Six years ago, listeners to a progressive radio network called Pacifica won a lawsuit that allowed KPFK members to elect representatives to their local station board, and through them, to determine who sat on the Pacifica National Board.  The demand for democracy was an eruption against a board of directors that considered selling one of the stations to finance a string of smaller Black stations in the South.  The settlement instituted the first democratically-run radio network in the U.S., another groundbreaking advance in the network's long history.  Such are the contradictions of democracy. 

Today, that democratic outburst has fallen victim to a single slate of candidates supported by "The Committee to Strengthen KPFK," a powerful amalgam of Local Station Board members, station staff, and new faces, and endorsed by attorney Carol Spooner, one of the key figures in the original effort to democratize Pacifica.  And they have injected the influence of a financed elections and Democratic Party politics into an institution that prides itself on being "powered by the people."  The Committee and procedural violations threaten to confuse and discourage candidates, and endanger the quorum necessary for election certification.

Lack of oversight, improper procedures, and an insider Committee so arrogant that rules seem meant to be broken, are spreading a viscous taint on the credibility of any election outcome.  At the same time, a blackout on election violations is so thorough, the determination to make quorum so overpowering after the near-failure of previous elections, that much of the electorate is unaware that infractions have occurred.  Even candidates who file complaints receive, at most and only occasionally, an acknowledgment that their complaint has been received.

Already, in the fifth week of the campaign, the Committee To Strengthen KPFK has wantonly violated several of the eleven simple rules laid out for fair elections.  The KPFK candidate webpages and broadcast archives, under the control of Committee member and station webmaster Ali Lexa, been used for numerous inequities in publishing candidate information.  And the procedures and timetable of election events distributed to the candidates and posted on the station website for voters has been altered with little or no notification to the voters and the candidates.  To date, no sanctions have been announced to repair the damage to independent candidates or to inform the voters.

In spite of its long list of rules violations, the Committee didn't hesitate to inject the election with the influence of privately financed campaigning, purchasing a high-gloss, multi-colored mailer sent to KPFK members, at a cost of $6,000 to $7,000 according to Committee director and candidate Grace Aaron, even as the donation-based station suffers a marked downturn in contributions.  The Committee To Strengthen KPFK has taken the first step to becoming a non-profit corporation itself, by affiliation with the International Humanities Center, which has adopted the Committee as one of its projects, providing the group with a tax shelter and anonymity for its donor or donors. 

The Pacifica National Board, recognizing the serious disadvantage the mailer poses to low- and moderate-income independent candidates, and that "spending of large sums of money in Pacifica campaigns runs counter to the noncommercial nature of the Pacifica Radio Network while underscoring the discriminatory nature of campaign financing so prevalent and objectionable in mainstream elections," moved on November 1 to begin a process to find remediation for the disadvantaged candidates.  The discussion of specific remedies began at the KPFK Local Station Board meeting on Wednesday, November 7.  Candidate Jubilee Shine told the local board, ""I am here to represent workers.  I'm a roofer and a union activist.  I couldn't get $7,000 for a flyer for this campaign.  I couldn't raise $300."  In order to implement the remedies, the board discussed the possibility of a further election delay, to December 21. 

Aaron formed the Committee to spearhead a campaign to remove progressive, lesbian, and African general manager Eva Georgia in light of a sexual harassment suit filed against her and the network.  In July, the Committee presented a petition calling for her removal to the Pacifica National Board, the culmination of a five-year campaign to oust Georgia with a plethora of accusations that began even before a staffer denied her the keys to her office when Georgia officially took over leadership of the station.  The Committee invited local media to the board meeting held in Los Angeles, and the event was reported in the LA Times, Throughout the summer, the press was fed accusations, and articles without context appeared in the LA Weekly (twice), where reporters salivated over the charges of Black lesbian sexual misconduct.  Meanwhile, the PNB, the CEO, and the CFO stood behind Georgia with unreported public statements of support.  The lawsuit is still pending, and Pacifica insiders seem confident that Georgia will be vindicated in court.

Aaron chaired the LSB in 2006 until her term ended and she was voted out.  During her tenure, she forced the local board into numerous closed sessions to present sundry charges against Georgia.  One, an expense report purported to show Georgia's misuse of station funds but discredited by the Pacifica CFO, Lonny Hicks, was circulated widely among station staff despite its confidentiality.

Aaron, along with Committee members and the slate's other two returning candidates, Lamont Yeakey and Donna Warren, during earlier elections were members of a slate known as Progressives for Independent, Responsible Community Radio.  PIRCR and slates at other stations in the network were organized by Spooner from Pacifica members who had opposed ensuring elected representation for underrepresented communities in the new Pacifica Bylaws.

The Committee To Strengthen KPFK and Spooner, after roundly condemning Georgia for bringing a lawsuit down on the network, are contemplating their own lawsuit against Pacifica for refusing to include their partisan mailer with the ballot mailing, according to Committee member Ian Masters in his November 4 broadcast (since edited out of the archived version of the broadcast).

Slate members Ricco Ross, Linda Sutton, Dan Wang, and Ahjamu Makalani, according to their election materials, are all active in the Progressive Democrats, a caucus of the Democratic Party, raising alarm bells about mainstream party funding and takeover of the "fiercely independent" radio station.  Makalani, who has moved from the Peace and Freedom Party and the Green Party to vice chair of the Progressive Democrats,  explained that they were supporting  John Edwards in the national elections because, "Kucinich wasn't a viable candidate." 

Other Committee candidates include Aaron, Summer Reese, Donna Warren, Lamont Yeakey, Lich Doan, Sarkis Ghazarian, Sergio Monteiro, and Shel Plotkin. Popular radio show hosts Shawn Casey O'Brien, Don Bustany, and Eben Rey are running with on the Committee ticket for staff seats on the local board.

Meanwhile, candidates without insider connections, largely newcomers to KPFK's election process, are left to slug their way through the morass of confusion, violations, and unannounced changes, in what is turning out to be something akin to a no rules wrestling match.

The elections are supposed to operate under the terms the new Pacifica Bylaws and the summaries provided to candidates in the 2007 Fair Campaign Provisions for Listener Candidates and for Programmers, Staff and Management , with the enforcement of the National Election Supervisor, Casey Peters, and Local Elections Supervisor, Liliana Sanchez. 

The Violations

Apparent violations by the Committee to date include:

• Committee candidate Donna Warren was on the KPFK Evening News of October 2, a week after candidates were prohibited from appearing on air.

• The Committee To Strengthen KPFK was provided with access to a mailing house and the use of the KPFK membership list held by that mailing house, while many other candidates were unaware that such a service was available and nearly all are unable to afford those services.  That list was used to send a mailer endorsing those candidates to the voters, unduly affecting the outcome of the election.

• The Committee To Strengthen KPFK used a website for four weeks that had “KPFK” in its URL, in direct violation of a prohibition against using the station call letters in an election-related URL.

• Ian Masters, program host and signatory to The Committee To Strengthen KPFK, in his broadcast of October 14 concluded that some candidates did not adhere to the mission of the Foundation, a clear disparagement of the candidates and violation of the rules for programmers.

• Masters during his broadcast of November 4 called some candidates “psychotic,” while he deemed The Campaign To Strengthen KPFK "sane" and "reasonable,", alleged that “pinche ethno-fascists” were disrupting the elections with "lots of race-baiting."  (The archived version of this broadcast was edited to remove the offending remarks.)

• Jon Weiner, program host and signatory to The Committee To Strengthen KPFK, includes a hyperlink on his show’s webpage from the KPFK website to his personal website , where he endorses the Committee slate.  Campaign rules prohibit using the station website to link to any endorsement.

• Lich Doan is running as a listener candidate although he was regularly announced as assistant producer for Background Briefing from June 1 to August 31, and he continues to be announced as the assistant producer for that show, giving him regular on-air name recognition and disadvantaging candidates without similar access to the airwaves.  Candidates are disqualified for listener seats after 30 hours of work for the station in the three months prior to the start of the campaign.

• Ajhamu Makalini, a write-in candidate according to The Campaign To Strengthen KPFK, did not have the requisite fifteen signatures for his nomination form but has been allowed to participate in the on-air and in-person forums.

KPFK website and archives inequities:

• Candidate Lich Doan’s statement included two references to his endorsement by Mr. Masters for the first month it was posted, an unfair advantage to candidates who did not use staff services to promote their candidacies.  Staff services are forbidden to candidates.

• Candidates Bayard Condon and Jubilee Shine have their names inaccurately posted on the website, and Joaquin Cienfuego’s name is misspelled on the ballot, so that their names on the website do not match their names as listed on the ballot.

• Candidates Bayard Condon, Reza Pour, Schyna Pour, and Alise Sochaczewski’s answers to the candidate’s questionnaire have not been posted on the station website, while other candidates’ answers have been available for weeks.

• The English on-air candidate forums for November 1 was not posted to the archives of station broadcasts until November 5 and the Spanish forum of the same date is still not available, although the forums for October 30 and 31 were available immediately after broadcast.

• The English-language forum of October 29 as originally posted edited out the responses of candidate Leslie Radford, and, when that was brought the attention of the Local Election Supervisor, the forum was hyperlinked to a non-existent file.

• Candidate Lawrence Reyes’ email address and telephone number, included in his candidate statement, were not included in the station website posting of his statement, and candidate Radford’s website was not included in the station posting of her statement, and these inequities continued for weeks into the campaign.  Other candidates’ statements that included email contacts and website addresses, notably addresses to the Committee's website, were posted properly.

• The number of viewings of each candidate statement is revealed on the list of candidates on the KPFK and Pacifica Foundation website , producing a bandwagon effect for some candidates, and this number can be artificially increased by repeatedly reloading the statement webpage.

Procedural infractions:

• The deadline to submit ballots was moved to November 26, but not all voters have been notified of the extension, so that some voters inevitably returned their ballots on the date indicated on the ballot without access to all information about the candidates or remedies of grievances that may occur after the original ballot deadline. The extension of the deadline also shortens the time to extend the election to assure a quorum, endangering the elections altogether.

• Unannounced changes to the published timetable, including more than a week’s delay in mailing the ballots, delaying the on-air candidates’ forums, delaying broadcast of the candidates’ on-air announcements, and extending the return date for ballots, have caused some candidates hardship in planning an election campaign.  

• No announcements have been made to the candidates of election events, changes to the election materials and election deadlines, any sanctions resulting from election violations, or the Pacifica National Board motion regarding elections passed and referred to committee, so that candidates are reliant on word of mouth to participate fully in the election process.  Links from Pacifica's homepage to Election News in English and Election News in Spanish lead to Washington, DC candidate statement.

• No time has been provided for a question-and-answer call-in period between candidates and station listeners as required by the Bylaws.

• Until November 5, no carts were aired regarding any election events, election materials, election deadlines, or any sanctions resulting from election violations, so that voters are denied timely election information and reminders on the airwaves, endangering informed voting and making a quorum.

• On-air announcements recorded by candidates did not begin to air until November 5, although the election timeline requires that broadcast begin immediately after the fund drive which ended on October 20.

• English-language forums will be rebroadcast while Spanish-language broadcasts will not, and neither candidate statements nor ballots are available in languages other than English.

• In-person candidate forums have been announced on the air only a handful of times, the announcements occurred only a day or two prior to the forum, and the address of the first in-person candidate forum was not posted on the station website until some hours before the forum, while announcements directed voters to that website for the address of the forum.

• The Local Election Supervisor appointed candidate Grace Aaron to convene the first in-person candidate forum and refused to intervene when that forum became contentious.  The Local Election Supervisor did not attend the second candidate forum, leaving the host to moderate the event.  In both cases, the lack of leadership diminished candidates’ communication with voters.

 

Leslie Radford has expertly encapsulated the multifaceted paralysis of governance at KPKF and the takeover by monied interests of the Democrat party that has squashed democracy, instituted self-censorship of programming content and corporatized listener representation/ownership at the radio station.

Volunteerism (the life-blood of listener-sponsored radio) has succumbed to a slick, glossy politicized professionalism exercised by Democrat Party hacks.

Leslie Radford has expertly encapsulated the multifaceted paralysis of governance at KPKF and the takeover by monied interests of the Democrat party that has squashed democracy, instituted self-censorship of programming content and corporatized listener representation/ownership at the radio station.

Volunteerism (the life-blood of listener-sponsored radio) has succumbed to a slick, glossy politicized professionalism exercised by Democrat Party hacks,

The station needs a diversity of ideas.

We know, in watching "free" elections under US capitalism, that there is no such thing. Wealth/ class, race, and gender play tremendous roles in limiting the available choices of candidates, and the media are all too happy to tell us who is a "credible" candidate.

We see much the same thing in the KPFK elections. Those who have long controlled the station in their own interests- so-called "progressive democrats and west side liberals have tried for years now to maintain the death grip on privilege that they have at the station. Some of them fought tooth and nail to prevent affirmative action in KPFK's elections, in an effort to ensure their continued dominance of the station, of what it broadcasts, and for whom it broadcasts. The same group of readily identifiable power players sought to eliminate KPFK's South African lesbian general manager, waging a a campaign of vilification that lasted literally, for years, form _before_ she ever set foot in the station until very recently when, at last, after years of harrassment, she had had enough, and resigned. The same "players" sought to make sure that the poor would have no voice in KPFK's future, and did all in their power to defeat proposals that would allow people to vote - even if they can't afford to subscribe to the station - by signing up under a system of waivers. Apparently, they never heard of the infamous poll taxes in the Old South that made it effectively impossible for poor people of color to vote, Apparently, they didn't understand that that bastion of injustice, th US Supreme court itself, had outlawed the practice, and apparently they were too tied to their own privilege to see clearly the comparison between the poll tax and the subscription fee that would "allow" one to vote in the white dominated atmosphere of KPFK's elections.

Or rather, perhaps they understood these matters clearly- all too clearly, and acted simply and consciously in their own naked self interest.

Perhaps they understood all along that the drive to get rid of the former general manager began with those who had been part of the hijacking of the station and mainstreaming it- people loyal to the old Schubb / Cooper regime that had purged virtually all radical programming form the air, and had certainly banned all radical programmers of color, and who had gone so far as to ban the pronunciation of Spanish place names with anything other than their English pronunciation.

No, these defensive an narrowly intersted people are not hard to identify. In past elections they called themselves PIRCR- People for Responsible Independent Community Radio.

NOW THEY GO BY"THE COMMITTEE TO STRENGTHEN KPFK."

AND THEY ARE TRYING TO BUY AN ELECTION AND CHEAT THEIR WAY TO VICTORY

Jon Weiner has just informed me that he has asked the KPFK webmaster to remove the link from KPFK to his website where he endorses the Committee.

But Air America is owned by rupert murdock.

........the company is owned primarily by Green Family Media, made up of New York real estate investor Stephen L. Green and his brother Mark J. Green, who closed on the purchase of the network on March 6, 2007 for US$4.25 million. The Greens' purchase of Air America Radio followed the company's Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing on October 13, 2006.

never happened.

What is absolutely verifiable is that I was NOT a member of the Local Advisory Board under Schubb. I came onto the interim LAB, after Schubb was gone and the lawsuit was won. This note opens with a lie that can be checked easily by anybody with web access.

No board would send a member in to "counsel" anybody if it involved a lawsuit, and I never had such a conversation with Ms. Manilla, nor would I. But since I wasn't even on the board, the author must have someone else in mind.

Georgia is accused of sexually harassing one woman, the only such charge that's been filed, as far as I know. I don't know the amount of damages sought, but "millions" sound utterly ludicrous to me.

I didn't know the minutemen had such good friends in KPFK--or does the Committee To Strengthen KPFK have such good friends among the minutemen?

Indymebia should not be trying to influence the KPFK elections. Leslie Radford's front page article is full of distortion and lies - and, guess what, she's a candidate. This is interference

It is highly unethical that Los Angeles Indymedia has decided to influence the KPFK Local Station Elections by posting a rant by one the candidates on its front page. To correct the injustice, Indymedia should now allow all of the other candidates the same opportunity. Short of that, Ms Radford should be disqualified.

I think Leslie Radford not only drank the Kool-Aid but now she's trying to get everyone else to chug-a-lug as well.

The outlandish actions Eva Georgia perpetuated on a regular basis were monumental and not just the rantings of rogue staff members as Radford would have you believe.

AFTRA Union members supported a vote of "no confidence in their General Manager" and yet these people who claim to support letting the little guy speak, tried to get the information stricken from the record!

Adding insult to injury - after all of the lawsuits and money that has been spent - Georgia got paid over $60,000 to go away! (http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2007/10/what_eva_georgia_cost_kpf.php)

Reading this fear fueling paranoia on IndyMedia today from blindly obediant people who backed Georgia as if she were Jim Jones is chilling to say the least.

Anyone who disagrees with them are immedetialy labeled right wing, racist or some operative within the CIA.

I am very concerned for the station at this time and don't know how long it will last if these people take over completely.

And I am beyond frustrated that the fine folks at IndyMedia thought that Radford's rantings should be posted on the main page. Don't you people know that she is running for the LSB?

In her letter she says, "Candidates Bayard Condon and Jubilee Shine have their names inaccurately posted on the website, and Joaquin Cienfuego’s name is misspelled on the ballot, so that their names on the website do not match their names as listed on the ballot."

Is she insinuating that due to a spelling error there is a conspiracy against these people? Maybe if you look at the full list of candidates for the LSB with your left eye closed you can see a clearly defined image of the messiah as well. Come on, wake up people.

nice effort at deflection Ms Radford (or should I say officer Radford). Clearly, if Eva Georgia was already GM, we're not talking about the unelcted LAB during Schubb's reign, but rather the unelected LAB afterwards - which you did sit on. And, as for my source, let's just say it's first-hand. Go ahead, Indymedia, do some journalism, find out the truth - that way, Ms Radford will be exposed as the blatant liar that she is

First of all, I identified myself in the "author" line of the article as a candidate.

I corrected the verifiable error in the comments above, and the writer concurs. The rest is fiction, but not fiction that anyone can prove or disprove, and I have no interest in getting into back-and-forth where I'm supposed to provide evidence that I *didn't* do something. That's absurd on the face of it. So far, no one has pointed to a factual error in the article itself. I will be happy to address those.

But if you would like to continue to smear me, go ahead. This is an intelligent readership--they'll make the distinction between smears and attacks. I'll bet they never knew that the crap inside KPFK was this vicious, but here goes.

Let me give them some background. Many of the same crew from the Committee that opposed Ms. Georgia and (I'm pretty sure) are slamming me here first came after me when I opposed ratification of Pacifica bylaws without guarantees of representation by oppressed groups. We lost that battle, but I stand behind it.

Pacifica is a "minority-owned" network for purposes of Corporation for Public Broadcasting funding, although it's listenership is largely white. That means, to this day, the national board has to be a majority peoples of color according to CPB rules to get CPB funding.

As I hear it, the Pacifica struggle began with GM Mark Schubb, abetted by Marc Cooper, purging mostly Black programmers from KPFK. Shortly afterwards, the national board floated a plan to sell the Berkeley station to finance a string of smaller Black Pacifica stations across the South. Carol Spooner led a listener revolt to demand that the listenership elect the local boards, which would, in turn, elect the national board--the "majority minority" national board.

I came into KPFK after Spooner had won the lawsuit, as the new Bylaws were being hammered out. And that's where I "earned" the animosity of Spooner and her local minions, supporting representation for the various communities of color, gender "difference," and the differently-abled.

You can meet one of those purged programmers, Dedon Kamathi, returned to the air by Eva Georgia, tonight at a candidates' forum at the Lucy Florence Coffee House, Gallery and Theater, 3351 West 43rd Street LA at 7:00 p.m.

And I'll be there, and I bet whoever is writing these comments will also be there. Let the fireworks begin (again).

Personal attacks are the last refuge of scoundrels. The name calling diatribes and efforts to create an atmosphere of scapegoating against Leslie Radford here are consistent with what has gone on in KPFK and Pacifica for years.

Since PIRCR and its new front group, "The Committee to 'Strengthen' KPFK" have long been on record - in formal votes - as opposing affirmative action remedies to balance representation on local boards for disenfranchised communities, since they have long been on record as opposing waivers for the poor so that they can participate in the station's elections, and since the election violations they have engaged in are indisputable, they have no recourse but to attempt to slander Radford, and hope, as they do it, that you, the reader, are gullible enough to not see through the ploy.

Notice the obvious. None of them deny the elections violations, nor the effort to turn the elections into a "he who has the money Rules" game _ they can't - they've been condemned by the Pacifica National Board for trying to buy the elections, none of them deny their opposition to affirmative action or fee waivers for the poor, none of them deny the long term effort to drive out the former GM, nor that it began before she even took office (Not that the former GM was saintly, by anyone's standards - I had marked differences with her). All they have left is to slander the one who has exposed what they cannot and do not deny.

Ok here comes the Spin Democratic/Repulican Party like Operations attacking the Truth that is undenialable that Ms. Radford inform us about. As these type of Arrognant Money Power Hungry slate with an Agenda that is is hidden from Public viewing as it is an attempt Take Over of KPFK to polish off Grassroots Voices with there Glossy mailer just as the Repulicrats do to ask for your vote and then act in there OWN Interest as the staff is doing now. The Quelling of Dissent and Craving out of Consent to Govern only for there own interests as Listener Democracy is Explioted for the Staff own ends($) as the Information being put out by those earning a Salary that i help paid, Paid Staff play Ring Around the Pony with Air time gaining a Salary and with Impunity controling the Information that is put out on KPFK wherther its thru Editorial Commentary by those whom already have shows or Station paiding Jobs and doing commentary or appearing as Guest on shows hence Censoring the possiblity of New fresh ideas and voices and De-constructing of serious National Security State issues, accepting the Pharmaceutical lies that so call Aids Drugs cure Aids while allowing this lie the Pharmaceutical Industry Laughs its way into the Bank without being Check or Challenged by the unPaid/Paid Programmers Censoring the Alternative Views of people as this Industry has engage in modern Human Genocide as it has done the same on 911 Truth as some of these same programmers and Slate of candidates condone the so call Humanirian Bombing of Bosnia during Clinton Sleazy and greasing Rein. So now here we come again with now a Second Hi-jacking attempt being wage by the so call Flashy Deep Pocket and Arrogant Committee To Strengthen KPFK these are Remants of the Chubb and Cooper Crowd whom have been Engage in a Lenghty Undermining of KPFK efforts to remain free and Independent and grassroots then Slandering the K-GM refer to LA Weekly as link to the great Fact Base Article Ms. Radford wrote. The relationship's are very cozy by most of the Listed Endorsers of this Arrogant Slate of mindless Mainstream Party Officals and the ongoing relationships with Marc Cooper and Chrubb for those whom had no idea these where the supporters of suppressing Dissent and Grassroots Democracy in Pacifica and hence making the conditions Possible for a Hi-jacking of our station and network. Ask yourself one question why will the Rich want to invest so much money to take over a Local Station Board knowing most of us struggle to support our station with our modest incomes and even the Poor contribute as much as there can or Volunteer. So my question to you all is Why Has The Rich and Powerful engage in an attempt to unduly Posion our Grassroots Election Process? Also, are we to Keep Our Station Power By The People or over-Power by the Rich and Well-Connected with a Clear Agenda to Lock Communities and new Voices out as these actors and thinkers only are looking out for there own interest and not of those of the Main Stake Holders the KPFK Listener Supporters. Honest

My name is Ricco Ross, I am one of the candidates running for LSB and it is really disheartening to read all of the negatively about the station which is about so much more to our community . It has been informative as I didn't really know much of the specifics re all the in fighting and you have prompted a conversation that is revealing. Having said that, Leslie I don't know you from Adam and like wise you doesn't know me. To some how imply that because I am a Progressive Democrate, active and a voting member of the Democratic Party (which I must admit lacks a spine to say the least.) and am trying to do all that I can to help change the governments position of looking after the "haves" and forgetting the "have not's", somehow makes me an unworthy candidate is something I strongly take objection to. Because I am tired of complaining and have gotten off my back side and become an activist "...raises alarm bells about mainstream party funding and takeover". ? Wow, that is some leap and if you can make such a leap there, I now have to question any and everything you say. I have met the other candidates on and off my slate and in my opinion all of us seem to truly want the same thing. Which is the best for KPFK. Some of us are from different slates, back rounds and some from similar back rounds, but from what I have heard, we seem to have a common goal, all be it different views of how to achieve that goal. We all want the best for KPFK and as some of us will be elected, we might want to start trying to work together now, because there may be different slates running, but in the end there will only be one LSB.

Ricco,

For the record, there's only one slate in these elections, the Committee To Strengthen KPFK.

What really interests me here is that you're talking and listening, you're getting your feet wet at KPFK, and that you're moving into activism. You might talk to Rodrigo or Kimberly or Lydia or Bill--all LSB members who are leaving. They all believe in KPFK, at least in its potential, and they've all struggled to do what is best for the station.

And I'd be happy to sit down over a cup of coffee with you if we can get our schedules together, and you can question me all you want--my veracity, my views of KPFK, my background there. Email me--my address is above.

As far as knowing you, I only know that you're a Democrat, and that's what I commented on. I'm pretty sure that most KPFK listeners want to know that four members of PDA have suddenly appeared on the KPFK scene.

Your concern with the article seems to be that I've linked the entry of local Democratic Party leaders along with a sudden influx of cash into the KPFK election to alarm bells I've heard from friends, who've heard them from friends, who've heard them from friends--a whole swath of people who are wondering what's happening. I didn't create those alarms, but they don't seem to be much of a leap to me.

I expressed the concerns I'm hearing (and feeling) to Ahjamu after the Santa Monica forum, and he seemed to hear what I was saying. If we can talk, maybe you will grasp some of what raised alarm bells for me, too.

--Leslie

Like thousands of "Yours in Struggle" documents that I've read about Pacifica matters in the past six years, this one starts off with a lie, or, to be more generous, dis-or-misinformation.

The listeners did not "win" a lawsuit. There was never even a Trial. In fact, the Evidence to that lawsuit is still being hidden away, buried, far outside the reach of any current staff or Directors. The former Plaintiffs and all the EDs to date and all the PNB members to date and the national staff have all spent the last five years pretending that those 43 boxes of historical documents are better left to a quite encounter with an industrial strength paper shredder.

The truth is, the Evidence was never presented to any jury and the lawsuit was settled out of court. No one won. Boy, is that an understatement.

It was settled for a couple of reasons:

1. The malicious lawsuits had bled Pacifica of money to the end point.
2. The campaigns of harassment had "removed" several of the key Defendants so that remaining body was not cohesive enough to pull together support for the last 30 days before Trial.
3. The interim Chair had delusions that he could negotiate a "peace" within Pacifica and he trusted that the Plaintiffs would be honest in their execution of that settlement. Boy, was he wrong.

The facts of the case were never "won."

Having left the first sentence in dismay, I scanned some of the other paragraphs. Leslie's claims about about the Committee to Protect KPFK being up and running for a month on a kpfk address is also a lie. Her attempt to lump all the slate candidates into one monolithic ideology is also a lie. Her suggestion that there is "dirty money" in the campaign is a lie. And so on, and so on.

Nalini

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and
do not necessarily reflect those of the LA Indymedia Center editorial
staff.
The article has been feature for the purpose of debate and not as an
endorsement or promotion any viewpoint or candidate.

I have in my pocket a ten dollar bill. my left hand wants 7 of it, my right hand wants three of it, and my toe wants 12 of it. My cat is hungry and my toe really want to buy a bike.

I am not saying that the kpfk struggle is a battle between one person, I am saying that its a crazy-ass-conflict whose rules of engagement and whose internal logic creates further madness.

This fight over the tools of simulation and simulacra and commodified rhetoric is a drain. This KPFK stuggle has drained the progressive scene of some meaningful action and actors.

I DO NOT KNOW the ins and outs of this struggle, but I have seen how this prolonged dogfight has killed a lot of grassroots projects and potentials and created really inflated rhetoric on all sides. The "politics" seem rotten on all sides... the politics (the way that people end up acting "politically").
I think all the idea that all the politicians in this fight are wonderful people.

Turn the station.

The problem within Pacifica is the effort by political groups to control without sharing.

Unfortunately, Spooner has decided to support "visionaries" whose goals are to agendize Pacifica at all stations, and spout selected viewpoints, and no others.

Worse, this encourages the sectarians at WBAI to clutch the station ever more tightly, lest they have to give up and share with anyone but their own single point of political view.

This drives away anyone who may be "on the Left" that does not subscribe to or embrace those beliefs, isolating Pacifica even further from what was its once considerable support base.

Radford's an idiot, pushing her own agenda, but she "gets it" more than most of the people involved and scrabbling for these seats.

Don't elect "activists"; they are activists for a reason, and unless you want your station being their bully pulpit, you don't need them in control.

Don't have "litmus tests" or anything that filters out "objectionable" political views; it's the diversity of viewpoints that made Pacifica the legend that it has lost by focusing too tightly on niche issues.

Don't elect "long time listeners", because they will want to turn back the clock to whenever they first started listening, and ignore the current realpolitik and are mostly ignorant of the newer technologies to spread the Pacifica message.

Save the station, save the network, save the progressive viewpoint. Keep the political viewpoints diverse and out of power.

The important claim that everyone seems to be missing is that the audio
files were censored to exclude certain comments from the files. Can
anyone attest or offer evidence to confirm this highly disturbing claim??

My name is Michael Pimental. I am a founding member along with Tracy
Larkins and numerous others of the KPFK lisdteners group. I then left
for Houston and became a member of the Pacifica Listeners Union and the
Houston Committee for Peoples Radio which wrote bylaws, held an election
and elected the Houston Interim Local Advisory Board of which I was a
member.. Which the Pacifica interim National Board voted to have merged
with the then appointed board and therby recognized the unique
democratic efforts of local listeners and volunteers which followed the
pattern of KPFA.

I must insist with a very firm grasp of the matter under discussion
that there was NEVER ANY other interim LAB, thus Leslie can not claim to
have been a member of an "interim" board as the board that she joined
was the same board, chaired by David Adelson, lead plaintiff in the LAB
lawsuit, that had existed throughout the hijacking and before. Indeed
Davis Adelson recruited a number of the hijackers in that role as LAB
chair, he also oversaw Leslie Radford's appointment..

There are indeed many contrived notions contained in this piece and the
comments appended and I won't adress them all but first I must address
the initial claim :

"After a struggle for democratic elections that nearly destroyed a
progressive radio network, local elections at KPFK are besmirched by
unchecked money, influence, and confusion."

"Six years ago, listeners to a progressive radio network called Pacifica
won a lawsuit that allowed KPFK members to elect representatives to
their local station board, and through them, to determine who sat on the
Pacifica National Board. The demand for democracy was an eruption
against a board of directors that considered selling one of the stations
to finance a string of smaller Black stations in the South. The
settlement instituted the first democratically-run radio network in the
U.S., another groundbreaking advance in the network's long history.
Such are the contradictions of democracy."

This should read in the articulated understanding of those who know

'After struggle for control of the network by operatives of certain
democratic party interests that eventually placed the lead plaintiffs
in a California lawsuit in control of the network, local elections at
KPFK are besmirched by the fact that the network continues to resent
community participation in controll of the network'

'Six years ago, people claiming to represent listeners and financial
supprters of a progressive radio network called Pacifica settled a
lawsuit that allowed KPFK members to elect representatives to somthing
called a local station board, and through them, to determine who sat on
the Pacifica National Board. The demand for democracy was not supported
by the Pacifica Campaign. The settlement allowed a group of nutballs to
rewrite Pacifica's bylaws which saw the spawning of the first
democratically-governed radio network(if you can call it that) in the
U.S., another groundbreaking advance in the destruction of Pacifica.
Such are the contradictions of democracy.'

Other than the numerous and deliberate mischaracterizations about the
members of the other slate and their motivations and actions as well as
the grievances aginst the election process. she failed to focus on the
relevant issue to indy media that a "Free speech radio network" and
it's station KPFK is deliberately altering audio files and censoring
certain speakers comments from their web archive. If true this is more
relevant than any other claim in her list of claims that rate from who
cares to, oh yeah that sucks.

The claims about money and the mailing are a real yawner. California law
has allowed this kind of communication between members of a non-profit
for many years and the fact that the candidates weren't aware of this
and are now complaining thru Leslie speaks poorly of their ability to
represent any communities of size or to even serve on such a board
effectively, whereas those that she besmirches are well known members of
a multifacted multiracial community called KPFK.

The other respondents are not well informed as to the fact that the
whole damn Free Pacifica movement was being manipulated and controlled
by the left inteligentsia and radical democratic party operatives from
the moment that the LAB lawsuit was filed, long before Carol Spooner and
her "RELATOR" status as confered by the California AG ever came into play.

After the suits merged their efforts there was no hope of really getting
Pacifica back to it's roots, only a hope that those that cared enough
would get stuck in all this madness in order to divert their energies
with control remaining in the hands of the liberals that support the
Satanic system of neverending credits and donations of credit.

Slasher

Interesting that Nalini has joined this discussion apparently defending the election process when I understood that she opposed the use of elections at all to determine the leadership of a non-profit.

Nevertheless, she raises some questions. "Win," I suppose, is in the mind of the player. In the settlement, the PNB had to relinquish control of Pacifica and the listeners got elections. Off the top of head, I can't think of a thing that board got except a 1/3 say on the reconstituted board as the bylaws were being rewritten.

The URL issue:

I said, "The Committee To Strengthen KPFK used a website for four weeks that had “KPFK” in its URL, in direct violation of a prohibition against using the station call letters in an election-related URL."

The rule says, "Candidate websites may not include the word 'Pacifica' or the station
call letters or frequency numbers in the URL."
Proof: I hope the url in the pic is visible here. It was changed a couple of weeks ago, but I managed to catch a screenshot before it changed.

"Monolithic ideology"? If you're referring to the PDA, I was clear that there are differences--that four members are Dem Party, and there are others whose affiliations except with the PDA members on the slate I don't know. But I hope they stand for *some* monolithic ideology , or why would they encourage voters to vote for a slate? Without something in common, the "slate" boils down to a group with a common publicity stunt, and I hope they stand for more than that. I'm not sure, though, since their platform is something I believe nearly every candidate would stand behind.

As to the money, until there is campaign finance disclosure in Pacifica, there will be questions.

Michael, you're mistaken. Lydia Brazon was chair when I came onto the iLAB, after Dave, after the settlement. But I agree with some of what you say after that.

Leslie Radford's "Premiere" candidate, Lawrence Reyes was banned from KPFK indefinitely by her own beloved Eva Georgia (see letter from Eva below).
The racist actions of this white woman (L Radford) include working hard to get Donna Warren, a black activist, and Lich Doan a Vietnamese activist thrown off the election, citing the fair campaign provisions. She is apparently completely ignoring the violations committed by her own pit bull. Mr. Reyes has made repeated threats of violence towards KPFK members including threatening handicapped individuals, women and fund drive volunteers.
Noting the very real threat of injury and liability to the station and Pacifica, the outgoing GM made the wise decision to ban this individual from the station.
Don't be swayed by the Cointel project of Ms Radford. She is working hard to confuse and disorient those of you that care about KPFK. Along with her team of unwitting provocateurs like the dim witted, screaming shrew Tracy Larkins, they will do everything they can to confuse or disenfranchise people that want what's best for the station. So they can make sure the listenership remains small and they can continue to have power and control over a increasingly marginalized station board.

If you want to make the right decisions, research all the candidates. There are several slates going around. Including Leslie's, which was advertised in Change Links. There's nothing wrong with looking at any of them, but make your own decisions. Be independent.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eva Georgia
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 12:20 PM
To: Armando Gudino; Sue Welsh; ellarinas; Operations; Bob Conger; Jack VanAken
Subject: letter re Lawrence Reyes
To Staff
This is to notify all KPFK staff and interested parties that as of July 19, 2007 Mr. Lawrence Reyes was placed on three months probationary status, during which time he was not to have engaged in any uncontrolled outbursts of anger or threatening conduct on station premises, or face immediate banning. It should also be noted that Mr. Reyes at that time had voluntarily agreed to refrain from participation in the upcoming October fund drive.

Seeing as Mr. Reyes displayed uncontrolled rage in the station on August 13, during the Programming Oversight Committee meeting, which incident prompted his removal from the PrOC as a member, and due to numerous complaints and concerns expressed by staff and volunteers, it is hereby noticed that Lawrence Reyes is prohibited from entering KPFK premises for all station business, be it volunteer or committee activities,
indefinitely, pending review by KPFK's interim General Manager, once appointed.

Moreover, I am requesting that Pacifica's National Elections
Supervisor, Casey Peters, be notified of a possible violation of the Fair Campaign Provisions for Candidates #4: "No candidate may engage in any act of physical violence or threats of violence against
another candidate or any members of the Pacifica community." which is retroactive to July 25, in the event that Mr. Reyes should apply for candidacy in the Local Station Board election.

It should further be noted that Pacifica's Bylaws state "...nor may air time be made available to some Listener-Sponsor Delegate candidate (s) but not to others. All candidates for election as a Listener-Sponsor Delegate shall be given equal opportunity for equal air time, which air time shall include time for a statement by the candidate and a question and answer period with call-in listeners." --Article 4, Delegates, Section 6, Fair Campaign Provisions. As a consequence of this requirement in the Bylaws it may become unavoidably necessary at some time for Mr. Reyes to enter station premises, subject to any possible ruling to the contrary by
the National Election Supervisor.

Eva Georgia
General Manager, KPFK

Lies and Slander, Eben ,the real Threat is that your Pit Bull atttack and threaten Lawrence and he has remain Humble waiting for a Just process as Eva gave in to her Staff Munity and on the way out Ban, Lawrence w/o a Process did you hear his letter to the LSB. I think the real Threat to your Comm to Try and Take over KPFK is that Lawrence will get elected. Eben perhaps you should refer people to your Racist Website do you really see a Human Being when you look in the Mirror.

Hey were your hands shaking with uncontrollable rage when you typed that message above?
Yeah we know about the pathetic letter he read that was supposed to be an apology. He can't even be honest in his account of the incident, about making violent threats to a volunteer during a fund drive. He made accusations and tried to blame the person he threatened. Some apology.
Don't you realize the whole incident referenced had multiple witnesses and was even recorded by the stations security camera? Stop lying about it. And this is just one of at least a dozen incidents where this bi-polar, unstable individual has threatened members of the pacifica family. Banning him from the station was done by a consensus of all station management, and noticed to the staff and public in the letter by Eva, above.

Dear Indymedia editors:

What you are doing here degrades this website, on 2 counts.

1. The disclaimer you've added to this article is absurd. This piece has thorough documentation (I've checked all the links ( as you should have, as well. I have never seen a story so well documented on LA Indymedia that was abused with this kind of disclaimer. For the most part, the facts in this article have not been disputed - they are indisputable. I can only suppose that you are hiding the fact that one of the LA Indymedia editors, who shall remain nameless, for the moment, at least, has ties to key members of the Committee to Strengthen KPFK ( including having worked on the prime time program of one such member)and that the disclaimer is actually a partisan effort to shield that group of candidates from the impact of their own abuses.

2. Speaking of abuses, I thought there was a rule against using the comments section of LA Indymedia to make personal attacks - or does that only apply when key members of the editorial staff don't have a personal stake in the issues at hand? Vicious personal attacks that have nothing whatsoever to do with the matters at hand have been allowed to remain in plain view, here, when normally the practice of the editors has been to "hide" them.

The personal attacks in question have all been against independent candidates, and every such attack has been allowed to stand. You, as editors, have left your own biases showing very clearly to anyone with eyes to see. I've refrained from naming the LA Indymedia editor in question, because it is disturbing enough to witness people being treated the way you are allowing them to be treated - against all precedent, without adding more sickness into the disease you are allowing to stew here. It is simply horrid that you let Leslie Radford be attacked his way without any justification or foundation, insofar as she is one of the best writers ever to grace your pages. You'd think at least you'd have respect for your own writers. Take a hint. Don't discount fact as opinion, and unlike KPFK, - FOLLOW YOUR OWN RULES. Don't allow this kind of abuse, and don't foster it by discounting valid reporting and allowing important local advocacy journalists to be smeared.

Years ago, in the days before back in the day, Pacifica waited three years for its license renewal while the House Un-American Activities Committee and the FBI tried to pin Communist conspiracy charges on the network.  A decade later, in a free speech fight that stretched to the U.S. Supreme Court, Pacifica fought for the right to broadcast George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" monologue.

Years ago, the police busted into KPFK and hauled the manager off to jail as the programmers aired the Patty Hearst tapes, secretly hand-delivered to the station, as I hear the story.

In 2003, General Manager Eva Georgia brought all the resources of the station to sponsoring international anti-war protest, and the station brought 60,000 people into the streets, the largest anti-war march in Los Angeles since Vietnam. This is the woman leading members of the Committee to Strengthen KPFK sought for years to drive out of the station.

Today, as I write this, Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca, who smashed the South Central Farm encampment and tore up the food, is in the studio as a guest, and the host, a member of the Committee to Strengthen KPFK, wraps up with "You're a good man, Lee Baca."

What will KPFK become?

KPFK must serve the future, not the past. It should serve those who seek to preserve life and foster liberation, not those, like Lee Baca, who destroy  the hope of us all for a new and better world. The issues for activists of today and our future are enormous.  Dismantling a world empire.  Liberating the people from the social control of brutality, terror, surveillance, incarceration, and genocide.  Dismantling the machine of perpetual war.  Rescuing the ecosystem.  Overcoming Euro-american cultural supremacism.  Surviving technological, economic, and societal disintegration.  These are the defining challenges confronting the 21st century.  They demand leadership from those who will live with the consequences of the decisions we make now.  Will KPFK take the lead?

The question of KPFK's future has become an ugly "debate" at Los Angeles Indymedia. What you read in L.A. Indymedia comments is an authentic reflection of the culture at KPFK now: name calling, snitchjacketing, mocking people with literacy problems or learning disabilities, intimidating other independent media.  "Politics" today inside KPFK is little more than scapegoating, hunting down people who speak truth to power.  The Committee to Strengthen KPFK struck the coup de grâce: a petition denouncing the general manager because she was being sued,  and spreading unproven accusations to the mainstream media.  Eva left, after suffering through five years of what you see on L.A. Indymedia and much worse.  And now they're coming in for the kill, an election that will determine the next general manager.

I got sucked into the mire.  L.A. Indymedia asked me to repost an article from my website here, and I did, knowing full well that the vitriol at KPFK was toxic.  Nobody has proven that anything I wrote was wrong, but such is the outrage of a bruised privileged class.  They can take their unproven crap about the general manager to the L.A. Times and the L.A. Weekly, but how dare I tell the truth on an open publishing site?  L.A. Indymedia has caved: they distanced themselves from the article with a disclaimer the likes of which I've never seen there.  They allow personal attacks to remain in plain view, a part of the "debate" they called for.  But, knowing the pressure, the threats, I can hardly blame them.

Except that L.A. Indymedia is open publishing, people.  You wanna pitch some other story, you wanna try to spin the facts, you wanna promote your own candidacy or candidate there, go for it.

But the Committee hasn't done that and and won't do it.  Their supporters' debate of choice is anonymous smears, snitchjacketing, mockery, fear-mongering, implicit threats.

KPFK, bastion of radical free speech, at the end of this election in a little more than three weeks, could be the voice of a faction of the Democratic Party and their allies, the voice of those who posted their vicious attacks on L.A. Indymedia, the voice of Sheriff Lee Baca.

TAKE OVER THIS RADIO STATION!  Do it for Will Lewis, the former KPFK manager who refused to give the Hearst tapes to the FBI, for Carlin, for communists, for anarchist Pacifica founder Lew Hill, for radical-ass, in your face radio--take over this station.

My words here are carefully chosen: vote the fuckers out.  And vote in fresh, authentically radical voices. Vote for Kahllid A. Al-Almin , currently in jail framed by the LAPD.  Vote for Joaquín Cienfuegos of Copwatch, vote for Rufina Juárez who led the South Central Farm resistance, vote for Lawrence Reyes of the Puerto Rican Alliance and a former affiliate of the Young Lords Party.  Vote for Schyna Pour , a budding high school radical and daughter of anti-Shah Iranian Reza Pour .  Vote for Jubilee Shine who organized the rally to stop the minutemen from taking Leimert Park.  Vote for former student radical against the Shah Moe Mansour , driven out of his country decades ago.  Vote for anti-racist, anti-war activist Chuck Anderson who screams at the system from inside the darkness of Orange County.

Don't vote for Grace Aaron, the head of the Committee to Strengthen KPFK, who led the public campaign of lies against Eva Georgia, or Aaron's supporters.  Don't vote for Donna J. Warren who brags about her twenty years with the Department of Defense as her qualification to run KPFK.  Don't vote for Ahjamu Makalani, vice chair of the California Democratic Party Progressive Caucus or Democratic caucus members Linda Sutton, Ricco Ross, and Dan Wang.

If you're not a voter, or if you are, spread the word on your facebook, your myspace, your email lists.  Use this article, use your own words, but tell people: the station is yours by all that's right in the world, and it's time to claim it.

The Committee and its supporters inside and outside the station won't let that happen, of course.  They've already concocted a joke of a lawsuit asserting that the station should have distributed their glossy, high-priced brochure in the envelope with the ballots or some such nonsense--after all, that's their privilege--so that, if they can't buy the election, they can void it.  If they win this fraud of an election in spite of your vote, or if they go to court to disqualify you, take over the station.

KPFK is your legacy, you've earned it through your struggle in the streets and in your communities.  Learn what KPFK was, dream of what it could be--the most powerful radio signal west of the Mississippi, capable of mobilizing sixty thousand people to take the streets from Santa Barbara to Riverside to San Diego.  The doors are open.  Take over KPFK.  Claim it, own it, make it yours.

This will be hidden. This SHOULD BE hidden. It will be hidden because it is an attack on Te LA Indymedia editor who backs the COmmittee to "Strengthen" KPFK It is an attack on Ana Kunkin, asking if Kunkin is a cop, and it asks that because Kunkin has left attacks up in plain view suggesting that an LA Indymedia writer is a cop. THAT KIND OF ATTACK IS NOT USUALLY ALLOWED HERE..iiT IS ONLY BEING ALLOWED BECAUSE ANA KUNKIN SUPPORTS THOSE WHO MAKE SUCH CHARGES, AND WHO LACK THE INTEGRITY TO DEFEND THEMSELVES FROM THE TRUTH IN ANY OTHER WAY.

Only cops benefit from snitch jacketing activists, so there is reason to suspect that anyone who does it, or who allows it, is a cop.

SO, THE QUESTION IS, IS ANA KUNKIN A COP?

IF THIS ATTACK IS "HIDDEN" WHILE OTHER SUCH ATTACKS ARE LEFT UP, YOU WILL HAVE THE ANSWER.

The man is competent, and would be an effective representative. He's also got an anger management problem, and seems to enjoy rage.

Whatever you may claim about Lawrence Reyes, he's not angry enough to sue Pacifica, and he may very well have grounds to do so. See below.

From: liliana sanchez <votekpfk@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 12, 2007 11:57 AM
Subject: letter in regards to Lawrence Reyes candidacy
T Ali Lexa <alexa@kpfk.org>

The challenge to Mr. Lawrence Reyes candidacy has been reviewed by the Foundation Counsel. The Reyes candidacy will be allowed to proceed.

The reasons given are:

1. No police report was filed.
2. The letter written by General Manager Eva Georgia banning Mr. Reyes from the station makes an exception for Mr. Reyes to be allowed to enter the station for election related recordings if he were to become a candidate.
3. A similar case of violence (not just threats) in Houston in 2006 resulted in the ban of the candidate from the studio but did not revoke his right to run for the LSB.
4. The probability that, if Mr. Reyes were to sue the Foundation upon being banned from his candidacy, the Foundation would likely lose the case and be liable for damages and expenses.

This ruling in no way condones Mr. Reyes alleged threats, nor does it alter the ban invoked by Eva Georgia. Lawrence Reyes and all candidates are reminded that violation of the Fair Campaign Provisions may lead to sanctions which includes their right to run for the LSB.

Liliana Sanchez
Local Election Supervisor

On 11 Nov 2007, Leslie Radford wrote:

>After a struggle for democratic elections that nearly destroyed a
>progressive radio network, local elections at KPFK are besmirched
>by unchecked money, influence, and confusion.

The struggle that "nearly destroyed a progressive radio network" was about much more than elections. Democratization was identified as a remedy to some of the complaints in the lawsuits and had broad support among listeners. After a settlement was agreed to by the parties in the lawsuits, there was a new struggle around the fashioning of elections in new organizational bylaws.

>Six years ago, listeners to a progressive radio network called Pacifica
>won a lawsuit that allowed KPFK members to elect representatives to
>their local station board, and through them, to determine who sat on the
>Pacifica National Board.

Democratization was one of the victories achieved by Plaintiffs in a Settlement Agreement. The lawsuits themselves were not won. Pacifica's failure to amend its bylaws and hold elections within the time frame agreed to in the Settlement threatened to abort the agreement and force the case to trial, surrendering the victory achieved. This was avoided through substantial compliance with the terms agreed to, under court supervision.

>The demand for democracy was an eruption against a board of directors
>that considered selling one of the stations to finance a string of smaller
>Black stations in the South.

This was a theory promoted by organizers for the plaintiffs, and used as propaganda to considerable effect. There was enough truth and evidence of truth to sustain the rumor, but the evidence was exaggerated out of proportion to its actual significance. In fact, a board expresses its will by passing motions and may often "consider" something only to reject it.

>The settlement instituted the first democratically-run radio network in the U.S.,
>another groundbreaking advance in the network's long history. Such are the
>contradictions of democracy. Today, that democratic outburst has fallen
>victim to a single slate of candidates supported by "The Committee to Strengthen
>KPFK," a powerful amalgam of Local Station Board members, station staff, and
>new faces, and endorsed by attorney Carol Spooner, one of the key figures in
>the original effort to democratize Pacifica.

Slates and parties are natural outgrowths of democratization, not rampaging monsters creating victims willy-nilly. Elections necessarily have winners and losers.

>And they have injected the influence of a financed elections and Democratic
>Party politics into an institution that prides itself on being "powered by the people."

Members have rights to campaign through advertizing. Advertizing is often not free. Members have rights to raise funds and spend them on campaigns. A delegate campaign funded by voluntary donations is as much "powered by the people" as a listener-sponsored radio station.

>The Committee and procedural violations threaten to confuse and discourage
>candidates, and endanger the quorum necessary for election certification.

Campaign advertizing typically increases voter response, so helps obtain quorum. Pacifica's quorum for listener-sponsor members is 10%, which is high in comparison with similar nonprofits.

>Lack of oversight, improper procedures, and an insider Committee so arrogant
>that rules seem meant to be broken, are spreading a viscous taint on the
>credibility of any election outcome.

This is hyperbole. Pacifica's elections are independently supervised to prevent partisan oversight. The Committee to Strengthen KPFK includes outsiders and insiders. It is not arrogant for members to demand the rights of members under law. The election rules were changed this year and some of the new rules have been violated in several station areas. Unless voluntarily corrected when an infraction is pointed out, remedy typically requires a favorable ruling on a formal complaint submitted to elections supervisors with adequate documentation of the claim of violation. The rule prohibiting station call letters in a candidate web address is of questionable legality and wisdom, but the CSKPFK is in compliance with this rule. The "vicious taint" and "stolen election" stuff is in the imagination of the author.

>At the same time, a blackout on election violations is so thorough, the
>determination to make quorum so overpowering after the near-failure
>of previous elections, that much of the electorate is unaware that
>infractions have occurred.

Infractions always occur, but not all claims are valid. Most of the electorate are unaware of the various claims and infractions that occur in every Pacifica election. At least one Pacifica election must apparently fail for lack of quorum for the PNB to recognize that the quorum requirement is too high, since this hasn't been fixed yet. Pacifica must obtain the approval of a quorum for a bylaws amendment to reduce quorum, so should not wait for an additional decline in membership interest.

>Even candidates who file complaints receive, at most and only occasionally,
>an acknowledgment that their complaint has been received.

Election Supervisors have been ruling on complaints received. Several candidates who have filed complaints have received notice that their complaints were denied. Some complaints have been accepted as valid and remedies applied or imposed. The website for tracking complaints never got built, so we don't know how many complaints and rulings there have been or if there is a backlog.

>Already, in the
>fifth week of the campaign, the Committee To Strengthen KPFK has wantonly
>violated several of the eleven simple rules laid out for fair elections.

The indymedia article's use of the KPFK logo in connection with its candidate author was itself a violation of the Pacifica election rules.

>The KPFK candidate webpages and broadcast archives, under the control of
>Committee member and station webmaster Ali Lexa, been used for numerous
>inequities in publishing candidate information.

There have been false claims of inequities and some honest errors. The station webmasters are naturally blamed for all errors in elections postings. KPFK is lucky to have a webmaster who cares about local governance.

>And the procedures and timetable of election events distributed to the
>candidates and posted on the station website for voters has been altered
>with little or no notification to the voters and the candidates.

Alteration to posted notices is public notice. Communication between elections supervisors and candidates has been poor.

>To date, no sanctions have been announced to repair the damage to
>independent candidates or to inform the voters.

Remedies are imposed only if formal complaint is made and found to have merit. Remedies may be imposed without public announcement.

>In spite of its long list of rules violations, the Committee didn't hesitate to inject
>the election with the influence of privately financed campaigning, purchasing
>a high-gloss, multi-colored mailer sent to KPFK members, at a cost of $6,000
>to $7,000 according to Committee director and candidate Grace Aaron, even
>as the donation-based station suffers a marked downturn in contributions.

Only a few of the items on Leslie's list actually qualify as alleged rules violations by slate members. Candidates finance their election campaigns privately because there are no public funds available for Pacifica's elections.

>The Committee To Strengthen KPFK has taken the first step to becoming a
>non-profit corporation itself, by affiliation with the International Humanities
>Center, which has adopted the Committee as one of its projects, providing
>the group with a tax shelter and anonymity for its donor or donors.

Association with a nonprofit actually increases transparency and accountability under IRS regulations. Pacifica elections are not subject to the various regulations and controls that apply to the financing of public elections.

>The Pacifica National Board, recognizing the serious disadvantage the mailer
>poses to low- and moderate-income independent candidates, and that
>"spending of large sums of money in Pacifica campaigns runs counter to the
>noncommercial nature of the Pacifica Radio Network while underscoring the
>discriminatory nature of campaign financing so prevalent and objectionable
>in mainstream elections," moved on November 1 to begin a process to find
>remediation for the disadvantaged candidates.

A Director from KPFK persuaded the PNB to attempt to intervene in the elections, but the Foundation bylaws mandate independent election supervision so as to prevent such interference. The PNB Elections Committee established a Campaign Finance Reform Subcommittee well before this Director brought an individual motion to the PNB.

>The discussion of specific remedies began at the KPFK Local Station Board
>meeting on Wednesday, November 7. Candidate Jubilee Shine told the local
>board, ""I am here to represent workers. I'm a roofer and a union activist. I
>couldn't get $7,000 for a flyer for this campaign. I couldn't raise $300."

Candidates may need to raise funds for their campaigns to compete effectively against other candidates. Candidates can reduce their individual fundraising burdens by combining resources with other candidates and forming a slate. Election campaign fundraising may be a reasonable test of the candidates' abilities to raise funds for Pacifica, if elected.

>In order to implement the remedies, the board discussed the possibility of a
>further election delay, to December 21.

The primary justification for the extension was the delayed mailing of ballots. I suspect that the mailing of KPFK area ballots by Pacifica was delayed because the mailing of candidate promotional materials in this station area was delayed by errors for which the Foundation would likely be found liable.

>Aaron formed the Committee to spearhead a campaign to remove
>progressive, lesbian, and African general manager Eva Georgia in light
>of a sexual harassment suit filed against her and the network.

This conjecture is inaccurate. There is some shared membership between the Committee to Strengthen KPFK and the unpaid staff petitioners who published an open letter, but it is obviously false to assert that they are one and the same, since the Committee includes paid staff and LSB members who stayed away from the open letter.

The sexual harrassment lawsuit was news which added momentum to long-standing complaints about KPFK management around other issues, many of which found their way into an open letter signed by some unpaid staff members. Dissatisfaction with station management undoubtedly contributed to the decision of some of these same petitioners to participate in organizing a slate, recruiting candidates, and writing a platform; but the Committee is not the same as the petitioners.

>In July, the Committee presented a petition calling for her removal to the
>Pacifica National Board, the culmination of a five-year campaign to oust
>Georgia with a plethora of accusations that began even before a staffer
>denied her the keys to her office when Georgia officially took over
>leadership of the station.

Five years of complaints led some individuals to eventually organize around the most recent petition just as some paid and unpaid staff had organized around previous petitions, but it is as incorrect to identify the petitioners with the Committee to Strengthen as it would be to identify the petitioners with staff. There are staff members who disagree with the petitioners and there are committee members who disagree with the petitioners. A group doesn't automatically adopt all of the opinions of each person joining the group, particular when there is disagreement.

It is true enough that neither the petitioners nor the candidate slate appear to include any of the knee-jerk Eva Georgia defenders who resisted any attempt to hold the KPFK GM accountable over the years, but this merely describes a common aspect of the two groups, not an identity between them. Georgia supporters similarly joined forces to combat the insurgents, but had a variety of individual reasons for doing so.

>The Committee invited local media to the board meeting held in Los Angeles,
>and the event was reported in the LA Times,

Individuals among the petitioners likely alerted the Times that they would address the PNB at its L.A. meeting. They apparently thought that publicizing their complaints was the way to accomplish some result other than increasing the GM's severance package.

>Throughout the summer, the press was fed accusations, and articles
>without context appeared in the LA Weekly (twice), where reporters
>salivated over the charges of Black lesbian sexual misconduct.

Sexual harrassment lawsuits are news. The public allegations in the lawsuit provided context for the reporting by local press of other claims against KPFK station management.

>Meanwhile, the PNB, the CEO, and the CFO stood behind Georgia with
>unreported public statements of support.

Foundation Counsel published a response to the lawsuit not well-reported by the local press. The PNB passed a resolution of support for Eva Georgia, also not well-reported by the local press.

>The lawsuit is still pending, and Pacifica insiders seem confident that
>Georgia will be vindicated in court.

Some Pacifica insiders appear confident of eventual vindication. Others Pacifica insiders are not so confident. Many have opinions as to the veracity or lack of veracity of the charges, but few have adequate basis for their conclusions, and this area of law is sufficiently complex that an employer can eventually face penalty or not independent of whether the alleged actions occurred or not.

>Aaron chaired the LSB in 2006 until her term ended and she was voted
>out. During her tenure, she forced the local board into numerous closed
>sessions to present sundry charges against Georgia. One, an expense
>report purported to show Georgia's misuse of station funds but discredited
>by the Pacifica CFO, Lonny Hicks, was circulated widely among station
>staff despite its confidentiality.

It has never been made clear publicly what portion of an internal financial investigation is presumed to have been circulated among staff or how widely it may have been circulated. It stands to reason that the several hundred pages of documentation that verify the report's findings never made the rounds. The Foundation rejected various charges that were never asserted in the report of the investigators, responding to the rumor, innuendo, and mischaracterizations of the unpaid staff open letter rather more than to the actual findings of the confidential financial investigation. The questions raised and reforms recommended in the report itself were not "discredited," since they were never adequately addressed or answered.

Ref: http://www.kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3165&Itemid=106

>Aaron, along with Committee members and the slate's other two returning
>candidates, Lamont Yeakey and Donna Warren, during earlier elections
>were members of a slate known as Progressives for Independent,
>Responsible Community Radio.

"Progressives for Independent, >Responsible Community Radio" is certainly a catchier title with more information in it that "Committee to Strengthen KPFK" which could as easily be a death squad or a body-building class as an independent alliance of reform candidates.

>PIRCR and slates at other stations in the network were organized by
>Spooner from Pacifica members who had opposed ensuring elected
>representation for underrepresented communities in the new Pacifica
>Bylaws.

To the best of my knowledge, Carol Spooner was never involved in the organization of any Pacifica delegate candidate slates. She urged many people she had corresponded with to become candidates, but definitely kept a distance from the internal politicking while iPNB Secretary. After her service as a Director, she has tended to cross slate boundaries in her various endorsements, more so in some station areas than in others. As an attorney, she has offered services to various individuals and slates seeking to enforce bylaws provisions and the California Corporations Code.
.
>The Committee To Strengthen KPFK and Spooner, after roundly
>condemning Georgia for bringing a lawsuit down on the network, are
>contemplating their own lawsuit against Pacifica for refusing to include
>their partisan mailer with the ballot mailing, according to Committee
>member Ian Masters in his November 4 broadcast (since edited out of
>the archived version of the broadcast).

It seems safe to say that neither the Committee nor Spooner have ever "roundly condemned" Georgia as alleged here, though the author's conflation of multiple parties into an ever-present and never-changing anti-Eva resistance makes the error understandable. Among Carol Spooner's many public statements there may be some "condemning" a GM or even "roundly condemning" a GM, but she would never make so incautious a statement about a pending lawsuit as Ms. Radford inlies here. As to the Committee to Strengthen, there's no real difficulty proving the negative there, since pretty much everything the Committee has ever publicly agreed to is in its platform, which makes no mention of the GM.

Ref:
http://www.candidateslate.org/Pages/Station/Platform-01.htm

The Committee, with representation from Spooner, may have threatened court action against Pacifica to force compliance with the state law that guarantees members the right to send campaign materials related to corporate elections. There was never any demand to include a partisan mailing with the ballot mailing. Candidate mailings were naturally planned and expected to go out before ballot mailings so that they would be read by voters before the ballots were marked.

>Slate members Ricco Ross, Linda Sutton, Dan Wang, and Ahjamu
>Makalani, according to their election materials, are all active in the
>Progressive Democrats, a caucus of the Democratic Party, raising
>alarm bells about mainstream party funding and takeover of the
>"fiercely independent" radio station.

"Alarm bells" are not evidence of mainstream party funding. Membership in a political party does not disqualify anyone from serving as a KPFK Delegate, nor does it control their votes after election. A group does not become a tool of or a front for Progressive Democrats just because several Progressive Democrats join the group. Moreover, the Progressive Democrats are not controlled by the mainstream party that they seek to change. Several KPFK delegate candidates have been involved in the Green Party, as Ms. Radford well knows, but this somehow hasn't raised "alarm bells."

>Makalani, who has moved from the Peace and Freedom Party and the
>Green Party to vice chair of the Progressive Democrats, explained that
>they were supporting John Edwards in the national elections because,
>"Kucinich wasn't a viable candidate."

Progressive Democrats are allowed to choose whomever they wish to support in the Democratic Party primary elections. In leaving the Peace and Freedom and Green Parties, Makalini surrendered his member's influence in choosing the nominees of those parties.

>Other Committee candidates include Aaron, Summer Reese, Donna
>Warren, Lamont Yeakey, Lich Doan, Sarkis Ghazarian, Sergio Monteiro,
>and Shel Plotkin. Popular radio show hosts Shawn Casey O'Brien, Don
>Bustany, and Eben Rey are running with on the Committee ticket for
>staff seats on the local board. Meanwhile, candidates without insider
>connections, largely newcomers to KPFK's election process, are left to
>slug their way through the morass of confusion, violations, and
>unannounced changes, in what is turning out to be something akin to
>a no rules wrestling match.

All candidates are required to follow the same rules, which were provided to each candidate as part of their nomination packet.

>The elections are supposed to operate under the terms the new Pacifica
>Bylaws and the summaries provided to candidates in the 2007 Fair
>Campaign Provisions for Listener Candidates and for Programmers, Staff
>and Management , with the enforcement of the National Election
>Supervisor, Casey Peters, and Local Elections Supervisor, Liliana
>Sanchez.

That candidates are supposed to follow election rules contradicts the earlier characterization of the elections as a "no rules wrestling match."

>The Violations Apparent violations by the Committee to date include:
>Committee candidate Donna Warren was on the KPFK Evening News
>of October 2, a week after candidates were prohibited from appearing
>on air.

The broadcast appearance of a candidate in connection with a news story may be ruled a violation or not, on a case-by-case basis, at the discretion of the independent Election Supervisors. The Fair Campaign Provisions should not become a serious impediment to legitimate news reporting by a Pacifica station, nor should Pacifica news staff allow their coverage of any story to be influenced by campaigning delegates.

>The Committee To Strengthen KPFK was provided with access to a
>mailing house and the use of the KPFK membership list held by that
>mailing house, while many other candidates were unaware that such
>a service was available and nearly all are unable to afford those
>services.

Access to membership lists in corporate elections is guaranteed by law. Ignorance of the law and/or inability to raise funds is no excuse for poor campaigning. Individuals with previous experience in Pacifica delegate elections naturally obtain advantage by that experience useful in future similar campaigns.

>That list was used to send a mailer endorsing those candidates to the
>voters, unduly affecting the outcome of the election.

Campaigning by direct mail is a right of members guaranteed by law and is a perfectly legitimate campaign tool. It is an important means of member communication and one of the few strongly protected against Foundation censorship.

>The Committee To Strengthen KPFK used a website for four weeks
>that had "KPFK" in its URL, in direct violation of a prohibition against
>using the station call letters in an election-related URL.

This is a technical violation if it occurred during the campaign period, though the rule cited is unreasonable and might be successfully challenged. The general intent is to avoid the appearance of an endorsement by the station or the Foundation, not to deny voters information about what election they are being solicited to vote in.

>Ian Masters, program host and signatory to The Committee To
>Strengthen KPFK, in his broadcast of October 14 concluded that
>some candidates did not adhere to the mission of the Foundation,
>a clear disparagement of the candidates and violation of the rules
>for programmers. Masters during his broadcast of November 4 called
>some candidates "psychotic," while he deemed The Campaign To
>Strengthen KPFK "sane" and "reasonable,", alleged that
>"pinche ethno-fascists" were disrupting the elections with "lots of
>race-baiting." (The archived version of this broadcast was edited to
>remove the offending remarks.)

If accuractely characterized, this broadcast would appear to be a violation even though candidates were not named - a violation similar to that created by the Pacifica iED in his recent open letter posted on multiple Pacifica websites, though more significant in its use of airwaves (which are addressed in the bylaws) rather than Pacifica websites (which are not addressed in the bylaws in this context). The election supervisors should have ruled on the matter if a formal complaint was made. If the station's rather than the producer's archive was edited, this suggests that the editing may have been ordered by the elections supervisors so as to prevent further violation rather than to hide a violation that occurred.

>Jon Weiner, program host and signatory to The Committee To
>Strengthen KPFK, includes a hyperlink on his show’s webpage
>from the KPFK website to his personal website , where he
>endorses the Committee slate. Campaign rules prohibit using
>the station website to link to any endorsement.

The rule referred to is not as clear as stated here by Ms. Radford, but its intent would appear to have been violated in this case. Jon Weiner's program page on the KPFK website does not now link to an external site, but his show listings in the program archives on the KPFK website do still link to a site which includes a slate endorsement, which appears to be a continuing violation of the new rule. There is no KPFK logo on Weiner's site and the endorsement is likely compliant with the rules that existed in previous KPFK delegate elections.

>Lich Doan is running as a listener candidate although he was
>regularly announced as assistant producer for Background
>Briefing from June 1 to August 31, and he continues to be
>announced as the assistant producer for that show, giving
>him regular on-air name recognition and disadvantaging
>candidates without similar access to the airwaves. Candidates
>are disqualified for listener seats after 30 hours of work for the
>station in the three months prior to the start of the campaign.

The bylaws require qualifying staff work to be performed "under the supervision of the Foundation radio station management." Under this definition, some individuals generally recognized as unpaid staff are nevertheless categorized as listener-sponsor members and so must run in that category if a candidate. Producer credit broadcast during the campaign period would appear to be a violation of fair campaign provisions for which reduced airing of the candidate's promotional cart would typically be the imposed remedy. Similar violations have likely occurred in every Pacifica election.

>Ajhamu Makalini, a write-in candidate according to The Campaign
>To Strengthen KPFK, did not have the requisite fifteen signatures
>for his nomination form but has been allowed to participate in the
>on-air and in-person forums.

Write-in votes for non-nominees are allowed by the rules of order, but a candidate who has not met the signature requirements for nomination would not likely qualify to participate as a candidate in on-air candidate forums. Participation being allowed by someone not on the ballot would suggest that an earlier disqualification may have been appealed, ruled by election supervisors to have been in error, and that the candidate in question has since been qualified.

>KPFK website and archives inequities: Candidate Lich Doan’s
>statement included two references to his endorsement by Mr. Masters
>for the first month it was posted, an unfair advantage to candidates
>who did not use staff services to promote their candidacies.
>Staff services are forbidden to candidates.

Previous volunteer work for KPFK is an obvious qualification worth mention by delegate candidates. Endorsement by an individual programmer is not "staff services." All rulings limiting the content of candidate statements are questionable and arguably exceed the authority granted to election supervisors in the Foundation bylaws.

>Candidates Bayard Condon and Jubilee Shine have their names
>inaccurately posted on the website, and Joaquin Cienfuego’s name
>is misspelled on the ballot, so that their names on the website do not
>match their names as listed on the ballot.

Website misspellings can be errors by the webmaster. Ballot misspellings can be errors by somebody else.

>Candidates Bayard Condon,
>Reza Pour, Schyna Pour, and Alise Sochaczewski’s answers to the
>candidate’s questionnaire have not been posted on the station
>website, while other candidates’ answers have been available for
>weeks.

Candidate answers to questionaires should be posted as near simultaneously in an election as possible, if those responses were provided by the candidates by the announced submission deadline. Increased airing of a candidate's cart is the typical remedy if a delay in website posting occurred through no fault of the candidate.
All of the candidates listed above have their questionaire responses appended to their candidate statements on the KPFK website. None of the listener-sponsor candidates from KPFK have their questionaire responses posted on the PacificaFoundaion,org elections site.

>The English on-air candidate forums for November 1 was not
>posted to the archives of station broadcasts until November 5 and
>the Spanish forum of the same date is still not available, although the
>forums for October 30 and 31 were available immediately after
>broadcast.

An engineering problem may have delayed the audio availability of a broadcast forum.

>The English-language forum of October 29 as originally
>posted edited out the responses of candidate Leslie Radford,

That's certainly suspicious.

>and, when that was brought the attention of the Local Election Supervisor,
>the forum was hyperlinked to a non-existent file.

That's certainly understandable. The edited forum needed to be unlinked and an unedited copy needed to be found and linked.

>Candidate Lawrence
>Reyes’ email address and telephone number, included in his candidate
>statement, were not included in the station website posting of his
>statement, and candidate Radford’s website was not included in the
>station posting of her statement, and these inequities continued for
>weeks into the campaign. Other candidates’ statements that included
>email contacts and website addresses, notably addresses to the
>Committee's website, were posted properly.

These items appear worthy of complaint, correction, and potential remedy.

>The number of viewings
>of each candidate statement is revealed on the list of candidates on
>the KPFK and Pacifica Foundation website , producing a bandwagon
>effect for some candidates, and this number can be artificially
>increased by repeatedly reloading the statement webpage.

All candidates are affected equally by this, which is the default configuration of the website software. Any candidate is free to inflate their hits, but site users probably don't pay much attention to these statistics. The data on web hits is a useful metric for supervisors to use in determining how much remedy should be applied to balance out website posting errors.

>Procedural infractions: The deadline to submit ballots was moved to
>November 26, but not all voters have been notified of the extension,
>so that some voters inevitably returned their ballots on the date
>indicated on the ballot without access to all information about the
>candidates or remedies of grievances that may occur after the original
>ballot deadline.

The KPFK deadline has been extended to December 11th, as posted on the station's website. Grievances about the slate mailing are generally not legitimate, since slate mailings are a protected activity. No "remedy" is required for the successful exercise of membership rights.

>Te extension of the deadline also shortens the time
>to extend the election to assure a quorum, endangering the elections
>altogether.

The election has been extended without an initial deadline quorum count. Early notice of quorum failure has thus been surrendered, though the LES may optionally determine and announce how many ballot envelopes have arrived at various times prior to the deadline.

>Unannounced changes to the published timetable,
>including more than a week’s delay in mailing the ballots, delaying
>the on-air candidates’ forums, delaying broadcast of the candidates’
>on-air announcements, and extending the return date for ballots,
>have caused some candidates hardship in planning an election
>campaign.

All candidates are effected by these delays, which are not the fault of any slate.

>No announcements have been made to the candidates
>of election events, changes to the election materials and election
>deadlines, any sanctions resulting from election violations, or the
>Pacifica National Board motion regarding elections passed and
>referred to committee, so that candidates are reliant on word of
>mouth to participate fully in the election process.

Elections aren't perfect.

>Links from Pacifica's
>homepage to Election News in English and Election News in
>Spanish lead to Washington, DC candidate statement.

Pacifica's webmaster, who is not associated with a KPFK delegate slate, isn't perfect.

>No time
>has been provided for a question-and-answer call-in period between
>candidates and station listeners as required by the Bylaws. Until
>November 5, no carts were aired regarding any election events,
>election materials, election deadlines, or any sanctions resulting
>from election violations, so that voters are denied timely election
>information and reminders on the airwaves, endangering informed
>voting and making a quorum. On-air announcements recorded by
>candidates did not begin to air until November 5, although the
>election timeline requires that broadcast begin immediately after
>the fund drive which ended on October 20. English-language
>forums will be rebroadcast while Spanish-language broadcasts
>will not, and neither candidate statements nor ballots are
>available in languages other than English.

Broadcast scheduling is the responsibility of local station management. KPFK does not have many volunteer translators. Additional candidate forums are planned at KPFK.

On Monday, Nov 12, 2007, Tejano wrote:

>We know, in watching "free" elections under US capitalism, that
>there is no such thing. Wealth/ class, race, and gender play
>tremendous roles in limiting the available choices of candidates,
>and the media are all too happy to tell us who is a "credible"
>candidate.

The limitations of representative democracy are largely independent of the economic system. The limitations of commercial media, by contrast, are closely tied to the economic system.

>We see much the same thing in the KPFK elections. Those who
>have long controlled the station in their own interests- so-called
>"progressive democrats and west side liberals have tried for years
>now to maintain the death grip on privilege that they have at the
>station.

Individuals with broadcast slots fight to keep or expand their access to the microphone irrespective of their politics. KPFK's programming obviously demonstrates a greater diversity than Tejano implies.

>Some of them fought tooth and nail to prevent affirmative action in
>KPFK's elections, in an effort to ensure their continued dominance
>of the station, of what it broadcasts, and for whom it broadcasts.

The idea that "affirmative action" applies to elections is absurd. The rule in elections is one vote per person. If a constituency wants a greater impact on the results of an election, they must recruit more voters and encourage them to vote. The "post-election remedies" that certain factions wanted incorporated into Pacifica's bylaws were illegal and anti-democratic.

>The same group of readily identifiable power players sought to
>eliminate KPFK's South African lesbian general manager, waging
>a a campaign of vilification that lasted literally, for years, form _before_
>she ever set foot in the station until very recently when, at last,
>after years of harrassment, she had had enough, and resigned.

It's "the same group" only because Tejano has chonen to define them this way. There were indeed opponents and supporters of Eva Georgia from the very beginning, and many of these stayed around; but any newcomers who simply wanted local management to be accountable in principle to local governance were then assumed to be part of "the same group" of anti-Eva players and frequently villified as racists as a consequence.

>The same "players" sought to make sure that the poor would have no
>voice in KPFK's future, and did all in their power to defeat proposals
>that would allow people to vote - even if they can't afford to subscribe
>to the station - by signing up under a system of waivers.

Not true. Waiver proposals have obtained cross-faction LSB approval each year that they have been offered. This year the LSB went so far as to approve all 121 waiver applications received, including those collected by a delegate candidate vocally opposed to the conspiracy of interests that Tejano perceives.

Ref:
http://www.kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3504&Itemid=106

>Apparently, they never heard of the infamous poll taxes in the Old South
>that made it effectively impossible for poor people of color to vote,
>Apparently, they didn't understand that that bastion of injustice, th US
>Supreme court itself, had outlawed the practice, and apparently they
>were too tied to their own privilege to see clearly the comparison
>between the poll tax and the subscription fee that would "allow" one
>to vote in the white dominated atmosphere of KPFK's elections.

The KPFK LSB declined to set any limits on the number of hardship waivers to be granted for the current election, declined to set any requirement beyond application, and approved more waivers than probably any other station this year or in previous years.

>Or rather, perhaps they understood these matters clearly- all too clearly,
>and acted simply and consciously in their own naked self interest.

Perhaps, on the other hand, they have consistently voted approval in a knee-jerk fashion of just about every proposal over the years that has been characterized as favoring the "disenfranchized," irrespective of both fairness or self-interest.

>Perhaps they understood all along that the drive to get rid of the former
>general manager began with those who had been part of the hijacking
>of the station and mainstreaming it- people loyal to the old Schubb /
>Cooper regime that had purged virtually all radical programming form
>the air, and had certainly banned all radical programmers of color, and
>who had gone so far as to ban the pronunciation of Spanish place
>names with anything other than their English pronunciation.

KPFK never imposed such pronunciation guidelines on all of its programmers and doesn't work in a way that would allow it to. The author may be referring to some obscure past communication of a particular News Director to the news staff.

>No, these defensive an narrowly intersted people are not hard to identify.
>In past elections they called themselves PIRCR- People for Responsible
>Independent Community Radio.

Tejano's chacterization doesn't well apply to PIRCR. Eva antagonists tended to migrate towards PIRCR rather than another slate because Eva supporters dominated the other slate, but PIRCR included some individuals generally supporting the KPFK GM. Tejano also mixes programmers, management, and governance so as to somehow assign responsibility for some actions of previous management to various governance candidates that came later.

>NOW THEY GO BY"THE COMMITTEE TO STRENGTHEN KPFK."

The platform and candidates can speak for themselves.

>AND THEY ARE TRYING TO BUY AN ELECTION AND CHEAT
>THEIR WAY TO VICTORY

Donating funds to elections campaigns and using donated funds in election campaigns are not fairly characterized as attempts to "buy an election." Mailing candidate promotional material to voters is not cheating. It's within the rules. Candidates must use the rules to their advantage as best they can.

On Monday, Nov. 12, 2007, Leslie Radford wrote:

>Jon Weiner has just informed me that he has asked the KPFK
>webmaster to remove the link from KPFK to his website where he
>endorses the Committee.

Links to Jon's site persist in the program archives section of the KPFK website.

On Monday, Nov 12, 2007, KPFK Listener wrote:


>It is highly unethical that Los Angeles Indymedia has decided to
>influence the KPFK Local Station Elections by posting a rant by
>one the candidates on its front page. To correct the injustice,
>Indymedia should now allow all of the other candidates the
>same opportunity. Short of that, Ms Radford should be disqualified.

The way that Indymedia works, other candidates do have the same opportunity. The way that Indymedia works, the inaccuracy of opinion and bias is allowed to be apparent rather than disguised in posted articles. Ms. Radford's utilization of Indymedia in her delegate election campaign appears to be within the election rules. Though the audience is not as targeted, this method of candidate promotion is far cheaper than a postal mailing, suggesting that this candidate might similarly encourage effective use of alternative media in low-cost fundraising for the station, if elected.

On Monday, Nov. 12, 2007, Concerned for the K wrote:


>AFTRA Union members supported a vote of "no confidence in
>their General Manager" and yet these people who claim to
>support letting the little guy speak, tried to get the information
>stricken from the record!

Not really. There was little opposition to the motion to include both the AFTRA member's vote and the anti-Eva Open Letter of certain unpaid staff and their supporters as addenda to the minutes of the KPFK LSB meeting where they were read. I actually opposed inclusion of the open letter because of its many distortions, but the question was called before I could move to divide it. Unfortunately, despite the vote, it looks like only the Open Letter and not the more rational AFTRA resolution finally got into the minutes.

Ref:
http://www.kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3085&Itemid=106

>Adding insult to injury - after all of the lawsuits and money that has
>been spent - Georgia got paid over $60,000 to go away!
>(http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2007/10/what_eva_georgia_cost_kpf.php)

The money on lawsuits has only begun to be spent. The campaign against Eva Georgia allowed her to appear as a victim in the negotiations for her exit.

>Reading this fear fueling paranoia on IndyMedia today from blindly
>obediant people who backed Georgia as if she were Jim Jones is
>chilling to say the least.

This is a natural outgrowth of the ascendancy of identity politics in the left generally and excessive tolerance for misrepresentation of the Pacifica Mission within the organization.

>Anyone who disagrees with them are immedetialy labeled right wing,
>racist or some operative within the CIA.

Pacifica attracts and welcomes those whose status as dissenters and opponents of the dominant culture has been defined simply by their acticulated antagonism to it rather than by the actual rationality or depth of their general ctitique. We shouldn't be surprised, then, when the survival skills that earned them their entry into the organization are employed by them within the organization.

>I am very concerned for the station at this time and don't know how
>long it will last if these people take over completely.


There is little chance of "these people" taking over KPFK governance completely because the choice voting method used in Pacifica elections insures that all significant constituencies among the membership obtain some representation. Even if a take-over of governance were to be accomplished, that wouldn't really accomplish much, because the role of the Local Station Board is quite limited -- it does not operate the station or decide its programming. As ususal, the greatest threat to the survival of the station is simply financial. KPFK is barely able to sustain its current level of operations with the income it brings in, and it will be called upon to assist other stations that are doing worse. Radio stations, like record stores, are faced with declining audiences in an environment of rapidly expanding information and entertainment media choices.

On Nov. 12, 2007, Leslie Radford wrote:


>Pacifica is a "minority-owned" network for purposes of Corporation
>for Public Broadcasting funding, although it's listenership is largely
>white. That means, to this day, the national board has to be a
>majority peoples of color according to CPB rules to get CPB funding.

Not quite. As long as it maintains compliance with qualification rules, every public broadcaster that applies can get CPB funding. Pacifica needs to maintain a minority majority on its Board of Directors in order to qualify for funding at a significantly higher level than the baseline award for Community Service Grants. If it lost that minority majority on board or staff, its CPB awards would be much less.

>As I hear it, the Pacifica struggle began with GM Mark Schubb,
>abetted by Marc Cooper, purging mostly Black programmers from
>KPFK. Shortly afterwards, the national board floated a plan to sell
>the Berkeley station to finance a string of smaller Black Pacifica
>stations across the South. Carol Spooner led a listener revolt to
>demand that the listenership elect the local boards, which would,
>in turn, elect the national board--the "majority minority" national
>board.

It's correct to say that Marc Cooper supported Mark Schubb, but characterizing the purge as of "mostly Black programmers" is convenient oversimplification. Rebels were ousted and most of KPFK's Black programmers were among the rebels. Some of the dismissals may have been for good and adequate reason, but these details were ignored by those protesting the programming changes.

The PNB never "floated a plan" to sell stations. Since both WBAI and KPFA are licensed to broadcast in the commercial band, one Director suggested looking into recovering this unutilized value with a frequency swap.

Carol Spooner was lead plaintiff in a class action lawsuit that sought to make Pacifica a membership corporation. This lawsuit, combined with others, became the organizing focus around a listener revolt that was already underway.

>I came into KPFK after Spooner had won the lawsuit, as the new
>Bylaws were being hammered out. And that's where I "earned" the
>animosity of Spooner and her local minions, supporting
>representation for the various communities of color, gender
>"difference," and the differently-abled.


The Settlement Agreement was a victory for those supporting making Pacifica a membership corporation, but the lawsuit wasn't won or lost. There was a dispute around the bylaws when those "supporting
representation for the various communities of color" and "gender
difference" lobbied for greater representation in election results than whatever would be the outcome of the democratic membership vote.

On Monday, Nov. 12, 2007, Anon wrote:

>Personal attacks are the last refuge of scoundrels. The name calling
>diatribes and efforts to create an atmosphere of scapegoating against
>Leslie Radford here are consistent with what has gone on in KPFK
>and Pacifica for years.

That much is true, but it cuts both ways.

>Since PIRCR and its new front group, "The Committee to 'Strengthen'
>KPFK" have long been on record - in formal votes - as opposing
>affirmative action remedies to balance representation on local boards
>for disenfranchised communities,

PIRCR is defunct. CSKPFK is new. The are many former PIRCR members not at all associated with the new group. PIRCR was formed after the bylaws were adopted, so never had an opportunity to vote on "affirmative action remedies to balance representation on local boards for disenfranchised communities," which is pretty much newspeak for "give a seat to any woman of color candidate even if rejected by the voters," since this would have been the primary effect of the various proposals offered at the time.

>since they have long been on record as opposing waivers for the poor
>so that they can participate in the station's elections,

The charge is blatantly false. Nobody is on record opposing hardship waivers. Extravagent speeches in support of waivers were a waste of board time, since the opposition was imaginary. Those delegated authority in the matter, however, would have better served the station if they had taken some steps to protect against abuse of the waiver process. Those who voted against a particular waivers proposal may have wanted such protection incorporated into the motion proposed prior to its adoption.

Ref:
http://www.kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3297&Itemid=106

>and since the election violations they have engaged in are indisputable,
>they have no recourse but to attempt to slander Radford, and hope, as
>they do it, that you, the reader, are gullible enough to not see through the
>ploy.

The election violations pointed out by Radford that might reasonably be assigned to CSKPFK are not especially serious. There is no good reason to believe that those attempting to slander Radford here are actually connected to CSKPFK. I hope that readers are not so gullible as to believe everything they read from any single source.

>Notice the obvious. None of them deny the elections violations, nor the
>effort to turn the elections into a "he who has the money Rules" game _

Anon is unlikely to be in a position to know if anything that may correctly be described as a violation and assigned to a CSKPFK candidate has been denied, so his or her assertion that there has been no denial is without merit. The absence of a detailed response on Indymedia from a specific source means little.

>they can't - they've been condemned by the Pacifica National Board
>for trying to buy the elections, none of them deny their opposition to
>affirmative action or fee waivers for the poor,

Whoa, there! The PNB has not condemned any candidate slate for any reason and it would violate the bylaws for it to do so. Every Delegate and every candidate running for office in Pacifica very likely supports affirmative action and fee waivers for the poor.

>none of them deny the long term effort to drive out the former GM, nor
>that it began before she even took office (Not that the former GM was
>saintly, by anyone's standards - I had marked differences with her).
>All they have left is to slander the one who has exposed what they
>cannot and do not deny.

It is quite possible to correct errors and inaccuracies without resorting to slander. The "them" refuting Leslie Radford in this thread is not the same "them" that campaigned against the former GM or the same "them" that is running in this election, though any candidates in the current election who did oppose the former GM in any way likely have no love for Ms. Radford.

On Nov. 13, 2007, Honest wrote:

>Ok here comes the Spin Democratic/Repulican Party like Operations
>attacking the Truth that is undenialable that Ms. Radford inform us
>about. As these type of Arrognant Money Power Hungry slate with
>an Agenda that is is hidden from Public viewing as it is an attempt
>Take Over of KPFK to polish off Grassroots Voices with there Glossy
>mailer just as the Repulicrats do to ask for your vote and then act in
>there OWN Interest as the staff is doing now.


No, Lawrence, there's no hidden agenda. Every candidate in the election wants to do what's good for the station and prevent the damage that their opponents might cause. They just have different ideas about what's good and what's damaging.

On Nov. 14, 2007, LA Indymedia wrote:

>The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and
>do not necessarily reflect those of the LA Indymedia Center editorial
>staff. The article has been feature for the purpose of debate and not
>as an endorsement or promotion any viewpoint or candidate.

Thanks for the clarification, for those not familiar with how Indymedia works. This is the same position that Pacifica has traditional taken with respect to the opinions broadcast by individual programmers, though in recent decades there has been a push for more uniformity in presenting a so-called "progressive" perspective.

On Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2007, Other Voice wrote:


>Unfortunately, Spooner has decided to support "visionaries"
>whose goals are to agendize Pacifica at all stations, and spout
>selected viewpoints, and no others.

Actually, Carol Spooner understands the difference between management and governance and would like to see some decent governance.


>Don't elect "activists"; they are activists for a reason, and
>unless you want your station being their bully pulpit, you don't
>need them in control.

Electing activists risks the LSB, not the station, becoming a bully pulpit for them, and governance work being shuffled aside in the process; however it is important that those elected to governance understand the Foundation's Mission, since they are the members' representatives in protecting it.

>Don't have "litmus tests" or anything that filters out "objectionable"
>political views; it's the diversity of viewpoints that made Pacifica
>the legend that it has lost by focusing too tightly on niche issues.


It isn't so important that governance reflect a diversity of viewpoints, since the station should be shielded from governance influence in program decision-making; but it isn't so important that governance reflect any political views at all, since it can do the work of policy development and management oversight on broad organizational principles quite separate from any politics.

On Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2007, Slasher wrote:


>The other respondents are not well informed as to the fact that the
>whole damn Free Pacifica movement was being manipulated and
>controlled by the left inteligentsia and radical democratic party
>operatives from the moment that the LAB lawsuit was filed, long
>before Carol Spooner and her "RELATOR" status as confered by
>the California AG ever came into play.
>
>After the suits merged their efforts there was no hope of really getting
>Pacifica back to it's roots, only a hope that those that cared enough
>would get stuck in all this madness in order to divert their energies
>with control remaining in the hands of the liberals that support the
>Satanic system of neverending credits and donations of credit.

Michael's perspectives, though a bit extreme and over-stated, are regularly more consistent with the known and verifiable facts than those of other commentators.

On Wednesday, Nov. 14, 2007, Leslie wrote:


>Michael, you're mistaken. Lydia Brazon was chair when I came onto
>the iLAB, after Dave, after the settlement. But I agree with some of
>what you say after that.

Leslie's correction is accurate.

On Thursday, Nov. 15, 2007, Hamburgular wrote:


>If you want to make the right decisions, research all the candidates.
>There are several slates going around. Including Leslie's, which was
>advertised in Change Links. There's nothing wrong with looking at
>any of them, but make your own decisions. Be independent.


I didn't see the Change Links referred to, but it may have been a listing of candidates supported by Michael Novick. If there were to be an opposition slate this election, that would likely be it; but endorsement by one person does not a slate make, and an article or letter is not an adverstisement.

The advice to study candidates independently is good advice.

On Saturday, Nov. 17, 2007, Leslie Radford wrote:


>Years ago, the police busted into KPFK and hauled the manager off
>to jail as the programmers aired the Patty Hearst tapes, secretly
>hand-delivered to the station, as I hear the story.

I'm the KPFK staff member who got the original Patty Hearst cassette out of the building prior to the broadcast of an equalized copy. The police didn't "bust in" as anyone was airing the tape, they came with a search warrant subsequent to the broadacst and we interrupted programming to broadcast their search live. The tape wasn't hand-delivered, it was left behind a mattress that was leaning against the back of the building in the alley. The police didn't haul the manager off to jail, Will Lewis went to jail from the courtroom when he refused to hand over the tape to a judge and was found in contempt.

--Terry Goodman

Reading Terry Goodman's endless, deadly- boring tome (above) was like eating a tepid-cold vat of gray dishwater soup. After about bowl five, I had to wonder if there would Ever be any substance - say, a scrap of potato or a bit of meat. If this man is on the KPFK Board, no wonder nothing ever gets addressed.

Here's the obvious. This is a struggle about who controls KPFK, and by what right they control it. If KPFK elections are to be run on money, then only the monied will run KPFK, and only in their own interests, just like the so-called elections run by the rich white ruling elites in the US as a whole.
BUT KPFK IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ALTERNATIVE, A VOICE OF THE PEOPLE, not of the droning aficionados of legalese and the status quo.

The truth is simple. Illusions take forever to spin.

Thanks for the object lesson.

Passed by the Pacifica National Board, November 1, 2007:

Whereas the intent of the Pacifica National Board and the Pacifica Election Bylaws is to protect the right to equal access for all candidates;

Whereas the right, process, procedures, cost or timeline to distribute a mailer to the entire membership of local signal areas has not been communicated to all candidates running for local station board elections;

Whereas the spending of large sums of money in Pacifica campaigns runs counter to the noncommercial nature of the Pacifica Radio Network while underscoring the discriminatory nature of campaign financing so prevalent and objectionable in mainstream elections;

Whereas the Pacifica National Board is deeply concerned about the resulting unequal access of individual candidates and/or slates that have the financial backing to pay for mailers to be sent to all local station members;

Whereas allowing expensive mailers is discriminatory, in particular but not only to women and people of color who have the least resources as well as to those interested in running as independents;

Whereas such mailers have been abused in at least one signal area and used as a fund-raiser for a private entity;

Whereas there is a lack of protection of Pacifica of such abuse; including the abuse of employer and/or corporate money being used to cover the cost of such mailers that could lead Pacifica open to takeovers of Local Station Boards by those with financial backing;

(The following items were referred to committee to report on implementation):

Be it resolved that the Pacifica National Board must do everything it can to get money out of its election process so that those most economically disadvantaged are not discouraged from participating in the process.

Be it resolved that the Pacifica National Board form a Special Task Force including membership of the campaign reform sub committee of the PNB elections committee, to revise the election rules to assure that those most economically disadvantaged are not discouraged from participating in the process.

Be it further resolved that the Pacifica National Board develops guidelines for the use of local station membership lists that are in accordance with State and Federal Law as well as the bylaws of Pacifica and that these guidelines must be in place 6 months prior to the next Local Station Board election;

*These items were passed for immediate implementation):

Be it further resolved that steps be taken immediately to remedy the unequal access that has occurred at KPFK and any other Pacifica station, including if needed the extension of the election period, and that these steps have minimal financial impact on KPFK or any other affected station.

Be it further resolved that the Pacifica Elections Committee, the Pacifica Elections Supervisor with consultation with Pacifica’s legal counsel, the General Manager (or Interim General Manager), and the Pacifica Directors (a defacto remediation task force) from the impacted signal area develop a timely plan for remediation within one week of passage of this motion to be implemented immediately thereafter;

Be it further resolved that the Pacifica Elections Supervisor will have the authority to rule on whether or not remediation measures proposed are acceptable and meet the concerns of the Pacifica Board as well as the legal obligations of Pacifica.

Terry Goodman wrote above:

"Nobody is on record opposing hardship waivers."

Terry says so, but he himself id on record as opposing hardship waivers. He voted against them on the afternoon of August 4, 2007. Here's the proof.
http://kpfk.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3297&Itemid=106&lang=en

Gee....welcome to Leslie's Blog, I guess.

The complaint she makes about the word 'kpfk' in the URL is disingenuous. I know the webmaster and he was very careful to create a URL that was:
http://www.candidateslate.org

The naming of one of the sub pages was more a function of his nomenclature on his hard drive. Leslie is trying so desperately hard to demonize these people that she's grasping at any straw or red herring that she can concoct.

The mailing was not funded by "big money" or "dirty money" or "rich elites." All these charges are terribly destructive. If IMC readers really knew the background of some of the current KPFK board, let alone some of the cranks who are running, they would better understand why the Committee formed....to recruit sane individuals to the board and to help get them some recognition for the common principles they have adopted.

The local boards are the ONLY source of the National Trustees. This means it's important who gets elected. If a group of people can get together, agree on a platform; organize themselves into a slate, then that is, at a minimum, some indication that they are serious and committed. Leslie's group is say "poor people are too stupid and disorganized to create a mailing." I think that's ridiculous. LA has a wealth of organizations among all our communities who will be able to mount a significant campaign when they work together. It's unfair and dishonest to accuse the Committee to Strengthen KPFK of anything other than being a group of people who are willing to serve a three year term to help the station. Leslie should have the common decency to stop her campaign of harassment.

The election has been extended since so few KPFK listeners have actually voted. If you want some advice on who to select, go to:
http://www.campaignslate.org

Nalini Lasiewicz

< http://www.campaignslate.org


should have read:

The election has been extended since so few KPFK listeners have actually voted. If you want some advice on who to select, go to:
http://www.candidateslate.org

Nalini Lasiewicz

I know this is adding fuel to an already out-of-control fire, BUT:

One has to ask, does the "Committee to Strengthen KPFK" have nothing to do with the split on 911 that is surfacing publicly at KPFK.

On a recent show, Ian Masters complained about unnamed forces threatening to force him to talk about 911 conspiracies on his show. I've heard other references. Clearly there are a handful of major programmers who devote much coverage to "911 Truth", and other, equally major programmers who studiously ignore any questioning of the "Official Conspiracy Theory" (govt-endorsed) around 911.

What gives?

KPFK, with the huge reach it has, in a major media metropolis, is always a flashpoint, and even more so on this ultimate flashpoint issue.

Why not have an on-air debate between members of these two groups on the issue of how the station is handling or not handling 911? Or off-air?

Does anyone else see something going on here?

TorQ

As someone who works at the station I can assure you that there has NOT been an attempt to stifle 9/11 programming. Some people with shows choose to not include it in their discussions and some even go as far as to poo-poo others who believe that it was indeed an inside job.

That said, as someone who does my best to provide expert analysis and guests who were eyewitnesses that day, I don't think that there is a plot to squash such topics.

Now, are there those who claim they are a proponents of "9/11 truth" that are using the issue to pit people against each other? I believe so. But many of these very same people have not ONCE come to me to congratulate me on getting these issues out on air. Not one!

You be the judge.

Nalini Lasiewicz has given up her claim that the url did not contain "kpfk" after radford's proof. Now she say radford is disingenous, but it is nalini who's being disingenuous and prbably lyng about the webmaster..

Any half-assed webmaster will tell you the the url she posts is a redirect to a folder in the server directory. u can see it for yourself if u clik on the link. radford's pic shows the original organization of the directory in this simple html site included a subdirectory called "kpfk."

Since this url is the homepage (index) for the group, every other page linked from below it probably included the "kpfk" reference in the url, too, until the webmaster moved the whole mess up to "pages."

Since the index (homepage) for the Pages directory is now the same homepage as the original kpfk subdirectory, there was probably nothing in the original Pages directory that the webmaster wanted public, no earlier index to Pages that pointed to pages/kpfk and other subdirectories. If there were other subdirectories, you can't get to them now from your browser.

If Pages only had a subdirectory called pages/kpfk,, then the kpfk subdirectory was specifically inserted to include kpfk in the url of every page of the public information on the slate.

Think of your home computer's directory. If you have a folder and the only thing in it is another folder, then the lower level folder is unnecessary. Maybe in the future you want to include more folders, but for now it's not needed. Unless you just want to make sure the label shows up to remind you what's there.

I do not make enough money to donate, but I volunteer several times more than enough to make me a member of the station. I do sign the log in and off sheet. several year ago i called for a ballot but they gave me a run around call this person and that person and received my ballot the last week of the voting. and this year i havent receive my ballot yet. KPFK needs to fix this problem asap.or tell the volunteers they are not a member of the station.

I'm hearing this a lot. People, volunteers, members who buy in, members with waivers, who haven't gotten ballots.

A method to get a replacement ballot was supposed to be announced between November 1-15, but that's another thing that didn't happen.

If you have email access, try emailing the election the national election supervisor at ballot@pacifica.org. If you don't have email access, you still have some options.

From the web, you can send a message to Pacifica at http://www.pacifica.org/contact/pacifica-national-office.html . Don't know how often they check this, but it's there.

To do a long distance telephone call, try 510-849-2590. That's the phone number for Pacifica. The NES isn't there, but they should be able to get a message to him.

And if you move quickly, you can send a letter to:

Casey Peters, National Elections Supervisor
Pacifica Foundation
1925 Martin Luther King Jr Way
Berkeley, CA 94704

Hope that helps.

It's amazing when Radford and her group, who scream racism and use other smoke screens, show their true colors.
At a recent town hall in Lemeirt Park, two of those on Kommisar Radford's slate, Lawrence Reyes and Chuck Anderson, in a public forum, called two of KPFK's programmers, Suzi Weissman and Jon Wiener "Zionists".
She can use as much spin as she wants in her endless rants, but the bottom line is she, her slate and agenda is filled with hate and contempt for anyone who doesn't agree 100% with her twisted vision of reality. And whichever way you try to spin it agent Radford, racism does not belong at KPFK.

I dont have to call year after year to get my ballot. i thoguht if i called once they have my info already. it is not my job to remind them. I should get my ballot automaticly in the mail like other members do.

KPFK Volunteer, I agree.

People into 9/11 are obsessed. There's no room for debate with them. They're lucky to get any time at all on KPFK.

Cool - thanks for the insider's data point re: 911 programming.

I have to admit, Roy Tuchman and Blaise Bonpane on the Committee tends to disprove my notion. Obviously there are all kinds of rifts at KPKF, this only one of them.

If the accusations of each side are true and KPFK is being fought over by Democratic Party/Schubb/Cooper types vs. a band of race-baiting, ultra-politically correct crazies, this certainly was not what most of us expected when the hijackers were overthrown. Let's hope that in the future we have more choices than this.