1 - ELECTION
RESULTS
The previous staff reps: (D= democratic side) (U= undemocratic
side)
Anthony Fest - D
Miguel Molina - D, usually absent
Mary Berg - U ususally
Lewis Sawyer - U usually
Bonnie Simmons - U
Brian Edwards-Tiekert - U
The present staff reps:
elected - Shahram Aghamir - D
Chris Brown - D
Brian Edwards-Tiekert - U
(not elected: Mary Berg, Mary Tilson.
Jeannine Etter)
remaining -
Anthony Fest - D
Bonnie Simmons - U
Lewis Sawyer - U usually
The representative from KFCF, Mark Hernandez, a very
contentious U,
is not continuing, & will be replaced,
(hopefully by his former substitute, a D)
In effect, a gain of 2-3 in these 2 categories!
The listener election will stand as the tentative list:
won:
Sherry Gendelman - U
Warren Mar - *
Matthew Hallinan - *
Susan McDonough - *
Diane Enriquez - *
* new reps on the CL slate, which usually votes U
Richard Phelps - D
Tracy Rosenberg - D
Chandra Hauptman - D
Sureya Sayadi - D
The present LSB listener reps
continuing:
Conn Hallinan - U
Ernesto "Tico" Chacin - U
Sherry Gendelman - reelected - U
PhoeBe ANNE (sorgen) - U
Andrea Turner - U usually
Sarv Randhawa - U
Richard Phelps - reelected - D
Sasha Futran - D
Noelle Hanrahan - D
Chandra Hauptman - reelected- D
Henry Norr - D
Akio Tanaka - D
[not continuing:
Attila Nagy - D
Stan Woods - D
Joe Wanzala - D
LaVarn William - D
Annie Hallatt - U
Rosalinda Palacios - U ]
THE TOTAL RESULTS:
staff 3 - D 3 - U
KFCF 1 - D?
listeners 8 - D 6 - U, 4 - *
The anti-democratic faction will probably have a slim majority
of 1 -2
2 - ANALYSIS
Richard Phelps' analysis of the staff election (excerpted):
In the first LSB election, it was 2 for entrenched and one for progressives.
In 2004 the "dismantler staff candidates" won all three seats
in a very badly run staff election. Many voters didn't get ballots.
2006 Progressive staff won one seat, Anthony, and in 2007 won 2 of three.
This voter shift coincides with the "dismantlers" moves to
consolidate power by weakening or eliminating centers of power at the
station: Appointment of Sasha Lilley as IPD, PC now advisory, UPSO "dismantled"
by edict, "Calls to Action" edict, attempt to keep IGM (many
staff spoke out at public comment before GM Hire ex. Session most against
IGM) etc.
. . . there were 72 first place votes for the progressive candidates
and 57 for the others. A major statement by the staff!
. . . . . . .
I think it may be time to form a formal progressive listener/staff alliance.
There have been informal connections for a long time and generally some
were worried that being to close to the listener activists ( who were
branded anti-staff, that slander went out with the UPSO "dismantling"
and the listener activists support for UPSO) would hurt staff candidates
in staff elections. I think that time has passed.
Time to let the entire community know that there are listeners and staff
that want fair democratic elections and input into station policies
and procedures. It is time to end the reign of a small undemocratic
self-appointed group as the "deciders" at the station.
. .
3 - CERTIFICATION
& ITS ISSUES
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ON THE 2007 KPFA LOCAL STATION BOARD ELECTIONS
[Long but informative & not posted elsewhere
so I could not link to it instead]
[Our comments added in brackets]
*_Listener Sponsors_*
On November 16, 2007, . . . . . . .
Before the Listener Sponsor vote count proceeded, the National Elections
Supervisor was informed that the remedy for an earlier violation of
the Fair Campaign Provisions had never been implemented, causing a handicap
to some candidates. A great deal of discussion ensued, with the possibility
of delaying the vote count until the remedy was implemented as a very
real alternative. However, given that the level of participation was
at the typical response of KPFA listeners, it was agreed that the time
had passed for the proposed remedy to have any significant effect. Regardless,
the decision that the vote count would proceed was based on a promise
by the National Elections Supervisor (NES) to grant the promised email
access for each of the aggrieved slates to send one message as a post-election
communication. [This would have been our Open
Letter, which many of you signed onto, but which was never sent out
because Bensky never provided his list as Casey required him to.]
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
At this time, it is the National Elections Supervisor's determination
that the likelihood of an alteration of the results by a hand-count
or by new versions of the computer applications is sufficiently small
as to obviate the need for a recount. [We don't
know if this is true.] In the wake of the vote count, 12 losing
[- and winning] slates have banded together
with a number of present and former board members and other media activists
to ask for denial of election certification. Many of the concerns they
raise are genuine and need to be addressed in the conduct of future
elections. The question of an uneven playing field comes both from privately
funded slate mailers and from celebrity programmer access to email lists
on the station internet server. The fact that the
promised remedy for violation of Pacifica Fair Campaign Provisions was
stonewalled by station management also raises legitimate concern.
On the other hand, to re-run the election under the present rules that
are skewed toward groups that are better funded and better connected
is unlikely to result in a substantially different outcome.
The tendency of the smaller groups to engage in petty rivalry, while
it may appeal to some, also lessens the likelihood of their presenting
a more cohesive, cognitive case to the listener-voters.
[We dispute this characterization, whose presentation appears to be
another election violation.] Again that suggests no change in a re-run
election. [We were not asking for a re-run election.
A non-certified election does not require this. It can also result in
the pre-election representatives remaining in place, which would be
a dramatic sanction.]
A lawsuit filed [by Sherry Gendelman and
most of the other CL reps] demanding certification s added fuel
to the pressure on the National Elections Supervisor to "certify
and move on". [This could be why he certified the listener election,
and without a final count]
Directors of the Pacifica National Board have expressed alarm at the
rapidity with which some candidates have turned to the courts befo engaging
in meaningful discussion to address problems in the election and governance
processes.
Frankly, any objective observer must acknowledge the serious flaws in
the conduct of each round of Pacifica elections from the adoption of
the Bylaws in 2003. They exacerbate tensions, encourage nomination and
election of self-important hot-heads, and provide noongoing feed-back
mechanism to allow members to monitor the behavior of the delegates
they have elected. [We do not agree with this
characterization of the by-laws].
For now, however, this process is preferable to the corporate-cloning
self-appointing boards which preceded our still new attempt at including
the membership in the governance process. We can only hope that a proposal
for an elections task force will revisit our methods prior to the 2009
election.
At least we can be pleased that a more rational election
timeline has been amended into the Bylaws, allowing for morcareful supervision
of Pacifica elections. But that is only one step from the infancy of
democratic input into the governance of our foundation.
In the meantime, despite some personal reservations about flaws in the
conduct of this and the elections at other stations, there is no gain
in creating a further crisis in the process by denying certification.
Therefore, by the limited power in me as National Elections Supervisor,
I hereby declare the KPFA listener sponsor election to be certified.
*_Staff Members_*
As at all Pacifica stations, the overriding issue from the beginning
of the 2007 cycle was preparation of the list of Unpaid Staff. Apparently
there is a perception (real or otherwise) that the balance of power
on the Local Station Boards hangs in those lists of who is and who is
not
allowed to cast a Staff ballot.
At KPFA this underlying power struggle was taken to an extreme with
the last-minute de-recognition of the Unpaid Staff Oganization (UPSO)
by the Interim General Manager. The purpose was apparently to take the
power of compiling the list of Unpaid Staff away from the staff themselves
and vest it in the hands of management. Had this been done prior to
the start of the qualifying period of June 1 to August 31, the rules
that apply at stations without unpaid staff groups would have been activated.
However, the notice came with just three weeks remaining in that three-month
period. This left no time for programmers and other volunteers who thought
they had already qualified as staff voters to log in the requisite 30
hours. So the National Elections Supervisor was left no choice but to
insist on keeping the UPSO rule in place that required only 30 hours
of work over 12 months.
What followed was a topsy-turvy whirligig of metamorphosing lists of
unpaid staff. People who had been on one list were dropped without rhyme
or reason when a new list was posted. Confusion and consternation were
rampant. The "final list", still incomplete, was not posted
until November 15 -- the scheduled Election Close Date. This left many
staff members still waiting for ballots, and the close date was necessarily
extended a month to December 17.
In that intervening month, about sixty more staff members cast valid
ballots. When the votes were counted on December 18, twelve ballots
had unverifiable PINs and fifteen had been submitted by email through
a third person not authorized to handle ballots. During the vote count,
there were loud and unceasing remonstrations demanding the inclusion
of one or the other group of ballots (but never both) to be included.
Regardless of the clamor, the rules were followed and only legitimate
ballots were counted.
###
Casey -
It was good to hear a clip from you on the KPFA evening news last night
defending democratic, fair elections in Pacifica. And maybe you noticed
that while your clip led off the series it finished with Seigel and
Bensky - a new violation, and slap in the face to the election process
and your role in safeguarding it.
[ Bensky was banned from the KPFA/Pacifica airwaves
for his election violation and required to provide his email list for
other slateds to email to - he ignored this, and was off the air a couple
of times - on once before, and again on this broadcast, typically attacking
KPFA/Pacifica democracy.]
We were of course not pleased with your statement certifying the election.
Not certifying the election does not have to mean a new election. The
old LSB can remain in place instead.
We did not expect significantly different results from a new election,
either, and did not want the foundation and everyone to bear the costs
and effort of a new KPFA election. Yet we did expect all the votes to
be counted, before certification. (Think Florida 2000.)
And we considered your last comments about our slates personal attacks
and a kind of final election violation. Although we call attention to
the differences between our slates and ask people to vote for ours we
have basically supported each other and are now united in the struggle
for fair elections.
And the overwhelming majority of our side did not and does not support
placing blame for the unfair election on you and Janay.
But now the opposition has showed its true face, attacking democratic
elections and blaming the democratic bylaws for the problems they themselves
caused by not supporting bylaws, fair campaign provisions, and elections.
This threatens the gains we made in 2000- 2003 in our ability as listeners
to safeguard Pacifica and its mission, and many listeners are agreeing
and are willing to stand up for democracy and fair elections.
Yours, Mara Rivera
4 - BIASED
REPORT ON NEWS! Please protest!
The broadcast referred to in this letter was a rare instance of reporting
KPFA own governance news, - on the completion of the election - on KPFA's
own news program - but they outfoxed Fox by presenting clips from Casey
first, and then Sherry Gendelman, Dan Seigel, Matthew Lasar, and
Larry Bensky! - a veritable Who's Who of dismantlers! Only Casey spoke
for democracy; Lasar tried to sound neutral, and the others attacked
democratic elections.
Listen to the archive of the program here:
http://kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=23907
(in the last 15 minutes: if on mp3, go to 46:00).
Richard Phelps has pointed out that an attack is heating up on elections
and on the Bylaws which specify them; in other words, a full blown attack
on Pacifica democracy seems to be in the works.
Richard commented:
Today's [12/21] evening news story about the LSB elections rivals Fox
news for the most biased one sided story of the year. It is actions
like this that are destroying KPFA and Pacifica. Power before principles
is the Corporate method and this story was a perfect example of corporate
spin, this time the Pacifica corporate spin. It certainly didn't represent
the truth or the varied opinions on the election but then as long as
the listeners send in their money who cares what they think. Our news
can spoon feed them the self serving management line. So much for Free
Speech Radio. ###
He urged that people contact the News Dept. to complain
about their report, and request an "equal time" report by
Committee members.
Apparently a PNB Election Task Force may be formed to
find "alternatives" to our current system. This could be a
disaster if no pro-democracy people are on it.
It's important to keep our Fair Elections Committee active.
An active Local Election Committee could take care of such
things as candidate forums and other ways of informing
listeners.
At this point, a committee is needed just to support
democratic elections and the bylaws which mandate them.
5 - THINGS
TO DO
* Stay strong!
* Keep informed. (Look at peoplesradio.net)
* Protest the unbalanced news report (see above)
* Sign onto our Open Letter protesting unfair
election practices if you haven't yet - it's not too late.
See it at http://peoplesradio.net/Election_void.htm
and tell us to sign you on at Fair Elections email: fair_elections@yahoo.com
