wbai.net Pacifica/WBAI history   events   links   archive   bylaws etc
iPNB   PNB   LSB   elections   contact info   opinion   search

DAILY REPORTS and Documents | L.A iPNB meeting page
Suggested changes in current bylaws draft

Presented at the iPNB meeting in L.A. March 7 - 9, 2003

Problems with current bylaws drafts
[notes by Dave Adelson, KPFK area]

I have some real problems with the bylaws and I thought that the purpose of doing these bylaws and one of the purposes of having proportional representation was to insure that everybody gets a voice, and that means also that you want structurally people in of positions of authority and power not to have an incentive to get rid of their political opponents and not to be able to, which gets rid of the incentive to try. The essence of peace is that the strong don't dominate the weak and vulnerable. And I'm concerned with the way that the LSB's elect the PNB members because they elect them one at a time which means that you can't have proportional representation in that vote. The simple majority on the LSB is going to select 100% of the PNB members, after the first round where there will be proportional representation.

Also staff lose their voting rights as staff immediately after termination [Article 3 Section 2 Term para 1 "A Staff membership term shall expire…(B) upon termination of employment as a non-management employee of a Foundation radio station, as applicable."] so that the manager can disenfranchise political opponents. If you can extend their voting rights to the next election after their termination that gets rid of that problem. The problem is an interest to get rid of your political opponents. You've got simple majorities on the LSB determining the entire National Board composition, you've got that oversight over the management, you've got the management able to get rid of their political opponents.

And then the other thing that worries me is the proxy and joint contribution thing . So if I pay someone, the way these right wingers pay people to collect signatures for petition drives, if I get people to sign proxies and I spend a million dollars I get 40,000 votes because they sign over a three year proxy to me and I get those votes. The joint contribution thing, Bob Lederer was telling me that many people do use joint contribution, but if you limit it to three people, that gets rid of that problem. And I don't understand why we need the proxy provision. I've been told that we need it in there now, but that a future elected board can remove it. If it's legal for a future board to remove it, then it does not need to be in there by law. And even if it is supposed to be in there and it is not in there, somebody would have to sue you over its absence and that that's never going to happen. So I'd like to see you get rid of proxy, to limit joint contribution, alter the election of the PNB by the LSB so that it is not such that a simple majority on the LSB can elect all PNB members [this is the result of election of one PNB member at a time by the LSB].

We are only get an end to the cycles of purge and counter purge when everybody has the ability a right to stand in place and be treated with respect and that means a certain amount of leverage.

Question from Teresa Allen: Are you saying you want direct listener election of the PNB.

Dave: No, the problem is that with the three year terms the LSB only elects one member at a time and so the political majority always selects that person. One year terms have another advantage. Suppose someone is doing a bad job. And you try to mount a recall drive because you have right of recall. During that drive, you have an enemy, and one with power. If elections are automatically every year people are going to treat each other with a lot more respect and regard because they need to maintain those constituencies.

top of page | DAILY REPORTS and Documents | L.A iPNB meeting page
iPNB index | home