain my votes and actions to anyone who asks, and I've even done that with you on occasion.
I'm not clear on why it is that you come up with these accusations, because they are clearly not based in any sort of factual foundation.
I'm the only LSB member who has a public address for contact, located on the http://www.kpfalsb.org website; those who you support have demanded no contact with the public, directing the addresses to be taken down.
As to "confrontation", I would point out that confrontation is a vital part of democracy.
Democracy follows the process:
Discussion: Identifying an issue.
Dissent: Determining if an issue is valid.
Debate: Cataloguing the merits of the issue.
Decision: Voting on the issue.
Remove any one of these points, and there is no democracy.
Without a vigorous Dissent, how do you confront the merits of an issue in order to decide it?
Without an objection to 'fishing expeditions' into personnel files, how do you proceed to protect workers from abuse from their employers?
Whatever it is that you support, it isn't democracy, if you chose not to vote for me.
Mark Hernandez
Member/Secretary/Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
Mark,
You're just great with words, but I can't really buy it. It would be better if I had time to read every detail of every meeting. I have attended many. There's a good chance I should be doing another task right now besides this, but I do feel the KPFA election, among other important things, is important.
If people such as LaVarn (the main person on the LSB working painstakingly, carefully and methodically rather than bullishly to see Pacifica’s finances) made any comments on the LSB about getting rid of (“getting them out”) any staff in particular, I am not aware of it. Now, this week, treasurer Brian Edwards-Tiekert is saying there is a need for KPFA to save money, and publicly saying at the local station board meeting that the most likely or best way is to lay off staff. When former treasurer Marnie (who often voted with the People’s Radio group after seeing the way you others operate) presciently brought that up last year, the Brian-Mark contingent vilified Marnie and others for even mentioning the possibility. I don’t want to imply this next part is any more than my recollection -- I don’t want to be accused of “swift boating” and I want all of the throngs who read indymedia to know this is only my recollection, but I seem to recall that this personnel thing was brought up rather late in the process and seemed at the time like a stalling tactic. The request for financial information had already been going on for some time at that point.
As to asking you about your reason for your votes:
I don’t recall asking you. Maybe I did. I remember asking Sarv during a break why he objected to the Honda strike vote about the 3rd or 4th month (or so) it was brought up. I asked very politely, yet was met by some ugly behavior by a couple of LSB members (not you). As someone who has, under pressure, sometimes defensively snapped at people, I don’t think it would serve any purpose to say who those people were. I’m just letting you know, it’s not always easy finding dialog with board members. What Sarv eventually answered was similar to what you’ve said in your defense here. That may have made sense for a month or two or three. Not for more than that. If it’s true that putting something on the consent calendar moves it later LOWER onto the new business calendar, that seems to me to be a really stupid rule. If it’s true, I suppose Chaundra lost a good chance of getting it discussed. However, she says she offered to discuss it with you. You did have several months to learn about the issue. You could have asked her about it.
I’m not singling you out as someone who behaves less than perfectly on the board. But on balance, I trust you less than the also flawed among us I do support.
Virginia
You're just great with words, but I can't really buy it. It would be better if I had time to read every detail of every meeting. I have attended many. There's a good chance I should be doing another task right now besides this, but I do feel the KPFA election, among other important things, is important.
If people such as LaVarn (the main person on the LSB working painstakingly, carefully and methodically rather than bullishly to see Pacifica’s finances) made any comments on the LSB about getting rid of (“getting them out”) any staff in particular, I am not aware of it. Now, this week, treasurer Brian Edwards-Tiekert is saying there is a need for KPFA to save money, and publicly saying at the local station board meeting that the most likely or best way is to lay off staff. When former treasurer Marnie (who often voted with the People’s Radio group after seeing the way you others operate) presciently brought that up last year, the Brian-Mark contingent vilified Marnie and others for even mentioning the possibility. I don’t want to imply this next part is any more than my recollection -- I don’t want to be accused of “swift boating” and I want all of the throngs who read indymedia to know this is only my recollection, but I seem to recall that this personnel thing was brought up rather late in the process and seemed at the time like a stalling tactic. The request for financial information had already been going on for some time at that point.
As to asking you about your reason for your votes:
I don’t recall asking you. Maybe I did. I remember asking Sarv during a break why he objected to the Honda strike vote about the 3rd or 4th month (or so) it was brought up. I asked very politely, yet was met by some ugly behavior by a couple of LSB members (not you). As someone who has, under pressure, sometimes defensively snapped at people, I don’t think it would serve any purpose to say who those people were. I’m just letting you know, it’s not always easy finding dialog with board members. What Sarv eventually answered was similar to what you’ve said in your defense here. That may have made sense for a month or two or three. Not for more than that. If it’s true that putting something on the consent calendar moves it later LOWER onto the new business calendar, that seems to me to be a really stupid rule. If it’s true, I suppose Chaundra lost a good chance of getting it discussed. However, she says she offered to discuss it with you. You did have several months to learn about the issue. You could have asked her about it.
I’m not singling you out as someone who behaves less than perfectly on the board. But on balance, I trust you less than the also flawed among us I do support.
Virginia
While it is true that there in not a veto per se on the LSB, in practical terms any member can object to an item on the consent calendar and that puts it into New Business. Given the fillibustering and other tactics designed to "dismantle the LSB" by Hernandez and his voting block, sending a consent calendar item to New Business is like a veto for that meeting and many more.
Now to Mark's BS about wanting to know about the Berkeley Honda Strike. Mark is very good with a computer and if he had wanted to know about the strike he could have Googled it and found out much info. He didn't do that or ask any of us about it, he just objected to it on the consent calendar month after month, along with Sarv Randhawa, who lives in the East Bay and is in Berkeley often at the station,(NO FRESNO EXCUSE FOR HIM). And now we get the cover story, if you buy that I have a couple of bridges for sale!! If Mark was progressive, which to my knowledge he has never called himself, what is there to know past the class reality that an employer dumped the union. Let's see "Which side are you on?" "Employer or union members, I will have to investigate and give it some thought?" How thin can a cover story be??? The real story is why are the Wellstone Club and other "progressives" pushing such a class unconscious cover story?????? Looks like power before principles, smells like DNC?? What happened to Paul Wellstone 's legacy?
Now to Mark's BS about wanting to know about the Berkeley Honda Strike. Mark is very good with a computer and if he had wanted to know about the strike he could have Googled it and found out much info. He didn't do that or ask any of us about it, he just objected to it on the consent calendar month after month, along with Sarv Randhawa, who lives in the East Bay and is in Berkeley often at the station,(NO FRESNO EXCUSE FOR HIM). And now we get the cover story, if you buy that I have a couple of bridges for sale!! If Mark was progressive, which to my knowledge he has never called himself, what is there to know past the class reality that an employer dumped the union. Let's see "Which side are you on?" "Employer or union members, I will have to investigate and give it some thought?" How thin can a cover story be??? The real story is why are the Wellstone Club and other "progressives" pushing such a class unconscious cover story?????? Looks like power before principles, smells like DNC?? What happened to Paul Wellstone 's legacy?
Following the events of 9/11/2001, the US Congress was assured that the Patriot Act was 'good legislation', and it was passed by an overwhelming margin...even though most of Congress never read the full text.
Today, we're still dealing with the consequences.
No matter how well meaning or good intentioned a resolution may be stated, I will not vote on it without information.
At the same time, I also see the question I've asked all along not being answered:
Why was this one resolution placed on the Consent Calendar, where there is no debate, discussion or question, when EVERY OTHER RESOLUTION has been on the full agenda, debated, discussed, and questioned?
However, as has been indicated, there is no "veto" on the Local Station Board, so the truth of the entire statement of accusation is now suspect, as is the author.
Mark Hernandez
Member/Secretary/Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
Today, we're still dealing with the consequences.
No matter how well meaning or good intentioned a resolution may be stated, I will not vote on it without information.
At the same time, I also see the question I've asked all along not being answered:
Why was this one resolution placed on the Consent Calendar, where there is no debate, discussion or question, when EVERY OTHER RESOLUTION has been on the full agenda, debated, discussed, and questioned?
However, as has been indicated, there is no "veto" on the Local Station Board, so the truth of the entire statement of accusation is now suspect, as is the author.
Mark Hernandez
Member/Secretary/Candidate, KPFA Local Station Board
Mark says:"At the same time, I also see the question I've asked all along not being answered:
Why was this one resolution placed on the Consent Calendar, where there is no debate, discussion or question, when EVERY OTHER RESOLUTION has been on the full agenda, debated, discussed, and questioned?
However, as has been indicated, there is no "veto" on the Local Station Board, so the truth of the entire statement of accusation is now suspect, as is the author."
And as Richard succinctly put it elsewhere:
"While it is true that there in not a veto per se on the LSB, in practical terms any member can object to an item on the consent calendar and that puts it into New Business. GIVEN THE FILIBUSTERING AND OTHER TACTICS DESIGNED TO 'DISMATLE THE LSB' [FROM THEIR OWN EMAIL] by Hernandez and his voting block, sending a consent calendar item to New Business is like a veto for that meeting and many more.
(Unlike Richard, I think Brian's educable -- misguided and perhaps feeling threatened, if not for his own job, then perhaps loyally on behalf of others he imagines he's supporting. I prefer to think that Brian, Sherry G and others do have the station's interest at heart. And it is for CERTAIN the rules by which the LSB operates need...something. I do think the behavior they (Mark, Brian, others) use is dangerous in the longrun, more than they are seeing, yes, as dangerous and even more dangerous than the goddamned stereotyping and conclusion-jumping by others. Brian DID say what's in the email above, for whatever reason. I don't think that way ultimately officious, "top-down" way of thinking is the right way. You may not want an airplane run by passengers, but you don't want it run by hijackers either)
Why was this one resolution placed on the Consent Calendar, where there is no debate, discussion or question, when EVERY OTHER RESOLUTION has been on the full agenda, debated, discussed, and questioned?
However, as has been indicated, there is no "veto" on the Local Station Board, so the truth of the entire statement of accusation is now suspect, as is the author."
And as Richard succinctly put it elsewhere:
"While it is true that there in not a veto per se on the LSB, in practical terms any member can object to an item on the consent calendar and that puts it into New Business. GIVEN THE FILIBUSTERING AND OTHER TACTICS DESIGNED TO 'DISMATLE THE LSB' [FROM THEIR OWN EMAIL] by Hernandez and his voting block, sending a consent calendar item to New Business is like a veto for that meeting and many more.
(Unlike Richard, I think Brian's educable -- misguided and perhaps feeling threatened, if not for his own job, then perhaps loyally on behalf of others he imagines he's supporting. I prefer to think that Brian, Sherry G and others do have the station's interest at heart. And it is for CERTAIN the rules by which the LSB operates need...something. I do think the behavior they (Mark, Brian, others) use is dangerous in the longrun, more than they are seeing, yes, as dangerous and even more dangerous than the goddamned stereotyping and conclusion-jumping by others. Brian DID say what's in the email above, for whatever reason. I don't think that way ultimately officious, "top-down" way of thinking is the right way. You may not want an airplane run by passengers, but you don't want it run by hijackers either)
You guys don't get it. Nobody cares about this Berkeley Honda resolution. It doesn't have anything to do with the radio station. Anyone can posture and pass meaningless good-sounding statements about all sorts of things. Why haven't you impeached Bush while you're at it? What we're voting for you to do is lead the operations of a radio station: give it support and community energy and connections.
That's the job. (Sigh).
That's the job. (Sigh).
Maybe it's about transparency and accountability.
Transparently silly.
If you haven't noticed, the custodial staff at UC Berkeley is in a death battle with the administration for decent wages: primarily people of color making $14/hr or less, not white male auto mechanics with $25/hr jobs. This has been going on for months. But there is no KPFA LSB resolution to support those workers - who are fighting a much bigger monolith than a new small business owner. Clueless. Most likely LSB members are friends of Berkeley Honda workers, but not, of course, of UC custodial workers.
What happened is that the author tried to sneak it through improperly on a consent calender because the LSB basic structures are so screwed up that you don't get to anything actually on your agenda for six months. Understandable that the attempt would be made, but there isn't any transparency and accountability when you're too messed up to get to your agenda for months at a time and have to resort to parliamentary maneuvers to talk about anything. Fix yourselves - demonstrate the ability to write an agenda and complete it in four hours or less and then we can have a conversation about transparency and accountability. Until then, you ,erely blame each other for your dysfunction and it's monotonous.
If you haven't noticed, the custodial staff at UC Berkeley is in a death battle with the administration for decent wages: primarily people of color making $14/hr or less, not white male auto mechanics with $25/hr jobs. This has been going on for months. But there is no KPFA LSB resolution to support those workers - who are fighting a much bigger monolith than a new small business owner. Clueless. Most likely LSB members are friends of Berkeley Honda workers, but not, of course, of UC custodial workers.
What happened is that the author tried to sneak it through improperly on a consent calender because the LSB basic structures are so screwed up that you don't get to anything actually on your agenda for six months. Understandable that the attempt would be made, but there isn't any transparency and accountability when you're too messed up to get to your agenda for months at a time and have to resort to parliamentary maneuvers to talk about anything. Fix yourselves - demonstrate the ability to write an agenda and complete it in four hours or less and then we can have a conversation about transparency and accountability. Until then, you ,erely blame each other for your dysfunction and it's monotonous.
I wonder who these Anonymous posters are. Is there any reason the above anonymous poster couldn't have put her/his name on it?
Seems like people don't want to deal with the content of posts - they want to decide whether or not they agree with it based on who wrote it so they don't accidentally end up agreeeing with someone on the other "side". Oops!
"Principals over personalities". The first and most important guide to clear thinking. It doesn't matter who said it. It matters whether it's well-said.
"Principals over personalities". The first and most important guide to clear thinking. It doesn't matter who said it. It matters whether it's well-said.
Don't miss this one! Dennis Bernsttein will be talking about KPFA's internal dynamics vis a vis the Board Election !#$$%^%&*()_++!
!!!! 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.
!!!! 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.
For more information:
http://www.allianceforademocratickpfa.org/...
WE'LL HELP YOU FILL OUT YOUR BALLOT???!!
No thanks. Sounds like an invitation to voting Florida style.
No thanks. Sounds like an invitation to voting Florida style.
From what several of these "Anonymous" posters have told me, it's because of a legitimate fear that Richard Phelps will attempt to sue them for anything that he disagrees with and can attribute to them.
Richard claims that the judge dismissed the small claims court case as "too complex", but the reality is that the judge admonished Richard for even starting the case, as it was clearly an effort to intimidate a listener's rights to free speech.
In the style of an ambulance-chaser level of barrister, Phelps sued in small claims in order to prevent the victim of his viscious action in order to prevent the listener from having legal counsel...making it a truly fair and equitable contest for an attorney to sue a retired Merchant Marine seaman.
These are the type of people who are associated with Peoples Radio and the Alliance group.
These are the type of people that the Alameda County Green Party has gotten into bed with.
Be sure to count your money and your fingers when you wake up.
Just because its "anonymous" does not mean that it isn't true.
If Virginia Browning is honest, she will come forward and verify it.
Don't answer -- I don't have time to look.
I didn't particularly like Richard's suing what's his name, but I'm not Richard. This guy (the suee) stood up at meeting after meeting, other public events as well, had a newsletter distributed, the majority of it dedicated to Richard and allies, but the accusations were picked well, not completely out of the blue, but often hit on themes that would show exactly the opposite of what was the case. For example, despite Richard Phelps' efforts to get Democracy Now! on at at least one more time when additional people could hear it, Suee's statements were that Richard was one of the ones preventing it from being added to a better time slot or an additional timeslot. etc.
Richard (and others) spoke with Mr. Suee, at first kindly, questioningly, "Hellow, Mr. Suee -- now what's this about fla and bwap bwap?" (paraphrasing). Mr. S., robotic-like always countered as if but a tape-loop vesticle. After awhile, Richard felt sensitive. It seemed perhaps like overkill, it seemed to take Mr. S too seriously, but as has been said, this ultimately was not really a joke, and here was one way to try to get Mr. S to realize hey, cut it out! Phelps wasn't suing for money. He just wanted to quit being hassled. EVEN if you feel you might have come up with a better tactic (and of course as you, Mr. Anonymous, can put yourself ACTUALLY and ABSOLUTELY in someone else's place you would know EXACTLY what each and everyone should do at all times), even if you feel you might have come up with a better tactic, it doesn't undo Richard's value. Mon, even if he WERE to be seen to have obvious FLAWS (unlike the hidden ones you used to have before you became...Anonymous), it wouldn't diminish all virtue, OK?
What is your problem by the way. DON'T ANSWER! Now I said I wouldn't post any more. If anyone really believes the exaggerations of these anonymous people who do things like count how many times a group of board members offer amendments as proof of anything...lost my thread. You mean like one of the amendments Brian offered that he wouldn't even vote for himself, but just offered to slow things up?
Now nighty-night! Turn off that solar cellar light.
I didn't particularly like Richard's suing what's his name, but I'm not Richard. This guy (the suee) stood up at meeting after meeting, other public events as well, had a newsletter distributed, the majority of it dedicated to Richard and allies, but the accusations were picked well, not completely out of the blue, but often hit on themes that would show exactly the opposite of what was the case. For example, despite Richard Phelps' efforts to get Democracy Now! on at at least one more time when additional people could hear it, Suee's statements were that Richard was one of the ones preventing it from being added to a better time slot or an additional timeslot. etc.
Richard (and others) spoke with Mr. Suee, at first kindly, questioningly, "Hellow, Mr. Suee -- now what's this about fla and bwap bwap?" (paraphrasing). Mr. S., robotic-like always countered as if but a tape-loop vesticle. After awhile, Richard felt sensitive. It seemed perhaps like overkill, it seemed to take Mr. S too seriously, but as has been said, this ultimately was not really a joke, and here was one way to try to get Mr. S to realize hey, cut it out! Phelps wasn't suing for money. He just wanted to quit being hassled. EVEN if you feel you might have come up with a better tactic (and of course as you, Mr. Anonymous, can put yourself ACTUALLY and ABSOLUTELY in someone else's place you would know EXACTLY what each and everyone should do at all times), even if you feel you might have come up with a better tactic, it doesn't undo Richard's value. Mon, even if he WERE to be seen to have obvious FLAWS (unlike the hidden ones you used to have before you became...Anonymous), it wouldn't diminish all virtue, OK?
What is your problem by the way. DON'T ANSWER! Now I said I wouldn't post any more. If anyone really believes the exaggerations of these anonymous people who do things like count how many times a group of board members offer amendments as proof of anything...lost my thread. You mean like one of the amendments Brian offered that he wouldn't even vote for himself, but just offered to slow things up?
Now nighty-night! Turn off that solar cellar light.
Daniel: Time to learn
by Bay Area Insider
Thursday Oct 26th, 2006 12:08 AM
From what several of these "Anonymous" posters have told me, it's because of a legitimate fear that Richard Phelps will attempt to sue them for anything that he disagrees with and can attribute to them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have offerd to publicly debate any and all comers, and you anonymous liers have to hide behind some excuse to avoid getting exposed. I did not sue Weber for printing things that I disagreed with. He or you or any one can criticize my politics anytime. I suggest that you be decent enough to do it honestly, if you know how. It seems that your kind is more interested in this kind of attack than discussing politics. For several months Weber was printing lies about me, not political disagreements, LIES! I asked him to stop every month and he refused. I warned him to stop and he continued to print lies that were defamatory. So I sued him in small claims court. Had I sued him in Superior court I would be getting attacked for forcing him to hire an attorney, etc. the anonymous posters will go after either side just to throw shit at me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Richard claims that the judge dismissed the small claims court case as "too complex", but the reality is that the judge admonished Richard for even starting the case, as it was clearly an effort to intimidate a listener's rights to free speech.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Another big lie. The case was dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE" so I could bring it again in Superior Court. Since then Weber has not continued to lie so directly about me. He still gets most of the politics wrong but that is his right. He does not have a right to defame anyone. I dropped it. I got what I wanted out of it. The judge didn't admonish me as you say, he said he didn't have enough time in small claims court to take up the complex issues involved. I even tried to settle the issue with Weber that day and I told him if he would agree to stop the lies I would drop the suit, he refused and I asked the judge to dismiss without prejudice and he did. It is in the court record. If the judge thought the suit was improper he would have dismissed WITH PREJUDICE AND THAT WOULD HAVE ENDED IT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In the style of an ambulance-chaser level of barrister,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How many lawyers do you know that have testified for the State Bar Court as an expert witness on personal injury ethics? I have also been consulted by the State Bar on investigations of attorneys practices that resulted in discipline.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Phelps sued in small claims in order to prevent the victim of his viscious action in order to prevent the listener from having legal counsel...making it a truly fair and equitable contest for an attorney to sue a retired Merchant Marine seaman.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
does being a retired Merchant Marine allow you to defame people month after month despite numerous warnings to stop and aviod the consequences of that unlawful conduct???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
These are the type of people who are associated with Peoples Radio and the Alliance group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The kind of people that fight for financial and political transparency, work on the national election committee to make the elections inclusive and fair, work for due process at KPFA and Pacifica, chair the LSB meetings without spending $400 a meeting on a Parliamentarian and much more. What have you done, except lie anonymously???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Just because its "anonymous" does not mean that it isn't true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What is does mean is that you can't be held responsible for your lies. What you do is similar to what the BUSH REGIME does. They want to use secret evidence and secret witnesses to convict people. How is that much different from what you do?? Why won't you debate publicly? Because you know you have nothing but lies and smears.
by Bay Area Insider
Thursday Oct 26th, 2006 12:08 AM
From what several of these "Anonymous" posters have told me, it's because of a legitimate fear that Richard Phelps will attempt to sue them for anything that he disagrees with and can attribute to them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I have offerd to publicly debate any and all comers, and you anonymous liers have to hide behind some excuse to avoid getting exposed. I did not sue Weber for printing things that I disagreed with. He or you or any one can criticize my politics anytime. I suggest that you be decent enough to do it honestly, if you know how. It seems that your kind is more interested in this kind of attack than discussing politics. For several months Weber was printing lies about me, not political disagreements, LIES! I asked him to stop every month and he refused. I warned him to stop and he continued to print lies that were defamatory. So I sued him in small claims court. Had I sued him in Superior court I would be getting attacked for forcing him to hire an attorney, etc. the anonymous posters will go after either side just to throw shit at me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Richard claims that the judge dismissed the small claims court case as "too complex", but the reality is that the judge admonished Richard for even starting the case, as it was clearly an effort to intimidate a listener's rights to free speech.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Another big lie. The case was dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE" so I could bring it again in Superior Court. Since then Weber has not continued to lie so directly about me. He still gets most of the politics wrong but that is his right. He does not have a right to defame anyone. I dropped it. I got what I wanted out of it. The judge didn't admonish me as you say, he said he didn't have enough time in small claims court to take up the complex issues involved. I even tried to settle the issue with Weber that day and I told him if he would agree to stop the lies I would drop the suit, he refused and I asked the judge to dismiss without prejudice and he did. It is in the court record. If the judge thought the suit was improper he would have dismissed WITH PREJUDICE AND THAT WOULD HAVE ENDED IT.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In the style of an ambulance-chaser level of barrister,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
How many lawyers do you know that have testified for the State Bar Court as an expert witness on personal injury ethics? I have also been consulted by the State Bar on investigations of attorneys practices that resulted in discipline.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Phelps sued in small claims in order to prevent the victim of his viscious action in order to prevent the listener from having legal counsel...making it a truly fair and equitable contest for an attorney to sue a retired Merchant Marine seaman.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
does being a retired Merchant Marine allow you to defame people month after month despite numerous warnings to stop and aviod the consequences of that unlawful conduct???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
These are the type of people who are associated with Peoples Radio and the Alliance group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The kind of people that fight for financial and political transparency, work on the national election committee to make the elections inclusive and fair, work for due process at KPFA and Pacifica, chair the LSB meetings without spending $400 a meeting on a Parliamentarian and much more. What have you done, except lie anonymously???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Just because its "anonymous" does not mean that it isn't true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What is does mean is that you can't be held responsible for your lies. What you do is similar to what the BUSH REGIME does. They want to use secret evidence and secret witnesses to convict people. How is that much different from what you do?? Why won't you debate publicly? Because you know you have nothing but lies and smears.
Thank you Daniel for this piece and giving me the true answer as to why I was not invited to the "upper room", translation ... not wheelchair accessible!
I won't bother to list the buck passing
as I've tried to get to the truth. And
I have the Greens to thank? Weren't they
on DN! this week denied participation themselves?
Different strokes for different folks?
Unlike other civil rights legislation, we
are ALL potential 'People W/ Disabilities'
and protected by laws both the Greens and Pacifica too often ignore. In this case the discrimination directly affected me
as did the inaccessible reception hosted by kpfa at the recent Pacifica Natioal Board meeting in Walnut Creek to which ALL LSB members were "encouraged" to attend and greet out-of-towners. The
only ways in were a choice between two sets of stairs! A clear violation of state and federal laws and for me it felt like
the "Jim Crow" receptions I attended protesting, with my grandparents who.
died before the victories of the 60's.
Again for the hard, cold, Jim Crow facts.
I say thank you very much. Keep reporting the facts! (especially financial transparency which I too have been following. The above expenditure was/is an illegal expendature of the listeners dollars to pay for that reception..
I won't bother to list the buck passing
as I've tried to get to the truth. And
I have the Greens to thank? Weren't they
on DN! this week denied participation themselves?
Different strokes for different folks?
Unlike other civil rights legislation, we
are ALL potential 'People W/ Disabilities'
and protected by laws both the Greens and Pacifica too often ignore. In this case the discrimination directly affected me
as did the inaccessible reception hosted by kpfa at the recent Pacifica Natioal Board meeting in Walnut Creek to which ALL LSB members were "encouraged" to attend and greet out-of-towners. The
only ways in were a choice between two sets of stairs! A clear violation of state and federal laws and for me it felt like
the "Jim Crow" receptions I attended protesting, with my grandparents who.
died before the victories of the 60's.
Again for the hard, cold, Jim Crow facts.
I say thank you very much. Keep reporting the facts! (especially financial transparency which I too have been following. The above expenditure was/is an illegal expendature of the listeners dollars to pay for that reception..
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$110.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network