[Kzyxtalk] KZYX Discussion

Wed Feb 26 11:28:39 PST 2014

thanks, doug, i will go through my 3ft stack of hardcopies remaing from the past,
and try to find references...my recollection is that the five community advisory
groups elected one rep each, who then elected bruce herring to it (2-1-1-1?) from
among the reps...

the proposed PAC 'mission' was modified through a few meetings i couldn't attend,
before the board gave it approval. not only was the board/staff determined the PAC
have no power over programming, but they also claimed a lawyer advised that unpaid
programmers were still 'staff', and therefor could not represent for community
advisory groups. so disenfranchising hopes of the interested for community
involvement in programming decisions was at least a two-step process...

the blurring of distinctions between public radio, National Public Radio, and
community radio in interpretations of mission statement hasn't helped, and john c's
poll of programmers for a definition of 'community' probably served to frighten him
from overtly stating the one he steers by. the board, as you may know, has never
seriously taken up streamlining the mission statement since. following the rebukes
from the previous mandated CAB, a defense of necessity has surrounded resistance to
grassroots changes. i understand their siege mentality, too...

this is old news. and i cannot say we would have survived this long without a staff
that persisted in face of stumblebums like king and zack on the board. i know you to
be a true-heart, to have tried your hand at that work, but john sakowicz is a
self-serving saboteur, and it pains me you're in league now.

i AM glad you and jane are back in the struggle where it counts. btw, was there once
a board proposal to eliminate board elections?
---

Tim,

The date was 12/9/08.  The PAC described in the policy paper was very different than
the PAC as it existed in reality.  Do you remember voting on the programmer member
of the PAC?  I do not, but Mary told me it happened.
 Who did you vote for?

I actually had the grievance months ago.  John said he wanted to have rotating hosts
as he felt my moderation was skewed by my station politics.
 I was happy with that.  Staff had become so antagonistic about the show by
the end that it was more of a pain in the ass than it was worth.   We are waiting
for the delay machine to be installed which I assume will happen sometime after the
election.

Doug

On Tuesday, February 25, 2014, Tim Gregory <tgregory at saber.net> wrote:

> doug wrote:
> 'This whole thing was started when I discovered that John Coate secretly and
unilaterally pulled a policy paper from the stations corporate
> documentation which
> demanded by board vote that programming be determined by a consensus of the
Programming Advisory Committee.  Coate has never denied that he did this and at my
> grievance hearing only said he felt the meetings were not very productive.' doug,
do you have a date for that board vote? i have no recall of it--the PAC as
> created was advisory to mary, only. (ask johanna?) they were set to evaluating
current programming, reporting quarterly, to help her do her job. (ask jen?)
watered down to death?
> anyway, a PAC that 'determines programming' has never flown a flag over kzyx, that
i
> know of...
> sorry you lost it to the papers...is your grievance process still alive? --- This
whole thing was started when I discovered that John Coate secretly and
unilaterally pulled a policy paper from the stations corporate
> documentation which demanded by board vote that programming be determined by a
consensus of the Programming Advisory Committee.  Coate has never denied that he did
this and at my grievance hearing only said he felt the meetings were not very
productive.  I went to current board members who generally blew me off so I felt
compelled to go public with this knowledge because the mission statement and the
bylaws demand that the members control station policy through election of the board
of directors. Do you think I wanted to do this? Do you think this has been fun for
me?
>  Do you imagine that I am an egomaniac who is doing this because I want to
> take control of the station and use it for my own selfish motivations?
>  Perhaps I am just an egomaniac doing this to impose my personality on the
> unsuspecting public of Mendocino County?  Give me a fucking break!!!  I have spent
hours of my life writing emails, publishing articles and running for the board of
directors because I busted the current GM breaking the law by circumventing the
board of directors legitimate ability to control station policy.  This power is
given to the board because they are elected by the membership.  In other words,
legally, the GM has wrested control of the station from the members.  He chooses the
product the corporation produces and disregards the direction of the board.
> I want to know, how is this not fire?  Nobody seems to want to have a discussion
about it.  Living in denial is not healthy and is only helping to augment an already
unhealthy creative atmosphere that has plagued KZYX for many years.  Please explain
to me why what appears to me to be a huge liability issue consistently gets
downplayed, generally through the use of personal attacks.
> The current board desperately needs to address these issues before more problems
arise.  At any time the station could be sued by any member or members.  The CPB
grant is in serious jeapordy if the FCC informs them of these issues.
> I have pleaded with the current board to vote to eliminate the PAC policy paper.
They prefer to act as if it doesn't exist.  I pleaded with then to change the
mission statement to "MCPB is a non-profit radio station that is an NPR affiliate
where the GM controls the stations programming and operational philosophy."  They
will not do it.
> All I have ever advocated is for the stations management to adhere to the
corporate documentation and other legally binding contractual agreements.
>  Why am I being accused of some personality defect for promoting a pretty
> common sense idea, protecting the station from liability?
> Why is it OK to you for the current GM to conceal past board approved policy from
the current board?
> Please explain.
> Doug Mckenty
> On Tuesday, February 25, 2014, <sako4 at comcast.net <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > Done, Norman. Thanks.
> > ------------------------------
> > *From: *"Norman de Vall"
> > <ndevall at mcn.org <javascript:;><javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
> ndevall at mcn.org <javascript:;>');>
> > *To:
> > *kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org <javascript:;><javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','
> kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org <javascript:;>');>
> > *Sent: *Tuesday, February 25, 2014 8:20:49 AM
> > *Subject: *Re: [Kzyxtalk] KZYX Discussion
> > John et al
> > The lack of D&O insurance for the Board of Directors is a serious issue and
needs
> > resolution.  And to this I would add two more:  Workers Comp insurance
> for
> > the
> > volunteers and whether or not station management has completed an: IIPP. Over
the years I have raised the issue of Workers Comp only to hear that the
> > station carries liability insurance and under the previous management the issue
of an" Injury Illness Prevention Plan", IIPP, as required by Cal OSHA and the
Dept.
> > of Labor, was not responded to.
> > These are issues which should be raised at the next Board meeting. Norman On Feb
25, 2014, at 7:17 AM, sako4 at comcast.net <javascript:;> wrote: Shelia, For the
record, I filed my complaint to the FCC to cover my ass. I
> thought
> > things were so seriously wrong at KZYX that I feared being sued. The KZYX Board
of Directors has no "directors and officers liability insurance"
> nor
> > are we indemnified in any way against damages caused by management. Remember
that the Board's chief responsibility is to oversee John Coate, who, incidentally,
vigorously resists oversight.
> > Filing the FCC complaint is what my attorney called an "affirmative defense". John
> > ------------------------------
> > *From: *"she-la" <sheila.dawn50 at yahoo.com <javascript:;>>
> > *To: *kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org <javascript:;>
> > *Sent: *Tuesday, February 25, 2014 1:43:54 AM
> > *Subject: *Re: [Kzyxtalk] KZYX Discussion
> > I respectfully disagree.
> > We can't control how people communicate but that in itself is no way to judge if
the issue is valid.
> > What most people do not understand-- it was easy to miss as the station aired
the message at the least probable times for full disclosure -- was that as part of
the renewal process, the station is required by the FCC
> to
> > ask for public input on how the station does or does not meet the community's
needs. That is what public radio is all about.
> > People could have written in glowing reports of the stations interactive
presence in the community but none did.
> > I wrote in because federal law is being ignored by station management in more
than one instance. This is serious business and the station 's Board had the option
of correcting the situation but chose to put their collective heads in the sand.
> > No one benefits if the station's license doesn't get renewed and no one really
wants that.
> > What is wanted is someone with enough power who will take a closer look
> at
> > what the station is required to do to get its tax exempt status and also federal
grant monies and whether or not they have adequately fulfilled those requirements.
> > Loyalty is an excellent quality but blind loyalty is a fool's choice. David
Gurney <jugglestone at gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > I agree. There are a lot more important things on the horizon than attacking our
public radio station.  Don't like it?  Turn the dial.  I think Mr. Sakawizc is
pushing a personal agenda/vendetta.  Yeah, there
> are
> > legitimate complaints, but closing down the station doesn't solve them. What
about our community college that's about to be shuttered?  You want to get excited
about something right now, that would be it.
> > ...
> > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Rick <rbharris11 at comcast.net<javascript:;>
> ><
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org <javascript:;>
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org <javascript:;>
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
_______________________________________________
Kzyxtalk mailing list
Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk