I agree with bernie and he has articulated my feelings exactly.

carol,
can you articulate the discussion and the concern's, and also who voiced those concerns and such that were used to make this decision that locked out the listeners unless they have an official place in the network? who is not to be trusted?

i mean, almost every last one of the people making the decisions (except the kpfa lab, of which you are the only elected member, with recall, which is interesting) are unacountable and self selected. in this town, the wbai lab (except a few members) and the staff at the station has never considered the listener activist's suggestions, unless of course they coincide with themselves maintaining power.

without a system of accountability and now no ratification by listeners of the bylaws, i am pretty certain that we can look to more entrenchment of the same people that got us here.

certainly with no guarantee of direct listener elections and perhaps not even choice voting, we are fucked. What is all this for? it's a recipe for alienation of anyone that wants real change. of course one does have to face the fact that listeners on the whole love star power and so the same people would probably be elected anyhow, but at least these people would be recallable.

i was looking forward to the "new pacifica. I can now relax and watch the network (except for kpft and maybe kpfk), atrophy with lifetime jobs and programs and only tidbits of what pacifica needs to become relevant, the way democracy now! did, by looking into the future, using youth, imc's community media groups. lots of talent there........

listen to the pilot on pacificamatters.net or at radio4houston.org to hear what norm stockwell, dennis bernstein, lyn gerry, bob mcchesney and others say about governance and what is necessary.

i don't see it happening.

i have better things to do than to watch this and be told that i don't count unless someone tells me i do and then only to give "input". many intelligent, dedicated people have left. perhaps that is the idea. it is easier that way.

patty
-speaking for myself, not affiliated with any group.

>Bernie -- I know how strongly you feel. But "serious consideration" does
>not mean doing what any particular number of people -- or any group or
>organization -- wants us to do. I do know that your proposal did receive
>serious consideration ... as did the concerns and proposals we received
>from others. The board made its decision seriously ... balancing various
>peoples' concerns, as well as our own concerns.
>
>When the next board is elected, it will do the same, I hope. But someone
>has to make these decisions -- and take the heat for them.
>
>Best,
>--Carol [Spooner]
>

>----- Original Message -----
>From:Bernie Eisenberg
>To: wildrose@p...
>Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 11:18 AM
>Subject: Serious consideration by the iPNB
>
>
>> Carol,
>>
>> I'm sorry but your words about serious consideration are belied by the
>> actions of the iPNB. The "Proposal for Independent Commissions to Create
>> New Bylaws of the Pacifica Foundation and its Local Station Boards" dated
>> 3/8/02 was summarily dismissed by the iPNB at the Los Angeles board
>> meeting. There was absolutely no discussion of the proposal that was
>> endorsed by 42 freepacifica activists from all five signal areas, among
>> them seven members from four of the LABs. Are these people less committed
>> to Pacifica than the outsiders that are to be invited by Osman's Mission
>> Commission? >>
>> The creation of the bylaws commissions would have been an excellent place
>> for the iPNB to show their support for bottom up democracy and listener
>> empowerment. I told the board that the treatment of that proposal was a
>> disgrace. And the iPNB is still acting in a disgraceful manner with >respect
>> to both the bylaws issue and the "mission commission." by not empowering
>> listeners. >>
>> Why is the board so distrustful of the listeners who saved Pacifica from
>> the hijackers? When does "democracy" start at Pacifica? >>
>> -Bernie >>