Silence from Pacifica on recall vote; Pacifica overrules KPFA board on budget

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/pacifica_recall_oversight/

. . . A response to [the latest] email blast sent out by the group that calls itself Save KPFA (and used to call itself Concerned Listeners).

There is a phrase used by Project Censored called a "truth emergency".
. . . . . it seems we have a truth emergency of our own. . . . .
I tried to reconcile this version of events with anything that really happened and it can't be done.
So in the interests of basic truth-based communication, let's address some of these *allegations* one-by-one.

1) Save KPFA claims that Pacifica has been *silent* on the recall for over a month. "The response from Pacifica? Complete silence. KPFA staff confirm Pacifica has finally turned over the signatures for validation against KPFA's member database"

[There is] an e-mail from the LSB-secretary Craig Alderson, a Save KPFA-affiliated individual, confirming that he did not drop off the signed petitions until after October 8th and another where he states that Pacifica's response is expected by October 26th. (Note that it is not yet October 26th) [at the time this was written]. You will also note that board vice-chair Conn Hallinan was copied on Alderson's second email, making it clear that he email blast is a dishonest attack on Pacifica [there was no "silence", and Conn of S/K knew that Andrew the GM was contacted].


From: Secretary KPFA LSB [mailto:secretary.kpfalsb [at] gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2011 2:12 PM
To: Andrew Philips
Cc: Arlene Engelhardt
Subject: Re: Recall

Andrew,
Please let me know when I can bring these by. [petitions]
Thanks, Craig

From: Secretary KPFA LSB [mailto:secretary.kpfalsb [at] gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 10:56 PM
To: Andrew Philips
Cc: Arlene Engelhardt; summer [at] pacifica.org; Conn Hallinan
Subject: Recall procedure

Andrew,
As we discussed earlier today, the procedure adopted by the PNB in 2009 is below. The relevant section at this moment is #2, according to which you have 10 working days (not calendar days) in which to certifythe petition. That would make the deadline October 26, which is about what you figured. Once you get the report from Chris Stehlik, you'llneed to forward that to me with a statement of how many signatures are required (i.e., equal to 2% of the current membership) and how many validated. The timeline for the election is calculated from the date you notify me. So that's where we are.
Thanks,
Craig Alderson KPFA LSB secretary


I couldn't say it any better myself, Craig. That's where we are. Can anybody say "retraction" for this out and out lie? [about "silence"]

2) Save KPFA claims the legal opinion obtained is bizarre and a manipulation

The attorney in question is Betsy Adler, a founding partner of the well-regarded law firm Adler and Colvin (formerly Silk, Adler and
Colvin) one of the acknowledged experts in not for profit law practice nationwide. Here are some snippets from her resume:

"Ms. Adler has served on the IRS Advisory Committee for Tax-Exempt and Governmental Entities and the advisory board of the National Center for Philanthropy and Law at New York University. She is a member of the Board of Trustees of the University of California Santa Cruz Foundation and the Board of Directors of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law. A past chair of the Exempt Organizations Committee of the ABA Tax Section, Ms. Adler has also taught the law of nonprofit organizations at Boalt Hall and the University of San Francisco. In 2011, Ms. Adler received the Vanguard Award from the Business Law Section of the American Bar Association, honoring her distinguished lifetime contribution and commitment to nonprofit law."

In summary the opinion states "However, on this point it is clear that a majority of the Listener Members affiliated with KPFA, as of the relevant record date, must vote for the removal of a Delegate elected by that member class in order for the removal to be effective. The affirmative vote of a majority of ballots cast is not sufficient".

3) Save KPFA Claims "Staff Cuts Loom"

That is quite an astonishing claim as the salary and benefit allotment in KPFA's budget for the 2012 fiscal year is EXACTLY THE SAME as the amount spent (and budgeted) for 2011. 1.8 million dollars. No more and no less.

4) Save KPFA Claims They Found a $300,000 Error in the Budget and the Mean Old PNB Took It Away

It is true that Save KPFA treasurer Barbara Whipperman amazingly claimed after the KPFA local board had approved a budget that she had *found* $300,000. Turned out that what was *found* was a mathematics error that left out some website income and added the pledges KPFA collects for sister station KFCF in Fresno and sends directly to them - pledges that constitute the majority of their income. After someone checked it out, the net change was zip. The same 2.6 million in pledge drive donations that was in the approved budget in the first place.

No cuts. Just no imaginary income. That is how two years of $600,000 losses aren't repeated for a 3rd and 4th consecutive year. You don't make stuff up.

Now that we've got all this straightened out, lets get back to the business of changing the world for the better.
. . . . . . . . . .
Peace,
Tracy Rosenberg
KPFA Listener Representative
Pacifica Foundation Listener Representative. and Board Treasurer

The original recall petition is a tissue of lies. You will no longer find it online.
Here is the text of the original petition, with responses by Tracy Rosenberg [and myself]:

"Petition to Remove Tracy Rosenberg from KPFA’s Local Station Board"

"We, as members of KPFA, call for a vote to remove KPFA Listener Delegate Tracy Rosenberg for actions adverse to the best interests of KPFA and the Pacifica Foundation. In her partisan quest to eliminate her opponents within KPFA, Rosenberg has created legal liabilities for the foundation, undermined KPFA’s fundraising, attacked its union, and destroyed KPFA’s most popular local program, The Morning Show."

"• DESTRUCTION OF KPFA’S MORNING SHOW. While serving as a member of the Pacifica National Board, Rosenberg drew up and presented to Pacifica management a list of staff to purge from the station in September 2010. That list included Morning Show co-hosts Aimee Allison and Brian Edwards-Tiekert, as well as Evening News co-anchor John Hamilton – all critics of Rosenberg’s board faction. As The Morning Show was KPFA’s most listened-to local program, and its largest fundraiser; and as Rosenberg’s list broke the seniority provisions of KPFA’s union contract, Rosenberg clearly placed her partisan interest in eliminating her opponents, above her concern for the well-being of the institution on whose board she serves.
KPFA’s staff union warned that a board member’s involvement in hand-picking staff to eliminate constituted “tortious interference” in KPFA’s union contract. Nevertheless, Pacifica pressed ahead with Rosenberg’s hit-list and laid off Brian Edwards-Tiekert and Aimee Allison in breach of KPFA’s union contract. After spending over $30,000 on an anti-union law firm to defend its actions, Pacifica was forced to reinstate Brian Edwards-Tiekert with back-pay."

Tracy:
1) The first charge has something to do with "drawing up a list" for last fall's layoffs. To be clear, the only list I am aware of is the union seniority list, which was not "drawn up" by me, but exists quite independently of me. The most dozen recent hires would have been the dozen employees on the lower half of the list (that is what seniority means). They are the ones who might have been affected by layoffs as Pacifica struggled to address KPFA's two years of $500,000+ operating deficits for the fiscal years ending 9/30/2009 and 9/30/2010 and return the unit to operational solvency.
[ my comment: Edwards-Tiekert always had the option to "bump" Hamilton - and finally did so when it became clear the union & court would not uphold the S/K bogus complaints. Pacifica was 'forced to' give him back pay because that was cheaper than more litigation.]

"The elimination of KPFA’s Morning Show has, according to web listening statistics and audience research data, cost KPFA dearly in terms of audience. Morning drive-time pledges during the Winter 2011 fund drive fell nearly $140,000 compared with the prior year. At that rate, the cost to KPFA of Rosenberg’s actions can reasonably be estimated at roughly $500,000 in pledges per year."
Tracy:
2) KPFA has increased or matched its listener support numbers over last year in the May 2011 fund drive, the February 2011 fund drive and the December 2010 fund drive. (Those are the 3 fund drives that occurred after the change in the 8am programming).

KPFA has currently raised 78% of projected 2011 listener support at the 67% point in the year (as of May 31st which is 8 months into a 12 month fiscal year).

KPFA has already raised 84% of the listener support total for the previous 12 month period of 10/1/2009 to 9/30/2010, when it posted an operating loss of $585,000.

KPFA's financial position as of May 31 2011 is at least $550,000 improved from the financial position of May 31, 2010.

"• ELECTION FRAUD. In January 2011, the Local Boards at KPFA and KPFK elected representatives to the Pacifica National Board who represented a challenge to the majority held by Rosenberg’s faction. Rosenberg brought two motions before the Pacifica National Board to overturn those elections under fraudulent auspices and for specious reasons.
Specifically, she circumvented the notice requirements of Pacifica’s bylaws by misrepresenting her motions, in writing, as the work-product of a board committee that had not even met to consider them. The passage of those motions permitted incumbent members of the Pacifica National board to illegally extend their terms of office, thus preserving the power of the faction that backed removal of KPFA’s Morning Show.
Rosenberg’s actions triggered two lawsuits against the Pacifica Foundation. Defending them cost the Foundation significant money. Both of Rosenberg’s motions were ultimately overturned by court injunction."
Tracy:
3) The motion the petition refers to was not written by me. It was authored by then-Houston PNB director Richard Uzzell. Then-PNB chair George Reiter asked me to introduce the motion under the Coordinating Committee report section of the meeting as the chair of the committee, so I did. His reasoning was the motion was time-sensitive and as an earlier Coordinating committee motion had expired, this motion needed to be dealt with by the board in a timely manner. As with any motion presented to the full board, the motion was subject to a vote by the Pacifica National Board. It passed.
[my comment: Strange that S/K is so concerned about costly lawsuits, when they have filed so many bogus ones expensive to Pacifica themselves]

"• EMAIL THEFT AND MISREPRESENTATION. Rosenberg misappropriated a list of KPFA members’ personal email addresses, moved it to a server account controlled by an outside nonprofit that she directs, and used it to spam KPFA members with emails purporting to be from KPFA to promote the new Morning Mix program. Her action violated KPFA’s written email use policy; it triggered complaints from KPFA members; and it also undermined KPFA members’ faith in the ability of the Pacifica Foundation to safeguard their private information, which can be expected to lead to a drop in donations. She has been censured by KPFA’s Local Station Board for these actions."
Tracy:
4) The email question has already been exhaustively discussed here [on IndyBay], but in a nutshell, the email was designed and authored by KPFA staff, provided only information about upcoming and archived shows and directed people to the KPFA website to make donations, which about 20 people did. I believe KPFA should be sending promotional emails on an ongoing basis to subscribers and I hope it will become institutionalized. What should be promoted is programming, not internal politics and board members sniping at each other. That is not a healthy outreach strategy :)
[ My comment: This was an honest mistake; the mailing was done for station support, not attack. It could have been taken care of with a discussion, not a recall!]

"When KPFA’s listeners elected Tracy Rosenberg to her present office, they did not elect her on a platform of election fraud, email theft, and purging The Morning Show. Since that is the course of action she has pursued, we ask that she be removed from office."
Tracy:
KPFA still has plenty of challenges ahead, but it is in much better shape than it was a year ago and that is good news. Wasting time and money on a lie-based recall campaign is simply hurtful to the station and should be rejected. It will weaken the financial position, exacerbate internal conflicts that need to chill out already, and distract the workers and volunteers and management staff and local and national boards from the productive work of programming, technology and fund development that needs to be done to ensure the future of this precious outlet.
[My comment: The recall is because this faction which aims to be the only decision makers at KPFA could not allow layoffs needed to save the station and network. All the other stations and Pacifica National itself went through their own mandated layoffs.]

So watch what you sign!
The Concerned Listener/KPFAworker/SaveKPFA faction has been manipulating listeners with disinformation to get them to support its self-serving aims, to the detriment of the station and entire network. They have chosen Tracy as their target, in a situation where they are losing throughout the rest of the network, and she, as a member of the National Finance Committee, has the understanding of the true financial picture and the manipulations which they were/are involved in, which almost brought the network down.

Further reading:
Also see "Who Actually Saved KPFA" at
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2011/07/19/18685256.php
For more from the "other side " see:

Maybe this has been pointed out here before, but I find it interesting that the poster of this apparently erroneous comment (Pacifica's alleged delay in processing the recall petition) will not put her/his name on it. If this is a good faith part of a political/organizational dispute, why hide the author's name?