[Kzyxtalk] Reasons for Challenging Programmer-Director Policy

[Doug McKenty]

Tim,  

I wish to to respond to this accusation that those of us who are trying to effect democratic change are doing so out of some sense of personal spite. I hear over and over that I am just mad because I lost my program. Now I hear that Dennis is mad because he lost the board election. 

This is ridiculous.  Is it so impossible for you to believe that we advocate for democratic reform because we care about Community Radio and truly believe that forcing out a large segment of the population (those who seek alternatives to NPR) is the root cause of the stations on going financial crisis?  

I have always, only advocated that the board of KZYX follow the basic protocol resulted by law. This is not a personal attack, this is out of serious concern that if the station does not abide by these laws, the CPB will pull its funding. 

I decided well in advance of losing Open Lines, that going public about these governance issues, with the hopes the Board would start to take them seriously, was worth losing my show over. Ask Stuart Campbell, I told him three months before I lost Open Lines that I would lose my program if I started to discuss these issues openly. I was not surprised in the least when, though I treated the cuss word just as I had dozens of cuss words, it was used as the excuse. I do not understand what made station management act that way, only to say that I have compassion for those who suffer from passive/aggressive coping mechanisms. 

By buying into the narrative that all of this effort to bring attention to a myriad of governance issues is somehow just a personal act of spite is only enabling this behavior. 

Doug 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 23, 2016, at 2:45 PM, Tim Gregory <tgregory at saber.net> wrote:
> 
> it did enter my mind that this had something to do with the members not being a big
> fan of you gaining a board seat recently, and possibly that you wished to still
> represent them whether they want you to or not.
> 
> are you in conversation with the ceo/gm?
> ---
> 
> 
> I have been asked to explain what I hope to accomplish by asserting the right of the
> Members to elect all of the Directors.
> 
> I am a big fan of membership nonprofits. They are an excellent vehicle for the
> collective efforts of a group of people who are focused on a common mission.  The
> choosing of the Directors by the Members is an act of collective consciousness, and
> the Directors are charged with making decisions on behalf of the Members.
> 
> I am assuming that the Programmers are well-informed, noble, and have the best
> interests of the nonprofit at heart.  Nevertheless, they do not represent the
> collective knowledge, wisdom, and interests of the Members.  If anything, there is
> an ongoing tendency, subconscious at least, to support the continuation of the
> status quo, as the people and thinking that go into choosing a Programmer-Director
> are already present at the station.  Some have even suggested that, since the
> Program Director selects the Programmers, there is an internal loop of support that
> protects the General Manager and Program Director.
> 
> The power of selecting one out of nine directors and having a guaranteed presence on
> the board should not be underestimated.  Much of our nation's politics right now is
> focused on who will choose the ninth vote on the Supreme Court.  Even in larger
> bodies such as Congress, the control of 11% of the vote (one out of nine) would
> swing almost any contested decision.  So taking away from the Members the power to
> choose one of their nine directors is significant.
> 
> In my life I have watched the arc of history bend toward justice.  But I am very
> troubled by the rising incidents of voter suppression that we have witnessed this
> year.  ID's that are hard to get, tougher registration rules, reduced polling
> places, reduced early voting, voting rolls purged - these are just some of the
> problems.  And each one of them means that the collective knowledge, wisdom, and
> concerns of those being affected by important decisions are less likely to be heard,
> to be integrated into the decision-making process.
> 
> I have reached the point where I am compelled to do what I can to reverse that
> trend.  In politics, as with the environment, we must think globally and act
> locally.  The station and the nonprofit will benefit greatly by restoring Member
> selection of all directors.  Conversely, the Programmers will not suffer.  They have
> for years been unfairly prohibited from running for any of the five District seats
> on the board, and that has kept good and competent people from running the past few
> elections.  I don't have a problem with individual Programmers being on the board.
> But that decision should be made by the Members.
> 
> Nor should people be concerned that Programmers will be shut out of programming
> decisions.  They are assured of input under the current Programming Policy and the
> Program Advisory Committee (PAC).  The current Board and Management should act
> immediately to fully implement that policy.
> 
> So what I hope to accomplish is to restore legitimacy to the Board of Directors and
> the governance of MCPB/KZYXZ.  I hope to make the Board a true expression of the
> will of the Members.  Our bylaws state that the station is Member controlled.  We
> have been told that means that the Members choose the Directors.  As noted above, it
> is not enough to choose eight out of nine.  The Board must acknowledge the right of
> the Members to choose all of the Directors, and make the necessary changes to our
> Bylaws and Election Policy.
> 
> Dennis
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk