<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>No one is talking about inspecting members info beyond figuring out how many members there are and how many members there were 9 years ago. Just trying to figure out what percentage of the membership and how much membership dues KZYX has lost in this time period. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">It is my understanding that when you join a nonprofit, other members get to know your address in case they want to discuss with you about how the non-profit is being managed. Members basically have access to the membership list for this purpose. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">In any case, the bylaws of MCPB allow for the possibility of a membership meeting that can take place creating a quorum that supersedes the board. To call a membership meeting requires 5% of the members to sign off on the idea. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">How can we call a membership meeting if we cannot contact the membership? Attempts to do so have run into stringent opposition by the current board who have made the process prohibitively expensive. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">The inspection for me is to clear up exactly what has been going on financially over the last 9 years at MCPB. I would like to understand exactly what happened in 2007 when the station's income plummeted by almost $200k a year and stayed there until the CPB started giving the station an extra $100k in subsidy to make up enough of the difference to keep the station afloat. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">I am especially interested in understanding what "contributions" kept the station afloat in 2010 when the station was about to go under. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">I would also like to learn how much money was set aside for the Ukiah studio that was later spent on other things. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">For me, most of the questions are ones left over from when I was on the board. I just want to figure out exactly how the station became financially viable though since 2007 membership dues, underwriting and events income are down by at least 30%. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">The bylaws specifically state that all the information I am asking for be given to any member upon request. The fact that the current board is apparently going to make me sue them for it makes me wonder what they trying to hide and why. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">When I was on the board it had been rendered a dog and pony show. We followed none of the policies or bylaws that we were required by law to adhere to. As a result, staff was able to run the station with no oversight and no transparency. I just want to take the time to do the job I should have done when I was on the board and answer some longstanding questions that myself and other members have interest in. </div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Doug McKenty</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Oct 3, 2015, at 8:58 PM, Rob <<a href="mailto:robotech@mcn.org">robotech@mcn.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Not sure that I read this whole thing all of the way and followed
every part but:<br>
<pre wrap="">"demand for inspection of the membership rolls" --???
</pre>
For me, as a member I don't really want other members "inspecting"
my role. I am a member; and as far as I am concerned that is that -
but no one really needs to know that.<br>
Clearly late now as I write this - but....<br>
<br>
My point is - I don't really want other members "inspecting" info
about me (as a member) - <br>
<br>
What is this "inspection" hoping to accomplish? That does not seem
clear to me. - But there is a lot in this email here.....<br>
I just think people should chill out....<br>
<br>
"2. Thank you for acknowledging a director's absolute right to
inspect any document under Corporations Code Section
6334.......Further, any non-disclosure agreement must be limited to
records that cannot otherwise be inspected by members,"<br>
<br>
What exactly are these folks hoping to inspect? What are they
looking for? <br>
<br>
"The purpose of the demand by the members is to review all financial
transactions and data, and all membership and voting records and
data, from the year prior to the employment of the current general
manager, Mr. John Coate, up to and including the date of inspection,
as there has been inadequate oversight by the board of directors
concerning finances, memberships, and elections during his tenure.
The membership has a legitimate interest in the financial affairs of
the corporation and the integrity of the voting rolls and election
process."
<br>
<br>
"membership and voting records and data"<br>
<br>
REALLY? - Not sure I am comfortable with that - I dont want my
government checking in on my voting record! Why would I want other
members looking at my station voting records? - non-disclosure
agreement or not!? <br>
<br>
I <i>get</i> that people want to make sure that things are "okay"
and no one is stealing / whatever from the station etc - I will
applaud that - but lets keep things under control with a level head
here people...<br>
<br>
"MCPB policies authorize the Board of Directors to name volunteer
members to board committees. The Board should consider naming some
of the signers to certain committees - e.g., Mr. McKenty to the
Finance Committee - as a way of engaging with the membership,
promoting transparency of governance, and avoiding the need for
future inspection demands."<br>
<br>
Ideas are good - there are board meetings to propose ideas and
suggest changes to things - right? - so members can talk to the
board etc - Seems like some of this is going beyond that - <br>
<br>
As a member I just like the good music, news, community discussions,
and local people / stuff etc...<br>
<br>
I am sure that we can all figure out a way to get along, without
inspecting members info right?.....<br>
<br>
Not trying to start / enter into the frey of the discussion here -
just want to voice my opinion as a member.<br>
<br>
Whaddya say?<br>
<br>
:)<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">R.</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/3/15 12:00 PM,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kzyxtalk-request@lists.mcn.org">kzyxtalk-request@lists.mcn.org</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:mailman.15.1443898809.6082.kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Send Kzyxtalk mailing list submissions to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk">http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk</a>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kzyxtalk-request@lists.mcn.org">kzyxtalk-request@lists.mcn.org</a>
You can reach the person managing the list at
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kzyxtalk-owner@lists.mcn.org">kzyxtalk-owner@lists.mcn.org</a>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Kzyxtalk digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. KZYX Inspection, Philo Oct 7 at 1pm (King Collins)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 19:38:58 -0700
From: King Collins <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:King@greenmac.com"><King@greenmac.com></a>
Subject: [Kzyxtalk] KZYX Inspection, Philo Oct 7 at 1pm
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a>
Cc: Parents for Peace <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parentsforpeace@yahoogroups.com"><parentsforpeace@yahoogroups.com></a>,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:discussion@lists.mcn.org">discussion@lists.mcn.org</a>
Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:92E86532-15A4-452E-8A85-E43EEBB8440E@greenmac.com"><92E86532-15A4-452E-8A85-E43EEBB8440E@greenmac.com></a>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Oct 2, 2015
Dear Mr. Campbell and Ms. Courtney:
Thank you for your email of September 5 concerning our demand for inspection of documents. In it, you state that your current position concerning the inspection is the same as your initial response of June 23, wherein you asserted that you could delay the inspection until you had hired a general manager and that our rights of inspection were more restricted than we claimed.
Please refer to our response of June 26, copied below. In it, we explained how your restrictions have no basis in the law. As for a delay, the organization has had plenty of time to prepare for the inspection, a total of four months by the time it happens. You have not identified any specific record that cannot be made available for inspection by October 7.
We intend to proceed with the inspection on October 7, beginning at 1:00pm, at the Philo office. It is not clear from your letter that you intend to refuse access at that time. Pursuant to the Corporations Code, you would need a court order to do so. Otherwise you will be in violation of California law, our own bylaws, and your duty to comply with both.
We thank you in advance for facilitating the inspection on October 7.
Doug McKenty
John Sakowicz
King Collins
Norm de Valle
Peter Kafin
* * * *.
June 26, 2015
Mr. Campbell:
Thank you for your email of June 23, 2015, responding to our written demand of June 9 for the inspection of documents. We disagree with your analysis.
1. The right of a member to inspect and copy records is not based solely on California Corporations Code Section 6330, which authorizes the inspection of membership records. There is also Section 6333, which states:
"6333. The accounting books and records and minutes of proceedings of the members and the board and committees of the board shall be open to inspection upon the written demand on the corporation of any member at any reasonable time, for a purpose reasonably related to such person's interests as a member."
In addition, the Bylaws of Mendocino County Public Broadcasting grant members the right to inspect any records that are not personnel records or otherwise protected by law:
"Member Inspection Rights:
Members shall have the right at all reasonable times to inspect all of MCPB?s records which are or should be maintained at the principal office except personnel records and other items that would violate the privacy of a specific individual or are otherwise protected under Federal or California law."
Thus the members' right to inspect does indeed extend to the categories of documents enumerated in the demand.
Please note that the Board of Directors does not have the power to amend the Bylaws to diminish any rights granted to members. Only a vote of the membership can do that. If you wish to oppose the demand, Corporations Code Section 6331 requires you to file a petition in Mendocino County Superior Court. Under Section 6336, any director or officer who does not comply with the demand can be punished for contempt of court. Under Section 6337, the organization can be held liable for members' reasonable costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, in connection with any related legal proceedings.
2. Thank you for acknowledging a director's absolute right to inspect any document under Corporations Code Section 6334. Because the volume of documents may be too great for any one person to inspect, Mr. Sakowicz may be accompanied by an agent or attorney to assist him. Since any given record will be inspected by the director or his attorney/agent, he will be in compliance with Section 6311 regarding such assistance. Further, any non-disclosure agreement must be limited to records that cannot otherwise be inspected by members, i.e., "personnel records and other items that would violate the privacy of a specific individual or are otherwise protected under Federal or California law." The Code does not require anyone to sign a blanket non-disclosure agreement as a condition for inspecting records, nor will they.
3. Your objection concerning a need to create records is misplaced. As stated in the Demand Letter:
"Please also note that a failure to present any of the requested items does not relieve you of the duty to make any and all of the other requested items available for inspection and/or copying. We are not asking you to create any summaries. But we do want access to all of the documents that are related to the above list, including any existing summaries, as part of the inspection of all records from 2007 to the date of inspection."
See also #6 below concerning your request for a delay.
4. To the extent you have already produced specific documents to Mr. Sakowicz in response to a prior demand, you do not need to provide duplicates. This exception does not apply if any member has demanded the same information.
5. The alternatives you have offered to Messrs. Collins and O'Brien concerning their prior demands to inspect the membership rolls are unreasonable and too expensive. They are based on an incorrect reading of a statute that bars releasing such information to third parties. Members are not third parties. In any event, prior efforts and negotiations are not a waiver of a member's right to inspect.
The efforts of Messrs. Sakowicz, Collins, and O'Brien to try to resolve the current crisis at MCPB/KZYX through negotiation with the board and discussion with the membership are not signs of bad faith but rather an attempt to avoid litigation. Do not confuse patience and reason with weakness and ill-will.
6. We see no need at this time to delay the inspection. As noted above, the failure to have all records available by July 11 does not relieve you of the duty to allow inspection of those records that are available at that time. If for any reason certain records are not available that the director or members believe are essential, then arrangements can be made to inspect them at a later time. Asking us to wait until four weeks after some unspecified date is too uncertain. However, we will consider a later date once the full board has met and considered this reply.
7. As noted above, you do not need to produce the same documents to Mr. Sakowicz twice. But the Demand Letter is more comprehensive and includes demands for inspection by members, demands which stand alone. There is no "condition precedent" that must be met before MCPB complies with the current demand.
8. Because Mr. Sakowicz has an absolute right of inspection as a director, his intentions are not an issue. The only time intent is an issue is if you believe that the members' demand for access to membership information under Sections 6330 is for reasons not related to their interests as members. If you believe so, then your remedy, as noted above, is to file a petition with the Superior Court to have that particular demand set aside. But the members do have a legitimate reason for their demand, as stated in the Demand Letter:
"The purpose of the demand by the members is to review all financial transactions and data, and all membership and voting records and data, from the year prior to the employment of the current general manager, Mr. John Coate, up to and including the date of inspection, as there has been inadequate oversight by the board of directors concerning finances, memberships, and elections during his tenure. The membership has a legitimate interest in the financial affairs of the corporation and the integrity of the voting rolls and election process."
9. Thank you for your willingness to consider the proposals set forth by Mr. O'Brien, one of the Demand Letter signers. If you adopt those specific proposals before July 10, he will drop his demand for inspection of the membership rolls, and will encourage the other signers to do likewise. However, this will have no effect on the demand to inspect and possibly copy all other records, including financial. Mr. O'Brien looks forward to working with the new Committee on Bylaws and Policies. MCPB policies authorize the Board of Directors to name volunteer members to board committees. The Board should consider naming some of the signers to certain committees - e.g., Mr. McKenty to the Finance Committee - as a way of engaging with the membership, promoting transparency of governance, and avoiding the need for future inspection demands.
Thank you again for you detailed response. Please make sure that the full board has time to consider this reply before it meets next Monday. We hope that the full board will acknowledge our right of inspection and take positive steps to address the underlying concerns. If it does, we will consider a delay. If not, then we will be at the main office on July 11 to proceed with the inspection. Please do not remove any records or take any other action that might hinder the process.
Sincerely,
John Sakowicz
Doug McKenty
King Collins
Norm de Valle
Dennis O'Brien
* * * *
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Kzyxtalk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk">http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk</a>
End of Kzyxtalk Digest, Vol 21, Issue 2
***************************************
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Kzyxtalk mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org">Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk">http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>