Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Quiet Meltdown on Planet Pacifica
Pacifica Radio currently faces its most serious organizational and financial crisis in years. Executive Director Nicole Sawaya has resigned effective in early October, and the network is considering budget cuts of more than $900,000. Pacifica is also grappling with the need for multiple bylaw amendments and the high cost of lawsuits. The National Board is split, the Human Resources Director has left, a line of credit has been secured to cover recent expenses, and another loan is being sought. Here are some highlights from the last year.
Two years ago it looked as if Pacifica Radio, the original listener-supported network, was on the road to reconciliation and renewed relevance after a decade of internal warfare. New national shows had been launched, the number of affiliates was increasing, a mood of collaboration and mutual respect was taking hold, and, in September 2006, the CFO reported the highest revenues in the organization’s 57-year history. A year later, the financial news was less encouraging, but Pacifica was about to hire a new Executive Director, Nicole Sawaya, returning to Pacifica after nine years with enthusiastic support from the Board and community.
Cut to September 2008. As Pacifica approaches its 60th anniversary, it faces the most serious organizational and financial crisis in years. According to several well-placed sources, Sawaya has resigned – for the second time in ten months – effective in early October. The network is considering budget cuts of more than $900,000, including at least 10 staff positions at stations and possible layoffs in the national office.
Pacifica is also grappling with the need for multiple bylaw amendments and the high cost of lawsuits. The National Board is split down the middle, the Human Resources Director has left, a line of credit has been secured from Wells Fargo to cover recent expenses, based on a C.D. held by KPFA, and another loan is being sought.
Nevertheless, those waiting for an official announcement, especially concerning personnel changes, would be well-advised not hold their breath. Although critical of the mainstream media, Pacifica’s managers and Board are often late and consistently coy when the subject is their own internal activities. Concerned about the staffing implications and potential for panic, recent meetings of the National Finance Committee have been conducted in executive session. The term “transparency” is used frequently, but, in part due to the crisis, is being selectively applied.
The rapid pace of the decline raises at least two questions: How could so much go wrong so fast? And, what do Pacifica’s leaders hope to do about it? The second question may be answered, at least in part, at the in-person meeting of the Pacifica National Board scheduled for next weekend, Sept. 19-21, in Washington, DC. Here is a recap of some key events during the last year.
Nicole Sawaya worked as General Manager of KPFA in the later 1990s, until she was abruptly dismissed during the struggle for the network. For years after that many people in the “Save Pacifica” movement eagerly looked forward to her return, certain that she had the radio know-how to give the organization what Pacifica historian Matthew Lasar called a “second chance.” The enthusiasm was so great that she was the only person interviewed face-to-face for the job last September, and quickly won both unanimous Board approval and a multi-year contract.
Complications arose almost immediately. Pacifica was in the midst of a Board election year – they happen two out of every three – and complaints emerged over how the National Election Supervisor and Interim CEO, who was also corporate counsel, handled disputes. Phasing in on a part-time basis, Sawaya meanwhile hit problems in the national office, particularly over control of finances. In early December, after only weeks on the job, she announced her resignation.
As negotiations proceeded to woo her back, Pacifica stations found it harder to keep pace with rising costs, particularly health insurance, legal fees, and governance. On-air fund drives, which bring in over 80 percent of the network’s income, weren’t meeting projected goals, most stations had meager cash reserves, and one – WBAI in New York – was both a half a million behind its target and mired in an internal power struggle that had been building for several years. After the elections, a lawsuit was filed by one faction at WBAI against the network and its representatives.
In early March 2008, Sawaya agreed to return. What changed her mind wasn’t revealed, but the fight over financial control did result in a Board decision to give her the right to directly supervise the national financial staff. Unfortunately, after a three month absence she faced a rapidly worsening picture. Sawaya was frustrated by an organizational structure that was costly and often blocked change. She openly called the approach “unsustainable.”
One of her first major decisions, made with Hicks’ agreement, was to cut the budget for Free Speech Radio News by 25 percent. What shocked Pacificans wasn’t so much the cutback (about $11,000 per month) on an agreement to produce a half hour daily news show that some questioned, but the fact that it was done without prior discussion. Sawaya explained that the financial crunch required strong and immediate action, and the Board decided to let it stand. Her other big decision, the hiring of a new General Manager at KPFK in Log Angeles, was met with more enthusiasm.
The next surprises came in July, just as budgets for the next fiscal year were being developed. The National Board had voted to convene in person that month, but national office management failed to follow up and the meeting had to be cancelled. Then, without explanation, Hicks disappeared from the national office. The Board made no announcement, but news leaked out that he was on “paid leave to deal with family matters.” Later, there were rumors that an investigation of his activities was being pursued, and also that he might sue. Meanwhile, Sawaya assumed responsibility for budget development, pushing for staff and other budget cuts. Managers at some stations responded, others – most notably at WBAI – didn’t.
Sawaya announced her decision to leave again in early August, but asked those who knew not to say anything for a month. At meetings, she meanwhile tried to convince the Board and National Finance Committee that Pacifica needed to act like a network and “centralize” various functions, especially accounting and reporting. Directors listened, but not much changed.
As the national political conventions approached, she turned her attention to Pacifica’s coverage of those events. It had been a high priority for her from the start. But some were surprised by her decision to attend herself at a time when the main business of the network was resolving its financial crisis. What the public didn’t know was that Sawaya had already announced her decision to leave.
Just before she went to Denver, another confrontation further intensified the situation. A volunteer programmer, allegedly “banned” from KPFA, showed up on August 20. The General Manager wasn’t around, but the Business Manager felt that something needed to be done. Calling the National Office next door, she asked for advice from Human Resources Director Dominga Estrada, who advised her to call the police. According to several witnesses, when the cops arrived excessive force was used, and Sawaya herself attempted to block videotaping of the event.
The response was dramatic and deepened the existing divide at the station. Management defended its decision but said it wasn’t responsible for the overreaction of the police. Many volunteers, and some on the staff, saw it as another example of a management team that was out of step with Pacifica’s values and mission. A letter of no confidence in General Manager Lemlem Rijio has since been signed by about 24 people.
In late August, the Human Resources director also decided to leave for a new job elsewhere, effective September 5, and the National Board began to discuss what was now being calling a “national office collapse.” Actually, the term referred to one of several options for how to address the overall problems. One alternative was to struggle on as is, a decision apt to leave a large budget deficit. Another was to cut a few national staff positions and the salaries of others. The third and most radical option was to lay off almost everyone, retaining only enough staff to pay the bills and keep the governance structure functioning. This is one of many decisions the national board will face when it meets in person.
It will also have to decide what to do about Pacifica’s leadership vacuum. Some hope to quickly recruit a new Executive Director. But this process usually takes months, and pending recommendations to re-expand the CFO’s authority and apply strict performance standards to all managers could get in the way.
Another possibility is that Hicks might be asked to step in upon his return, or that Siegel might again be tapped. But Siegel has been criticized for his handling of (and billing for) recent personnel and election-related lawsuits, which have allegedly cost the foundation hundreds of thousands. Hicks has his own critics, and may not even want the job. Another possibility is Ambrose Lane, who served as interim ED before I was hired. Finally, the Board could ask its Chair, Sherry Gendleman, to fill in. But she’s said to be less than enthusiastic about that prospect.
Even if a new chief executive can be found – and the Board overcomes its divisions to agree – there is still the biggest elephant in the room. Pacifica hasn’t figured out how to resolve its current financial crisis, and, even more difficult, restructure its programming and management to reverse a long-term decline in listenership and income.
-- Adapted from a report filed by Greg Guma on Maverick Media
Cut to September 2008. As Pacifica approaches its 60th anniversary, it faces the most serious organizational and financial crisis in years. According to several well-placed sources, Sawaya has resigned – for the second time in ten months – effective in early October. The network is considering budget cuts of more than $900,000, including at least 10 staff positions at stations and possible layoffs in the national office.
Pacifica is also grappling with the need for multiple bylaw amendments and the high cost of lawsuits. The National Board is split down the middle, the Human Resources Director has left, a line of credit has been secured from Wells Fargo to cover recent expenses, based on a C.D. held by KPFA, and another loan is being sought.
Nevertheless, those waiting for an official announcement, especially concerning personnel changes, would be well-advised not hold their breath. Although critical of the mainstream media, Pacifica’s managers and Board are often late and consistently coy when the subject is their own internal activities. Concerned about the staffing implications and potential for panic, recent meetings of the National Finance Committee have been conducted in executive session. The term “transparency” is used frequently, but, in part due to the crisis, is being selectively applied.
The rapid pace of the decline raises at least two questions: How could so much go wrong so fast? And, what do Pacifica’s leaders hope to do about it? The second question may be answered, at least in part, at the in-person meeting of the Pacifica National Board scheduled for next weekend, Sept. 19-21, in Washington, DC. Here is a recap of some key events during the last year.
Nicole Sawaya worked as General Manager of KPFA in the later 1990s, until she was abruptly dismissed during the struggle for the network. For years after that many people in the “Save Pacifica” movement eagerly looked forward to her return, certain that she had the radio know-how to give the organization what Pacifica historian Matthew Lasar called a “second chance.” The enthusiasm was so great that she was the only person interviewed face-to-face for the job last September, and quickly won both unanimous Board approval and a multi-year contract.
Complications arose almost immediately. Pacifica was in the midst of a Board election year – they happen two out of every three – and complaints emerged over how the National Election Supervisor and Interim CEO, who was also corporate counsel, handled disputes. Phasing in on a part-time basis, Sawaya meanwhile hit problems in the national office, particularly over control of finances. In early December, after only weeks on the job, she announced her resignation.
As negotiations proceeded to woo her back, Pacifica stations found it harder to keep pace with rising costs, particularly health insurance, legal fees, and governance. On-air fund drives, which bring in over 80 percent of the network’s income, weren’t meeting projected goals, most stations had meager cash reserves, and one – WBAI in New York – was both a half a million behind its target and mired in an internal power struggle that had been building for several years. After the elections, a lawsuit was filed by one faction at WBAI against the network and its representatives.
In early March 2008, Sawaya agreed to return. What changed her mind wasn’t revealed, but the fight over financial control did result in a Board decision to give her the right to directly supervise the national financial staff. Unfortunately, after a three month absence she faced a rapidly worsening picture. Sawaya was frustrated by an organizational structure that was costly and often blocked change. She openly called the approach “unsustainable.”
One of her first major decisions, made with Hicks’ agreement, was to cut the budget for Free Speech Radio News by 25 percent. What shocked Pacificans wasn’t so much the cutback (about $11,000 per month) on an agreement to produce a half hour daily news show that some questioned, but the fact that it was done without prior discussion. Sawaya explained that the financial crunch required strong and immediate action, and the Board decided to let it stand. Her other big decision, the hiring of a new General Manager at KPFK in Log Angeles, was met with more enthusiasm.
The next surprises came in July, just as budgets for the next fiscal year were being developed. The National Board had voted to convene in person that month, but national office management failed to follow up and the meeting had to be cancelled. Then, without explanation, Hicks disappeared from the national office. The Board made no announcement, but news leaked out that he was on “paid leave to deal with family matters.” Later, there were rumors that an investigation of his activities was being pursued, and also that he might sue. Meanwhile, Sawaya assumed responsibility for budget development, pushing for staff and other budget cuts. Managers at some stations responded, others – most notably at WBAI – didn’t.
Sawaya announced her decision to leave again in early August, but asked those who knew not to say anything for a month. At meetings, she meanwhile tried to convince the Board and National Finance Committee that Pacifica needed to act like a network and “centralize” various functions, especially accounting and reporting. Directors listened, but not much changed.
As the national political conventions approached, she turned her attention to Pacifica’s coverage of those events. It had been a high priority for her from the start. But some were surprised by her decision to attend herself at a time when the main business of the network was resolving its financial crisis. What the public didn’t know was that Sawaya had already announced her decision to leave.
Just before she went to Denver, another confrontation further intensified the situation. A volunteer programmer, allegedly “banned” from KPFA, showed up on August 20. The General Manager wasn’t around, but the Business Manager felt that something needed to be done. Calling the National Office next door, she asked for advice from Human Resources Director Dominga Estrada, who advised her to call the police. According to several witnesses, when the cops arrived excessive force was used, and Sawaya herself attempted to block videotaping of the event.
The response was dramatic and deepened the existing divide at the station. Management defended its decision but said it wasn’t responsible for the overreaction of the police. Many volunteers, and some on the staff, saw it as another example of a management team that was out of step with Pacifica’s values and mission. A letter of no confidence in General Manager Lemlem Rijio has since been signed by about 24 people.
In late August, the Human Resources director also decided to leave for a new job elsewhere, effective September 5, and the National Board began to discuss what was now being calling a “national office collapse.” Actually, the term referred to one of several options for how to address the overall problems. One alternative was to struggle on as is, a decision apt to leave a large budget deficit. Another was to cut a few national staff positions and the salaries of others. The third and most radical option was to lay off almost everyone, retaining only enough staff to pay the bills and keep the governance structure functioning. This is one of many decisions the national board will face when it meets in person.
It will also have to decide what to do about Pacifica’s leadership vacuum. Some hope to quickly recruit a new Executive Director. But this process usually takes months, and pending recommendations to re-expand the CFO’s authority and apply strict performance standards to all managers could get in the way.
Another possibility is that Hicks might be asked to step in upon his return, or that Siegel might again be tapped. But Siegel has been criticized for his handling of (and billing for) recent personnel and election-related lawsuits, which have allegedly cost the foundation hundreds of thousands. Hicks has his own critics, and may not even want the job. Another possibility is Ambrose Lane, who served as interim ED before I was hired. Finally, the Board could ask its Chair, Sherry Gendleman, to fill in. But she’s said to be less than enthusiastic about that prospect.
Even if a new chief executive can be found – and the Board overcomes its divisions to agree – there is still the biggest elephant in the room. Pacifica hasn’t figured out how to resolve its current financial crisis, and, even more difficult, restructure its programming and management to reverse a long-term decline in listenership and income.
-- Adapted from a report filed by Greg Guma on Maverick Media
For more information:
http://muckraker-gg.blogspot.com/2008/09/q...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The gigantic elephant in the room is that Pacifica is hamstrung by its burdensome and amateurish boards. The members of the board are elected with no expertise on how non-profits, or any other businesses for that matter, are run. Unlike the boards at practically every other non-profit in the nation, they bring no demonstrable experience or skill sets to the table. Many, if not the majority, of the board members around the country have no interest in righting the financial ship, or making sure that the network is run efficiently and effectively. Some of the board members are committed to putting the interests of the network and its financial well-being ahead of all other considerations, most, however, are not.
Most of the board members are interested in their own selfish desire for control over the network and its programming. They have no interest in fund-raising, promotion, outreach, or audience growth. Most of the board members want to re-program the network to reflect their personal political viewpoints and to eliminate programming they deem not politically doctrinaire enough. The board elections and the local and national meetings cost the network in excess of $500,000 per year. There is virtually no return on that investment in positive action or change. There is no leadership coming from the boards, both local and national, pushing financial well-being and growth. Every call for the board to take the lead on fundraising is met with blank stares and efforts to change the subject.
The solution is to follow the model of practically every other non-profit organization in the country and to have board members appointed on the basis of their expertise in various board functions like financial management, fundraising, event planning, tax and FCC law, et. al. The size of the board should be halved. This would eliminate the costly board elections, which less than 10 percent of the eligible listenership find important enough to participate in. The current system insures that a large proportion of the board would come mainly from those with particular political agenda who see membership on the board as an opportunity to grind personal axes. An expert board would leave aside selfish political concerns and bring sound financial judgments to their decisions. An expert board would evaluate management performance based on objective criteria like success in meeting financial goals and audience growth projections for the year. Adherence to the network's mission would be implicit in a candidate for appointment to the board being eligible for a seat on the board.
These basic changes to the makeup of the Pacifica board would eliminate many of the current financial problems the network now faces and set the network in the direction of working on the remaining problems and even allow the network to set goals for the future. I believe the current board system is what is weighing the organization down and preventing decisions from being implemented. It is the reason why the network can't hire and retain competent personnel at its highest levels because they become frustrated with board inaction and infighting.
Serious moves in the direction of reshaping the board has to happen as soon as possible, or the 59-year-old institution known as Pacifica Radio will cease to exist within the next few years. I write these words knowing full well that no one will take these basic, yet vitally important, steps out of fear of a backlash from a tiny vocal minority of people more concerned with settling old scores and clinging to the past than moving the station forward. The decision must be made soon at the highest levels: Bold action now or more of the same and eventual oblivion.
Most of the board members are interested in their own selfish desire for control over the network and its programming. They have no interest in fund-raising, promotion, outreach, or audience growth. Most of the board members want to re-program the network to reflect their personal political viewpoints and to eliminate programming they deem not politically doctrinaire enough. The board elections and the local and national meetings cost the network in excess of $500,000 per year. There is virtually no return on that investment in positive action or change. There is no leadership coming from the boards, both local and national, pushing financial well-being and growth. Every call for the board to take the lead on fundraising is met with blank stares and efforts to change the subject.
The solution is to follow the model of practically every other non-profit organization in the country and to have board members appointed on the basis of their expertise in various board functions like financial management, fundraising, event planning, tax and FCC law, et. al. The size of the board should be halved. This would eliminate the costly board elections, which less than 10 percent of the eligible listenership find important enough to participate in. The current system insures that a large proportion of the board would come mainly from those with particular political agenda who see membership on the board as an opportunity to grind personal axes. An expert board would leave aside selfish political concerns and bring sound financial judgments to their decisions. An expert board would evaluate management performance based on objective criteria like success in meeting financial goals and audience growth projections for the year. Adherence to the network's mission would be implicit in a candidate for appointment to the board being eligible for a seat on the board.
These basic changes to the makeup of the Pacifica board would eliminate many of the current financial problems the network now faces and set the network in the direction of working on the remaining problems and even allow the network to set goals for the future. I believe the current board system is what is weighing the organization down and preventing decisions from being implemented. It is the reason why the network can't hire and retain competent personnel at its highest levels because they become frustrated with board inaction and infighting.
Serious moves in the direction of reshaping the board has to happen as soon as possible, or the 59-year-old institution known as Pacifica Radio will cease to exist within the next few years. I write these words knowing full well that no one will take these basic, yet vitally important, steps out of fear of a backlash from a tiny vocal minority of people more concerned with settling old scores and clinging to the past than moving the station forward. The decision must be made soon at the highest levels: Bold action now or more of the same and eventual oblivion.
This comment about the boards has a lot of sense to it.
“have board members appointed”
So who would appoint the board members? Obviously the same clique who’ve been working to re-hijack Pacifica. Cronies appointing cronies.
Listener democracy is hardly an easy road, but it sure beats anything else. Difficult though it is, we have to make democracy work at Pacifica.
This is an accurate report of what is happening and what needs to happen. “Democracy” at Pacifica is a failure. The majority of the listeners do not care about it and do not want to be involved. They want just good progressive radio in both public affairs and the arts. The “democracy” of the few who have the time to go to the meetings with their own agendas for programming is a disaster. It has created a boondoggle where nothing can ever happen.
Stop these expensive and ridiculous “elections”, cut the board in half, and get people who know what it means to be on a non-profit board in there, or we will lose it all.
Stop these expensive and ridiculous “elections”, cut the board in half, and get people who know what it means to be on a non-profit board in there, or we will lose it all.
My comment above was in referance to "The obvious" by Hayes. Not the original post.
Contrary to the first posters position that a streamlined all appointed (BY WHOM ? ) board composed of people with special skills would transcind politics and only work for the betterment of the network without any ''political agenda '' , etc, well even ''techies '' have politics !
As the late famed muckraking journalist IF Stone once said '' When someone swears to me that they have no agenda that just confirms to me that they have ---a agenda ! ''
There's nothing wrong per se with having a ''agenda '', that is a set of ideas and beliefs that , in the case of KPFA, that they think would make the station stronger..
The problem arises when a group tries to impose that agenda via managerial dictate as opposed to winning people over to their positions thru the democratic process.
The former is what KPFA mgmt and it's allies on the Station board have attempted to do over the years . Not only has that contradicted what the struggle against the pro-corporate high jackers in 1999 was all about ,the arrogance of those ''entrenched'' and resistance to any real accountabilty (like their stubbon resistance to directors inspections of the finanical records ) ,' has played a major role in bringing about the current criisis at Pacifica .
As the late famed muckraking journalist IF Stone once said '' When someone swears to me that they have no agenda that just confirms to me that they have ---a agenda ! ''
There's nothing wrong per se with having a ''agenda '', that is a set of ideas and beliefs that , in the case of KPFA, that they think would make the station stronger..
The problem arises when a group tries to impose that agenda via managerial dictate as opposed to winning people over to their positions thru the democratic process.
The former is what KPFA mgmt and it's allies on the Station board have attempted to do over the years . Not only has that contradicted what the struggle against the pro-corporate high jackers in 1999 was all about ,the arrogance of those ''entrenched'' and resistance to any real accountabilty (like their stubbon resistance to directors inspections of the finanical records ) ,' has played a major role in bringing about the current criisis at Pacifica .
Of course people have viewpoints. Nobody's arguing that they don't. That's not the point. The point is that members of non-profit boards at every other non-profit in the country, if not the world, have board members who bring skills, knowledge and expertise to the table. Most non-profit bylaws forbid members of the board of directors from directly interfering in the operations of the organization. Those bylaws keep personal agendas from mucking up the process. Managers are hired to run the organization. The boards provide periodic oversight and help set long term goals. That's as it should be or the organization can't function.
As for who appoints the board, do your research. Just about every non-profit board sets up a panel, or search committee made up of current, or former employees, past and present donors, volunteers, et. al. who have a long running connection to the organization and have a long established committment to the organization's mission. They set about recruiting qualified board candidates who bring a wealth of dedication and expertise to the organization and use their specialized knowledge and skills to better the operation. The overwhelming majority of listeners don't care about the daily operations of the organization or the personality conflicts around the organization. They have programs they like to listen to. Those they don't like, they don't listen to. Period end of story.
Numerous channels exist for listener feedback and involvement. Emails, letters and phone calls are solicited from listeners. There is a listener comment line. The network is a California based non-profit corporation, it's non-profit 990 tax form, which has all the relevant financial information one could ever want is public information and available on-line at the state's website.
The wastefulness of the current board structure is killing the organization. The original post describes the dire situation well. Pacifica is spending itself into oblivion and the most egregious wasters of network resources are the boards. As currently constituted they accomplish nothing. They should be restructured along the lines I've suggested or this whole argument will be moot because the organization will cease to exist if something isn't done soon. No exaggeration, it's probably a matter of a year or so tops and Pacifica is history.
As for who appoints the board, do your research. Just about every non-profit board sets up a panel, or search committee made up of current, or former employees, past and present donors, volunteers, et. al. who have a long running connection to the organization and have a long established committment to the organization's mission. They set about recruiting qualified board candidates who bring a wealth of dedication and expertise to the organization and use their specialized knowledge and skills to better the operation. The overwhelming majority of listeners don't care about the daily operations of the organization or the personality conflicts around the organization. They have programs they like to listen to. Those they don't like, they don't listen to. Period end of story.
Numerous channels exist for listener feedback and involvement. Emails, letters and phone calls are solicited from listeners. There is a listener comment line. The network is a California based non-profit corporation, it's non-profit 990 tax form, which has all the relevant financial information one could ever want is public information and available on-line at the state's website.
The wastefulness of the current board structure is killing the organization. The original post describes the dire situation well. Pacifica is spending itself into oblivion and the most egregious wasters of network resources are the boards. As currently constituted they accomplish nothing. They should be restructured along the lines I've suggested or this whole argument will be moot because the organization will cease to exist if something isn't done soon. No exaggeration, it's probably a matter of a year or so tops and Pacifica is history.
First of all, the last time KPFA and Pacifica had an appointed board of "professionals", they plotted to sell off the stations, sued each other, tore KPFA off the air and piped in music from Houston on a T-1 line, called the police on employees (again) and virtually spent the foundation into bankruptcy with private security bills in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
It was the democratization of Pacifica that cleaned that mess up.
Appointing rather than electing is immunity against ... nothing.
What's bankrupting the foundation isn't the elections, which by the way, do NOT cost $500,000 unless they are being deliberately bungled. The last budget
I saw was for about $175,000 and included one-time purchases of vote counting equipment, and divided among the 5 stations, which is about 1% of KPFA's budget. Tops 2% of the budget.
What's bankrupting the foundation is:
A) Repetitively mishandled personnel situations that turn into lawsuits that are consistently settled out of court with large payouts. This is coupled with unpublicized severance packages paid to disgruntled employees who threaten to sue on their way out. Millions, folks, between all 5 stations. Due to
management hires for "radio skills" instead of "managerial skills", a corporate counsel who plays political games, and the utter failure of the managers running the stations to implement reasonable personnel policies and apply them fairly.
B) The melt-down of the New York station, whose heavily black nationalist programming has largely alienated the former WBAI audience and failed to bring in a replacement audience to pay the station's bills. This has resulted in culmulative, multi-year losses and debts. These losses have been papered over for years.
The opposed-to-democratization folks (who go by the JUC in NY and Concerned Listeners in Berkeley) have been the dominant faction who have presided for the last few years over poor hiring decisions, the NYC meltdown, and a long sequence of lawsuits and severance balloons. They have frustrated every attempt by the pro-democratization folks to inspect the books, make cost cuts long-needed, and settle lawsuits (and there's another one coming in Berkeley from the Foster incident, no doubt).
Then they turn around and blame the problems on institutional democracy.
The reality is quite different.
Institutional democracy may be the only way to clear out these hacks, get rid of the cronyism that is killing the place and find managers who know how to manage. The current dominant faction is failing ... big-time ... and allowing them to continue appointing themselves into infinity will mean the prompt destruction of the network.
No doubt about it.
It was the democratization of Pacifica that cleaned that mess up.
Appointing rather than electing is immunity against ... nothing.
What's bankrupting the foundation isn't the elections, which by the way, do NOT cost $500,000 unless they are being deliberately bungled. The last budget
I saw was for about $175,000 and included one-time purchases of vote counting equipment, and divided among the 5 stations, which is about 1% of KPFA's budget. Tops 2% of the budget.
What's bankrupting the foundation is:
A) Repetitively mishandled personnel situations that turn into lawsuits that are consistently settled out of court with large payouts. This is coupled with unpublicized severance packages paid to disgruntled employees who threaten to sue on their way out. Millions, folks, between all 5 stations. Due to
management hires for "radio skills" instead of "managerial skills", a corporate counsel who plays political games, and the utter failure of the managers running the stations to implement reasonable personnel policies and apply them fairly.
B) The melt-down of the New York station, whose heavily black nationalist programming has largely alienated the former WBAI audience and failed to bring in a replacement audience to pay the station's bills. This has resulted in culmulative, multi-year losses and debts. These losses have been papered over for years.
The opposed-to-democratization folks (who go by the JUC in NY and Concerned Listeners in Berkeley) have been the dominant faction who have presided for the last few years over poor hiring decisions, the NYC meltdown, and a long sequence of lawsuits and severance balloons. They have frustrated every attempt by the pro-democratization folks to inspect the books, make cost cuts long-needed, and settle lawsuits (and there's another one coming in Berkeley from the Foster incident, no doubt).
Then they turn around and blame the problems on institutional democracy.
The reality is quite different.
Institutional democracy may be the only way to clear out these hacks, get rid of the cronyism that is killing the place and find managers who know how to manage. The current dominant faction is failing ... big-time ... and allowing them to continue appointing themselves into infinity will mean the prompt destruction of the network.
No doubt about it.
What got Pacifica into today's financial crisis is the CFO's cover up of the Foundation's finance. There was so many money paid to "Contractors" or "Consultants" over the years. Money was eaten up little by little and the CFO was covering up all with his projection Financial Statements. An insider has brought up the evidences to the Board and was shot down by a committee formed by the CFO's best friends. He will be back soon. After Nicole's leaving, everything will back to the same business as before.
Pacifica's funded by the listener's hard earn money, and they have every right to know what happened to their money.
Pacifica's funded by the listener's hard earn money, and they have every right to know what happened to their money.
Anonymous is flat wrong. The elections and the meetings cost in excess of $500,000. The meetings at all five stations and the four times yearly national meetings, which include airfare, food and hotel for the bloated national board. It is the boards that are bringing the stations to ruin. They don't raise money. I'll repeat that: A NON-PROFIT BOARD THAT DOESN"T RAISE MONEY! Have you ever heard of anything so ridiculous. They're really good at eating the food and flying on the planes and staying at the hotels all on the network's dime.
The previous appointed board was not made up of experts, or professionals. The appointments were made for political reasons. Nothing more. None of those people knew what they were doing. I've already outlined ways in which you can avoid politically motivated appointments without these idiotic elections. It will require bylaws changes directing the board to keep out of the day-to-day operations of the station and its programming. It will have the power to oversee management periodically, maybe twice a year. The reviews won't be based on political litmus tests. They will be based on how the management is running the network, keeping it on budget and meeting fund raising and listener growth goals. That's IT! Period! End of Story! Anything else brings the chaos and nonsense we currently have.
The current boards aren't cleaning anything up. It is they who've hired the people who are screwing up WBAI. It is they who were elected by a tiny fraction of the audience. Most listeners don't care a whit about the petty internal squabbling at these stations. They have programs they like and others they don't. They give to support the programs they like and the network's overall mission.
The current boards refuse to fund raise. Refuse to outreach in the community, put on events or try in anyway to increase the station's listenership. The current board structure is a millstone around the neck of the network and will lead to its eventual destruction.
The previous appointed board was not made up of experts, or professionals. The appointments were made for political reasons. Nothing more. None of those people knew what they were doing. I've already outlined ways in which you can avoid politically motivated appointments without these idiotic elections. It will require bylaws changes directing the board to keep out of the day-to-day operations of the station and its programming. It will have the power to oversee management periodically, maybe twice a year. The reviews won't be based on political litmus tests. They will be based on how the management is running the network, keeping it on budget and meeting fund raising and listener growth goals. That's IT! Period! End of Story! Anything else brings the chaos and nonsense we currently have.
The current boards aren't cleaning anything up. It is they who've hired the people who are screwing up WBAI. It is they who were elected by a tiny fraction of the audience. Most listeners don't care a whit about the petty internal squabbling at these stations. They have programs they like and others they don't. They give to support the programs they like and the network's overall mission.
The current boards refuse to fund raise. Refuse to outreach in the community, put on events or try in anyway to increase the station's listenership. The current board structure is a millstone around the neck of the network and will lead to its eventual destruction.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$210.00 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