<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff">Dear Dennis:</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff">I have been thinking about publicly informing the KZYX Board of Directors that unless they are willing to meet monthly and also immediately establish the PAC along with standard Board committees (finance, planning, fund raising, etc), they ought to all resign in an orderly fashion.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff">The Board's unwillingness to act like a real Board is a disgrace to our community and make a travesty of our important community station.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff">Your thoughts?</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff">Richard</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;color:#0000ff"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div style="text-align:center"><div style="text-align:center"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,153);font-size:x-small"><font face="times new roman, serif">Richard Louis Miller, M.A., Ph.D.</font></span></div><div style="text-align:center"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,153);font-size:x-small"><font face="times new roman, serif">Clinical Psychology</font></span></div></div><div style="text-align:center"><font size="1" color="#000099" face="times new roman, serif">Wikipedia: Dr Richard Louis Miller</font></div><div style="text-align:center"><font size="1" color="#000099" face="times new roman, serif">Wikipedia: Wilbur Hot Springs</font></div><div style="text-align:center"><div><font size="1" color="#000099" face="times new roman, serif">MindBodyHealthPolitics.org</font></div><div><font color="#000099" face="'times new roman', serif" size="1">Psychepedia.org</font></div></div><br><br><br><font color="#000066"><br></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:48 AM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dennisobrien@sharejerusalem.com" target="_blank">dennisobrien@sharejerusalem.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div style="font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div style="font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,sans-serif;font-size:16px">To the MCPB/KZYX Board of Directors:<div><div><div><div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div dir="ltr"><br clear="none"></div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Below
is my reply concerning the proposals for amending the Election and
Board Policies. I am sending this to
each director to make sure it can be considered before next week's
meeting, as there have been reports that the public is
unable to reach the full board using the address on the website, i.e.,
that the communications are being "filtered". Unfortunately, I will be having minor surgery on my back that
day and will be unable to attend. If anyone has any questions or wishes
to discuss the proposals, please contact me.</div></div><div dir="ltr"><div><br clear="none"></div><div>Sincerely,</div><div>Dennis O'Brien</div><div>Member<br clear="none"></div></div><div dir="ltr"><br clear="none"></div>The
following proposals were sent to MCPB/KZYX Board of Directors on
September 23, 2015, asking for specific changes to the written Policies
and Procedures for the Board and for Elections. The responses by Board
President Meg Courtney are in italics, followed by my replies. The
first six proposals concern elections, the last six communications.
They will be presented to the full board for possible action at the
November 2 meeting.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">1. Allow members who join in January and February to vote in the election that year by <b>extending the deadline for voting eligibility from December 31 to February 28</b> (the list is certified March 1).<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>This
is problematic. It takes Diane a fair amount of time to come up with a
complete and accurate list of members who are eligible to vote. Neither
our membership database (Donor Perfect) nor our accounting systems are
set up so that we can get that information with just a few mouse clicks.
There are quite a few parameters to consider, and it takes consultation
with the staff to make sure that all volunteers are included. So,
practically speaking, we could not delay the process as long as Dennis
suggests and still have time to get the list, create the mail merge for
the letters, ballots, etc., order the printing of all the materials
(envelopes, different colored paper, etc.) and get this all put together
in a timely way to meet the timings for the candidate forum and voting
window. It just seems like a lot of work & disruption for dubious
benefit.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Although
the logistics of maintaining a membership database must always be
considered, it is difficult to imagine that any of the tasks that you
describe would take two months to complete. Given proper management,
all of the information could be entered and ready to finalize at the end
of February, with perhaps the addition of a few last-minute
memberships. Not having an automated database that can do this
instantly suggests that our current data storage system needs to be
reviewed and possibly replaced.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Even
if the above tasks cannot be automated, it would not take more than a
week to manually prepare a list. Thus there is no reason that the
deadline for becoming a member-eligible-to-vote should be any earlier
than February 21. This would not create any additional work, as all the
memberships need to be input anyway. And it would not be a disruption
to work, as there is plenty of time between now and then to spread out
the necessary tasks.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Nor
are the benefits “dubious”. By generating more interest in the
station, its policies, and the candidates for the board, the later
eligibility date will increase total memberships and increase member
participation/engagement in station governance. Both of these goals are
enshrined in our bylaws and in the laws/regulations that govern
membership nonprofits and public radio stations. <br clear="none"><br clear="none">2. <b>Publicly announce the availability of Simple Living and Volunteer memberships</b> during the election period, including the winter membership pledge drive and the January mailing to the members.<br clear="none"><i><br clear="none">Both
of these get announced at various times and places. We do not want to
make a big deal out of either one, because frankly, we are seeking
higher paying memberships. People tend to give what is asked for. There
really is no good reason to make it more public than it already is, and
certainly not announce it in print mailings or during a pledge drive
when we are trying to maximize our income.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">This
is a moral question for the board and the organization. By your
statement, you are placing the bottom line ahead of the fulfillment of
the individual listener and maximum public involvement in public radio.
For many of us, that is simply wrong. It is certainly contrary to our
bylaws and regulations which encourage us to maximize public
participation. In addition, your assumption that announcing the simple
living and volunteer memberships will reduce income is unsupported by
any statistics. We may very well increase income from having more
members, enough to offset any who choose to pay the lower amount.
Having more members on the books will also encourage funding sources
like the CPB to increase funding. Finally, a station that is honest and
open about its member’s options is more likely to retain a core of
loyal members. There’s a lot to be said for the economic benefit of
doing things morally right. If we at least tried it for a year and
compared the results the board could make a more informed decision.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">3. <b>Facilitate communication between candidates and the media/public</b>
by asking candidates for their email addresses and permission to
disclose to any media or other person/group seeking to contact them.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>Because
people are running for election to a non-profit Board does not make
them public figures, necessarily, nor eliminate their right to some
privacy. Anyone who really wanted to get in touch with a candidate could
do so through the office, and I see no reason to make this change. What
is the real benefit to the station?</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">During
last year’s election, when the media contacted the station in order to
contact the candidates, management refused to provide contact
information. Therefore, your statement that the media “could do so
through the office” is historically inaccurate. Asking candidates for
their permission to release contact information addresses any privacy
concerns. Indeed, if it is really your position that the media/public
can get this information from the office, then you MUST obtain
permission from the candidates to release it. The real benefit to the
station is an increase in public awareness and participation, and an
increase in information for members to make an informed vote. These
serve the goals of increased membership and member engagement, as noted
above.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">4. <b>Provide written notice of the annual membership meeting</b> with the election materials.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>Sure, we could add that into the letter, and/or on the ballot.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Thank
you very much for agreeing to do so. Two years ago, when I pointed out
that such notice was required by state law, the then-President and
General Manager spent a lot of time and energy in opposition. In order
to make sure that future boards/staff do things properly, I again ask
that you memorialize this decision by amending our Election Policy.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">5. <b>Prohibit use of the organization's resources by board and staff for campaigning</b> for or against any board candidate.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>In
principle, there is no problem with this. However, would it prohibit
staff from expressing their preferences in private emails or on phone
calls to members they happen to know. It would be impossible to sort out
the source of that contact information. We could prohibit any staff
member from using our database to look up a member’s contact information
in DPO for purposes of campaigning, but the GM, for instance, has lots
of member’s contact information in their personal phone and personal
email address book. Some is gotten from them personally, but some is a
result of station business, and there is no way of making a
determination of which source. The staff all use their personal phones
to conduct station business, because our business phone costs for local
calls are so high, and it saves us money to use personal phones that
have unlimited talk & text time.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">This
proposal would have no effect on an individual’s use of their own phone
or email account, even if people use their personal resources for
station business. It is directed only at the use of the station’s media
resources, including its internal email lists. If “the organization's
resources” is too vague, then I request a specific prohibition against
the use of internal email lists for campaigning. It is the hidden
campaigning, under the guise of official communication, that is the
problem. Such a limited prohibition would not trigger any of the
concerns you have raised.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">6. <b>Establish written procedures for replacing ballots.</b><br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>Yes, we can certainly do this.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Thank
you very much for agreeing to do so. Could you please make sure that
such procedures are adopted no later than the January 2016 board
meeting, and subsequently included in the election materials that are
sent to the members? Last year there was confusion, causing delay and
possibly missed votes. Also, please make sure that the written
procedures are made part of the official Election Policy so that future
boards/staff have guidance.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">7. <b>Create member email list</b> for periodic notices, schedules, and outreach.<br clear="none"><i><br clear="none">We
have some email information now, and do ask for it, but many don’t
provide it. We are not using this information in any way, and have no
idea whether or not that information in DPO is accurate. This is a
larger issue, one that needs to be discussed in depth. It’s not so
simple a thing to adopt these changes.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">It
is difficult to imagine a membership nonprofit NOT using the internet
to stay connected with its members, especially a public community radio
station that is supposedly media-savvy and has a duty to engage with the
membership/public. It would be very simple to input the currently
known email addresses into a new list, using the same programming that
now maintains the internal list serve (see above). We already routinely
request member’s email addresses on our membership form, and it is a
required field for online donations. All that is needed now is the will
to use the information. The immense benefit to the organization and
its members from such communication (e.g., a quarterly post with station
news and the current program schedule) should make the policy decision
simple. Indeed, your response seems to agree with the policy, though it
suggests that membership information is not routinely being updated by
the staff assigned to do so.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">8. Either establish an <b>interactive internet discussion service</b> on the <a href="http://kzyx.org" target="_blank">kzyx.org</a> website, or announce the availability of member-established services, e.g., KZYXTalk.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>People
can interact through our Facebook page. It would take staff time to
moderate a <a href="http://kzyx.org" target="_blank">kzyx.org</a> interactive forum, because we could not just allow
anyone to post anything they wanted; it could become a free-for-all. As
for posting information about the KZYXTalk listserv on our station
webpage, wouldn't this establish a bad precedent? Wouldn't we then have
to do the same for any other group? What would the standard be? The
station webpage should be for official station business only.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">I
can understand not wanting to dedicate staff time to maintaining an
interactive internet discussion service. But there is no reason why you
cannot let people know that such a service has been established by one
of our members. You can use the usual disclaimers to let folks know
that it does not represent KZYX policies, etc. Nor would this open the
floodgates for anyone to demand access to the official website. The
board of directors can make an individual determination as to whether a
member’s offer of time and resources will benefit the station by
fostering communication and engagement.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">The
underlying issue seems to be that the board does not want to announce
any forum that might have comments in opposition to current policies and
procedures. But that is precisely what engagement is all about.
Without a diversity of viewpoints, and the ability to share them, the
station will stagnate. It is far better to allow discussion and benefit
from it than to spend time and energy fighting it.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">9. <b>Create a Programmers Page</b> for information about programmers.<br clear="none"><i><br clear="none">Good
idea, but who is going to create it, write it, manage it as things
change, etc.? We have no one to do it, and there are more pressing
needs. Cannot not spend staff time on this; not a high priority.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">After
further research, it looks like the website already has this capability
(see, e.g., <a href="http://kzyx.org/index.php/music/music-rock/dead-air" target="_blank">http://kzyx.org/index.php/music/music-rock/dead-air</a>). It
appears that each programmer can use the "blog" function to post their
playlist and other information, though it also appears that this
function has been dormant for a long time. Perhaps the Program Director
can help facilitate the use of this resource by the programmers. I
recommend that the PD input contact information for each programmer in
the title field for each show (a one-time task that the programmers
can't do). The programmers themselves would be responsible for any
additional postings about their show in the blog section. The
programmers should also be allowed to post information about their other
activities, which would also encourage their use of the site. Right
now those pages are an underused resource.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">10. <b>Improve outreach to members </b>for membership on standing and advisory committees.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>Yes,
the Board could do a better job of this. But why do we need a policy
change? Not everything needs to be immortalized in policy. The Board
could take responsibility for making on-air announcements, and we could
establish a webpage for it. Though right [now] Stuart is the person
managing the website changes (with John’s help), and do we want the GM’s
time spent on this just now?</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">As
with the other proposals, I am asking for a change in the written
policy so that the current board actually commits itself to such action,
and so that future boards will be required to do so. As for the time
needed, adding a notice to the election materials concerning the
committees and how to apply would take only a few minutes. Ditto a
posting on the web page. At this time, I request you adopt a policy
that such an announcement must be included in the election materials,
and then explore further means of outreach once a permanent GM is hired.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">11. <b>Provide all requested non-confidential information.</b><br clear="none"><i><br clear="none">We
are already doing this. We answer requests for information a number
times a day from people calling the station, writing the station,
emailing the station, etc.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">Thank
you for agreeing with the policy. However, as noted above, a personal
willingness to do something does not mean that it will always be done,
or that those who follow will also do it. Indeed, some of your
predecessors were not so willing to provide information. That is why
each of these proposals includes a specific change to Policy language.
If you are already doing something that you believe is proper, then
there is no reason not to adopt this change. It will provide direction
to those who follow while assuring the membership that they will be
provided all the information that they are guaranteed by law.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">12. <b>Fully implement the Programming Policy</b>, including the Program Advisory Committee.<br clear="none"><br clear="none"><i>The issue of the defunct Program Advisory Council does need to be addressed. This needs to be taken up at a later board meeting.</i><br clear="none"><br clear="none">I
respectfully disagree. The president of a board cannot unilaterally
declare a policy to be defunct and thereby refuse to implement it or
indefinitely delay discussion. The Programming Policy, including the
Program Advisory Committee, was adopted by the MCPB Board of Directors
in 2009 and remains in force. The current board and staff have an
obligation to abide by it. Indeed, the decisions currently being made
by the Program Director, such as elimination of the Safe Harbor hours,
are invalid unless they are made in compliance with the existing policy.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">As
you are no doubt aware, programming and the process of determining
programming are among the most contentious issues facing a public
community radio station. The current policy is the result of extended
discussion and community input. It represents an effort to comply with
CPB regulations and our own bylaws, which state that our programming and
processes are to be controlled by the members. You must at this time
direct the staff to comply with the current policy. That's their job,
especially the Program Director's. If you believe the policy needs to
be changed, you can do so, sooner or later as you see fit. But the
current policy is now in force, and it must be implemented.<br clear="none"><br clear="none">Thank
you again for your consideration of these proposals, and for your
detailed response. It appears we agree on the benefits of most of the
proposals, though we disagree on priorities and implementation. Please
remember that each of these proposals is intended to help our goals of
increasing membership and increasing member participation/engagement.
These goals should be the touchstone for every director when making
decisions about our public community radio station.<div><br><br></div><div><br clear="none"></div></div></div></div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Kzyxtalk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org" target="_blank">Kzyxtalk@lists.mcn.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>