NOVEMBER 14 SPOKES COUNCIL MEETING

AGENDA: PLU at North Bay

JimĖs Proposal
The Folio
Strategy
Charitable Trust
CRPB report
Schedule
Talking to Tomas Moran 11/20

PLU at North Bay
Rafael Renteria and Bernie from the PLU are coming to northern Calif. next weekend. After a press conference in front of KPFA on Saturday, Heidi Chesney will bring Rafael and Bernie to NB4KĖs Art and Word fund raiser. Sunday afternoon, there will be a gathering at MichaelĖs to meet Rafael (maybe with Les Radke) and SundayĖs spokes meeting will be held at New College with Rafael, Bernie and Heidi giving a presentation on the PLU. The following spokes meeting can discuss rejuvenating participation in NB activities. Suggested donation of $1 for New College (to cover their $20/hour charge). We also decide that we should take up a regular collection for the P&J meeting site.

STRATEGY
Calendar: We need to determine what is a good use of our time, and to assess if we will need to set up a new Outreach committee. It is suggested that we create a calendar to list various meetings and events, then decide how to delegate our time. Next week, we will put together a working calendar.

There is a clear need to get mailing lists and begin organizing to get a voting group together for the democratization of Pacifica. We should also be aware that not everyone will support electing a new LAB or Pacifica Board. Some want the least amount of change necessary, others want mass resignations and elections and others fall somewhere in between. In the greater KPFA listening area, all groups have tried to work together in spite of differences in support of the station. But there is not an overall set of goals or even clarity about what each groupĖs goals are. Attending the meetings of other groups helps give us access to what those groups are about.

There is resistence to ÏdemocraticÓ input in some quarters, which is viewed as threatening. A system of proportional representation could help answer some of the concerns. To help overcome the disruptive influence of a lot of new people entering the decision making process, Gregory proposes that only 1/3 of the LAB be elected at a time, leaving a base of 2/3. This should be able to bring in some dynamism without disrupting the whole order at one time.

Gregory cite KPOO as an example of having an open program council where attendance at three meetings qualifies one for membership and access to input.

The group that went to the Houston Board meeting consented to a mission statement of accountability and democracy at local and national levels. Our LAB could grow large enough to be inclusive of everyone interested, and find itĖs own balance over time. The old by-laws provided for a station board to carry on station functions. Over time, the board has become advisory only. Now may be the time for the community advisory board to be inclusive, like a congress whose only real power is the power of persuasion in expressing community interests. A separate program committee, especially one that includes a community rep, should be the body to make programming decisions so that the staff can maintain their independence. It is important to expand our movement to include more voices and input as a grass roots movement without hierarchical structure, whose activities are based on personal interest and committment. The LAB functioning as an advisory group only removes their ability to be activist. We need to be aware the the current by-laws do not offer protections for the LABs (LAĖs LAB has been dissolved twice). CPB funding requirements require arbitron ratings with a certain racial makeup. Their monetary contributions have an effect on the programming changes and the structural changes at Pacifica.

FOLIO
Ralph Steiner, the previous Folio publisher, is getting more involved in reestablishing the Folio. He will talk to Jim Bennet Monday to see if KPFA will allow us to mail out a postcard initiating the Folio, using their bulk mail non-profit rate and mailing list. There is a precedent for this kind of mailing, as long as Pacifica does not have to print or pay for it. Postage may by around $1085, other costs will come from printing the postcard. We authorize Michael to spend what he needs to get this project going.

CHARITABLE TRUST
Gregory has been working on organizing an escrow fund to collect funds for KPFA, and hold them for up to a year while demanding that listeners be given membership status with the power to nominate board directors. 90% of the fund could be turned over to the local Pacifica stations as they begin the process of democratization. We recognize a need for this kind of fund being used at the local level. It needs to be well organized before initiation. While it could potentially be used to get rid of CPB funding, GregoryĖs vision is for a trust with no strings attached to the money being contributed whose legitimacy would come from having 501c3 status. And it is suggested that the best way to get rid of CPB is by a democratic process involving educating the listeners to understand why CPB funding needs to be eliminated. This fund should not be used to give a mixed message that negotiating with the current Pacifica Board is possible; it should be used as part of the process for getting rid of the current board.

CRPB
Dan Bartley, the lawyer behind the Committee to Remove the Pacifica Board will be filing this suit shortly, to be accompanied by an ad for fund raising. The Attorney General will be in a position to grant relator status which would allow the suit to go forward. Pacifica will have 20 days to show why relator status should not be granted. Once the status is granted, the suit can then be filed with the courts. Letters to the Attorney General right now might unfavorably politicize the process; the suit needs to keep out of the political realm so that it can be decided on its legal merits.

TALKING TO TOMAS MORAN
Alice feels we should all encourage Moran to file a DirectorĖs suit against the board now.

JIMĖs PROPOSAL
Jim feels there are times when decisions should be made at the council level, and not be sent back to the affinity groups. We agree that continued review of our process is appropriate but inclusion of the affinity groups is an important part of the process of consensus.

Back to the opening window