Judge Roesch Order Posted – Requires Pacifica to Allow Members to Vote on New Bylaws – But…

Update to my blog post of Jan. 26 — Judge Roesch issued his official written order (verbal order given Jan. 23), and it’s here:  Judge Roesch Order 2020-02-06.

This order was in response to the Pacifica Board Directors who tried to prevent Pacifica members from being able to vote on the new Bylaws. As I wrote on Jan. 26, the judge told those in court on Jan. 23 that he would require that Pacifica allow the members to vote on whether to approve the new Bylaws, ordering that the ballots be sent on Feb. 18 or shortly thereafter, to everyone who was a Pacifica member as of Jan. 2 .  Members will have 30 days to vote.

However, actions by the Pacifica National Board to delay voting on the Bylaws, and attempts to prevent the members from voting at all, have required us (the Pacifica Restructuring Project) to go to court to require Pacifica to uphold the member’s rights. The Board has spent considerable amounts of members’ donations to prevent them from being able to vote. Luckily, the judge recognizes the members’ rights and ordered ballots be sent out.

But last week the Pacifica National Board approved an election plan that was seriously flawed, and that not only allowed but had provisions that would actually require that only people opposed to Bylaws reform would get air time on our stations. The Communications section of that plan, which was incorporated into the NES contract, is here.  Board members opposed to the new Bylaws also aired a long special program on two of our stations, in which numerous untrue statements were made, no one in favor of the new Bylaws was represented, and the Board members producing the show presented a very one-sided (and incorrect) story about the Bylaws. So PRP had to go back to the judge again to ask for fairness in communications with members – both on the air and with the ballots – with equal time for both sides. Here’s what PRP filed with the court this week. It’s easier to follow if you read them in this order:

  1. Motion (request of judge) for orders to conduct fair election
  2. Proposed orders to conduct fair election
  3. Crosier declaration
  4. Spooner declaration
  5. Wonderwheel declaration
  6. DaSilva declaration
  7. Goodman declaration

The judge is expected to issue a ruling on these fairness issues on Feb. 14.

Bill Crosier

Good News! Judge Says Pacifica Must Allow Members to Vote on New Bylaws

On Thursday, January 23, Judge Frank Roesch ruled that Pacifica must stop delaying a vote by the members on the proposed new Bylaws, set the new notice period with on-air announcements as starting on January 2, and ordered that ballots be sent to the members on the 46th day after Jan. 2 (which would be Feb. 16) or as soon after that as possible.

The judge did not like the argument from members of the Pacifica National Board who urged everyone on the PNB to vote yes for the new Bylaws in order to defeat them by sending them to the stations Delegates for a meaningless vote (that could take up to two more months) and thereby delaying a member vote until after the deadline. Under our current Bylaws, Bylaws changes proposed by petition of the Members (as these new Bylaws are) can be approved by the Members and it does not matter whether the PNB nor Delegates (LSBs) of each station approve them or not.

Still be to be determined is whether the leadership of Pacifica’s broken governance will allow a fair presentation of both sides of the new Bylaws issue. On Dec. 20, 2019 (the same date that the PNB majority followed the pro-tem chair’s direction to vote yes on the new Bylaws in an attempt to kill them), the PNB directed that an extremely one-sided and misleading essay on the new Bylaws be posted on Pacifica’s web site, and broadcast announcements on our stations have directed listeners to go there where they see that essay first. PRP hopes that Pacifca’s governance will allow both sides to get an equal chance to be heard.

So far, the Pacifica National Board has caused tens of thousands of dollars of listener donations to be spent on legal fights and maneuvering in order to prevent Pacifica members from exercising their right to vote on the new Bylaws, but then have blamed PRP for supporting this right of the members. The vote on the new Bylaws is expected to cost much less than elections for Delegates/LSB members. The latter require separate elections at each station for listeners and staff (10 elections total), with huge numbers of candidates and candidate statements to deal with, while the Bylaws election will have just one yes/no question on it (and no separate elections for each station), making it much simpler and less expensive for that election.

Of course, the Pacifica Restructuring Project encourages all members to vote yes for the new Bylaws, to end the ongoing dysfunction and failure to deal with Pacifica’s financial and governance crisis, and to support management who can work to fulfill the Pacifica mission instead of micromanaging by board members.

Bill Crosier

A Letter to Pacifica Members re Criticism of the Proposed New Bylaws

Dear Pacifica Radio Members, 

New Bylaws are being proposed to change the governance structure of the Foundation.

Understandably, there have been some criticism of the new Bylaws.

Following is an argument in support of the new Bylaws.

What listeners, staff, and affiliates want is a financially viable network that is supported by members who subscribe to the station for its programming.

In order to have a financial healthy network, the network needs a board where the members spend the board meeting time, working to bring financial stability to the Foundation, instead of fighting factional battles.

Pacifica’s current democratic governance structure that we had over the last 17 years has failed to do that.

In 2019, the board had 39 open meetings and 23 closed meetings over 44 days.

1. At the end of 2019, the board had not completed previous year’s audit, risking the non-profit status of the foundation.

2. At the end of 2019, the board had not come up with the plan to pay off the $3.25 million loan due in full on April 1, 2021.


There are reasons the current democratic governance structure has not worked.

1. Democratically elected Board have resulted in creating factions where fighting factional battles became more important than looking after the business of the foundation,

2. Factional alliance became the criteria for getting on the board rather than skills and expertise needed on the board, further dividing the board.

The main arguments against the new Bylaws are that the new Bylaws are undemocratic and will create self-selecting Board.

1. It is true that the self-selecting Board that precipitated the 1999 crisis did not work, and we do not want to return to that.

2. However, we had democratically elected Board over last 17 years, and that has not worked.


The proposed new bylaws tries to avoids the negative aspects of the previous boards and retain the positive aspects of the previous boards.

1. Five Station Representative Directors are democratically elected by the stations members. Because the members will directly elect one Director from each station, that individual will more likely have the skill set needed on the board,  They will present themselves, their qualification, and vision to the voters rather than in the past when people were elected based on the slate they were running on.

2. Six Directors appointed by the Board will bring experience and expertise that station representatives might not have.

Another argument against the new Bylaws is that it will do away with our Local Station Board and turn it into an advisory board.

1. With the current Bylaws the LSB IS an advisory board with the exception of electing Directors. With the new bylaws Station Representative Directors will be democratically elected by the members.

2. Corporation for Public Radio (CPB) mandates that each station has a Community Advisory Board (CAB), so the advisory role of the LSB can be folded into the CAB.

Another argument against the new Bylaws is that the quorum for membership votes would be only 5%, instead of the current 10% of members, making it easier to sell assets like a station.

1. Many times over the past 17 years stations have had difficulty reaching quorum, sometimes delaying the elections of the Local Station Boards for several weeks.  The 5% quorum of membership will give the members who are interested the ability to elect Directors and to vote on measures that require their approval.

2. Only reason the network would be in a situation where they would even consider selling a station is if the board is so dysfunctional that they cannot manage the financial affairs.  That is what we are trying to prevent!

Another argument against the new Bylaws concerns staff and affiliate representation.

1. The new Bylaws remove staff directors, but the staff has large influence in the selection for the one station representative because of their position.

2. Currently affiliate directors are selected based on factional alliance.

3. The staff and affiliates will benefit from a financially healthy network rather than no network.

One should be mindful of where the most vocal opposition comes from

1. There are bad actors who are eyeing the $100 Million in assets, and want to keep the current dysfunctional governance structure.

2. There are those that have carved out a niche within the current factional governance structure and want to keep that power even though the factional governance structure is imperiling the Foundation.

3. What is ironic is that those who say they are for democracy are trying to block the members, who finance the network, from voting on the type of governance structure members want.

As you weigh whether to keep the current governance structure or try a new governance structure, remember that Pacifica needs a credible and responsible National Board that can bring financial stability to the Foundation, so that staff is free to produce programs that follow the Pacifica mission, and the listeners and the affiliates are motivated to financially support the network.


Akio Tanaka

2017 PNB Secretary

PRP Responds to Misleading, False, and Defamatory Legal Filings by PNB

Pacifica filed some rather astounding materials with the court in Alameda County on Jan. 8, containing declarations with outright false statements.

The Pacifica Restructuring Project responded with legal filings to set the record straight, and to make it clear to the judge, which group (PRP) was working on behalf of the members, and which group (some of the PNB) was making statements in  a desperate attempt to prevent the members from being able to vote on new Bylaws to fix Pacifica’s dysfunctional governance. The filings by Pacifica, as stated in PRP’s reply, were “a thicket of misrepresentations of fact, false innuendos, speculations, and irrelevant red herrings intended to be prejudicial”.

The new PRP filings, that reference the ones filed by Pacifica’s attorney, are:

Then on Jan. 16, the day after the above reply was filed, PNB Directors Aaron, Steinberg, and Sagurton posted a special “emergency” meeting of the PNB for Jan. 23, to seat newly-elected Directors a week earlier than previously scheduled, in an attempt to get ahead of the judge’s ruling in the case. The Pacifica Restructuring Project filed the following response:

  • Supplemental Reply P&A and Declaration, in response to improper setting of special meeting by certain members of the PNB in an attempt to get new Directors seated before the judge rules on the case

Update, Jan. 23, 2020: Citing advice from their own legal counsel, the PNB members who had called for the special “emergency” meeting, to seat new Directors just before the judge ruled on the case, cancelled the Jan. 23 PNB meeting.

Bill Crosier

PRP asks judge to require Pacifica to comply with notice requirements and allow time for member vote

The Pacifica Restructuring Project filed new papers with the court on Dec. 27, 2019, to help ensure that Pacifica members get to vote on the new Bylaws, despite maneuverings by those opposed to letting the members vote. The filing asks the court to require Pacifica to broadcast notices of the new Bylaws in compliance with the current Bylaws, to allow more time for that to be completed and for ballots to be sent out so that the members can vote on the new Bylaws, and for seating of new Directors to be delayed until that is done.

This followed a rather astounding Pacifica National Board meeting on Dec. 20, 2019, in which the Chair pro tem of the PNB, Alex Steinberg, urged PNB Directors to vote “yes” on the new Bylaws proposed by PRP, in order to help defeat them, as a yes vote by the PNB then makes the Bylaws go to the Delegates of each station, before going to the members for a vote. Even if the PNB and/or the Delegates voted to not approve the new Bylaws, the Members still get to vote on them and a vote of approval by the Members would override however the PNB and Delegates vote. Thus, the PNB and Delegates voting accomplishes nothing other than delaying a vote by the members of Pacifica.  The PNB yes vote was clearly a vote to not approve the Bylaws, as stated by the Chair Pro Tem and posted on pacifica.org, and was simply a ploy to delay a member vote until after the (extended) deadline of Feb. 1, in order to prevent the member vote from taking place.

The National Election Supervisor, Renee Penaloza, had previously verified that the PRP Bylaws petition had enough valid signatures (at least 1% of Pacifica members) to be a proper petition, even though she was hired late — after the Notice Period for Bylaws amendments had already been completed, but without notices broadcast on Pacifica stations as the current Bylaws require to be done during each day of the notice period. Such a failure to broadcast notices had killed other proposed Bylaws amendments in early 2019..

Because both California law and the Bylaws guarantee the right of members to vote on new Bylaws or amendments submitted by a member petition, PRP is asking Judge Roesch to affirm that right but also to require that Pacifica fulfill the other notice requirements in the current Bylaws before the vote. Therefore, PRP is also asking the judge to extend the deadline for completing the member vote, as it cannot start until the broadcast notices are completed.

The new papers filed with the court are:

The judge is expected to give a ruling on January 23 regarding this, so stay tuned for further updates.

Bill Crosier

Judge sets Notice Date for Bylaws amendments after PNB fails to do so

On Oct. 21, 2019, Judge Frank Roesch granted an alternative writ of mandate, as requested by the Pacifica Restructuring Project, and set the “Notice Date” for Bylaws amendments as the following day, Oct. 22. He also ordered that Pacifica comply with the rest of the Bylaws regarding notice for Bylaws amendments, in order to start the process that is required before voting on them.

The amendment process that is required by the current Pacifica Bylaws, and which Judge Roesch ordered Pacifica to follow, is in Article 17, Section 1.

The judge’s order was in response to a filing by PRP made after the PNB failed to set a notice date so that Bylaws amendments could be considered and voted on.

Bill Crosier


Pacifica Bylaws survey and website under attack by KPFT’s LSB

From members of the Rethinking Pacifica collective:

As people across the country are sharing and contributing to the Rethinking Pacifica bylaws survey, a small group of people have attempted to stop the communication. A motion was approved at the Aug. KPFT LSB meeting to shut down the website. Strong objections were made that the motion is censorship of the membership and an attempt to intimidate a KPFT LSB member who played a key role in initiating this effort. Former Pacifica interim Executive Director (and still a KPFT LSB member and PNB Director) Bill Crosier is actively working to fix the problems with Pacificas governance and to do a survey to find out what Pacifica members and listeners want (as opposed to just what current board members want).

KPFT has a history of chaotic and dysfunctional meetings. It seems that the KPFT LSB majority don’t want open transparent exploration of our current governance problems perhaps because the responses may indicate the membership is unhappy with our LSBs and may want changes.

Heres the motion that KPFTs LSB approved: rethinkingpacifica.org/censorship-intimidation-motion-by-kpft-lsb

The intimidation part of the motion calls for a committee to investigate Bill Crosier, followed (probably) by a trialto decide what sanctions they want to levy on him for organizing to bring people together fix our broken governance.  In the face of this intense opposition, Bill has said that he does not, and will not, yield to the intimidation tactics.

Update (Sep. 8, 2018): The investigation committee is meeting today, Sep. 8, at the Montrose library in Houston, 2nd floor, at 1 pm CDT. It was originally posted as an open/public meeting (which I wanted, too), but was changed to executive session on Wed. night). Anyone who wants to give “testimony”, though, is welcome to come and tell the committee what you think. Unfortunately, there’s been almost no publicity for this.

Observers of the situation have noted similarities to McCarthy‘s “House Unamerican Activities Committeeof the 1950s.

The censorship part of the motion called for Bill Crosier to take down the Rethinking Pacifica web site (rethinkingpacifica.org) and the associated survey (goo.gl/forms/IHnH68MT5I0H8igG3), to which that web site links. Of course, the Rethinking Pacifica group (including Bill) have no intention of taking down the web site nor the survey. There is no legitimate reasons for doing so. We don’t need permission from the LSB or PNB to do what we’re doing. Anyone can – and many have – done similar things with websites, petitions, etc., with no repercussions, including punishment for any email addresses they might have collected in those endeavors. We MUST reform our failing governance (our boards) if Pacifica is to survive, as so many Pacifica members have been saying. Instead of bowing to the KPFT LSBs attempted censorship, We encourage everyone reading this to check out the Rethinking Pacifica web site and also fill out the survey.

One of the comments about the survey is that so far Bill has been the only person whos identified himself as being part of the group. Intimidation, harassment, and censorship tactics, as the KPFT LSB is doing, seem to be directed at anyone on our boards willing to push for change, and are one of the reasons why people have been reluctant to step forward publicly. If you are willing to let your name be made public as supporting Rethinking Pacificas push to reform our governance, then please reply to Bill at kpft<at>crosierbiomed.com (replace “<at>” with “@”) and let him know.

Thanks to those of you who have provided so many positive comments about the need to reform Pacificas governance so that we can not only survive, but grow and enhance the Pacifica mission, and to provide more news, music, public affairs, and culture that the other stations wont let you hear. To see some of the many comments and suggestions weve received so far, go to rethinkingpacifica.org/2018/06/19/thanks-for-filling-out-survey or scroll down to the bottom of the Rethinking Pacifica web site and check out the post Thanks for filling out our survey -and survey updates“.

Please share this post with other Pacifica supporters. Permalink: https://rethinkingpacifica.org/2018/08/30/kpft-lsb-attempt-to-shut-down-web-site/


Thanks for filling out our survey -and survey updates


Thanks to those of you who have already filled out our survey, and keep reading to see some of the many comments and suggestions we have received so far, from Pacifica supporters. We’d like to add yours, too, so be sure to fill out the survey today!

We are looking to you, Pacifica supporters, to help us learn what’s important to you. The early pioneers of aviation found they had to learn and adapt in order to be successful. YOU can help us learn what Pacifica needs, so we won’t be stuck on the ground, or crashing every time we try to fly. Help us soar and reach to the sky!

Update – July 2019 – A list of problems with Pacifica’s Bylaws/governance/boards, and suggested solutions, have been compiled and made publicly available here. These were complied from submissions sent in response to requests to both the PNB Governance Committee and to several unofficial Pacifica e-mail lists. Thanks to all of you for your submissions.

Thanks to those of you who have already filled out our first survey on the Pacifica Bylaws and what changes are needed to ensure that Pacifica can not just survive, but pay its bills, get more listeners, and become a more powerful influence in current political discussions.

Please share on social media and e-mail your friends about the survey.

Representative comments and suggestions we have received so far:


To the survey question “Other comments or suggestions about the Pacifica Bylaws“, here are some responses:

  • Major Bylaws changes are needed to ensure we have smaller, competent boards. Our governance should help with fund raising and ensure our debts are paid. It should represent the interests of our members rather than of tiny groups who have learned how to take advantage of flaws in the Bylaws to drive away competent board members and get themselves and their friends installed on the boards.
  • Bylaws should require better, “state of the art,” uniformly specified and applied financial organization with required follow through by staff and PNB. Balanced Budgets must be required for all stations and departments. Not only should the bylaws require that stations programming be community based, but more programming must be setup to facilitate and use the nation wide/ world wide network.
  • Stations with 17000 members need more PNB representatives that stations with 7000 members. It needs to be representational.
  • The bylaws were written by groups of traumatized people across the network who were hell-bent on assuring that the pains they endured in the struggle to save Pacifica would never happen to us again; and in effect they created a prison which has kept us trapped for over 15 years and prevented Pacifica from being the change-making, truth-telling information disseminator and platform of communication we have needed this entire time.
  • Keep it as simple and easy as possible. “Nature is pleased with simplicity. And nature is no dummy” ― Isaac Newton
  • Sortition, sortition, sortition. SORTITION. This is the only way I can see to salvage the bitter factionalism and self-interest created by the LSB and PNB elections.
  • Do not keep the democracy. It never worked.
  • i will suggest that Pacifica Members vote for Pacifica Directors from a slate of candidates provided from a nominating committee and the elected PNB members run the entire Pacifica network. No more LSBs
  • It may be the personalities involved, but local and national meetings seem to be manipulated by parliamentary engineering. You cannot expect donors to continue to support this.
  • The bylaws should be reviewed on an annual basis. There should be more input from station members. Outside review of bylaws and rules should be considered.
  • much to say..too often all these board members don’t know shit about broadcasting or if they are staff..are wedded to the present system and use all sorts of ideological bullshit to justify nothing being done.
  • Short as possible. Board hire and fire management and let management mange. Or Amicable divorce.
  • Full rewrite, eliminating all that is covered by statute.
  • should be re-written reducing the power of the boards and it’s members
  • Simple bylaws are all that are needed. Bylaws set the governance structure, not govenance policies and should not be used to try to set policy. The bylaws should make it clear that the ED is in charge, and that the CFO, Secretary, and GMs report to him or her. The current confusion as to whether station managers are responsible to the ED or their local board needs to end. The GMs must be accountable to the ED, and hired and fired by the ED, without the LSB’s having the power or authority to get in the way or confuse the situation.
  • The framers of the Bylaws were overgenerous with the Foundations time and resources. The notice requirements for LSB meetings have rarely been followed fully. Having elections two out of every three years is ridiculous. Four in-person meetings a year is absurdly costly. This is what happens when activist-ideologues with no broadcasting or management experience are handed a blank slate and allowed to devise rules for an organization.
  • Consider separating the stations into independent entities, which could still be affiliated through an umbrella organization, IF THEY CHOSE TO DO SO. In any case, each entity would have just one board and their own bylaws. Either there is one central board, or the stations become independent with their own boards. If the stations are independent, then the umbrella organization (Pacifica) is also independent, so it’s board is chosen independently, not from local members. Local stations can come and go from Pacifica at will, which will force Pacifica to be responsive to their needs. Independent Pacifica affiliates would pay a fee to be affiliates, but could decide to leave if they were not happy with the services provided.
  • They should have a clearly-articulated process for: 1. Adding new stations to the organization, and 2. Spinning off stations to independent community-based nonprofits, if that’s what their membership wants, and 3. Liquidating stations whose debts and deficits pose a threat to the rest of the network
  • I’m not sure that democracy has any place in governing a radio network.
  • it is good you are thinking about this. now take some of that money that is spent on elections and hire someone like Miki Kashtan or someone with skills to help evaluate the problems and wholistic create solutions. by law changes are not enough nor does it get to the root of the problems.
  • If these are not working lets switch to being an affiliate and use their bylaws or use them as a model if they are working for the affiliate being copied.
  • The Bylaws should allow stations to leave Pacifica, if they want to.
  • 1. If we’re going to have elections we have to find a way to get more people voting. 2. We also need to coordinate programming more nationally. We should be much more of a national presence than we are, with more professional national shows. Our numbers of listeners are abysmal. 3. Ask in the community what kind of programming potential listeners want to hear; not current listeners but non-listeners in our target audience, like political millennials. 4. And consider advertising on buses…relatively cheap for the return
  • a two tier structure with a professional BOD and a member board would be preferable.

To the survey question “Besides changing the Bylaws to make Pacifica more functional, what other changes are needed to bring stability to Pacifica’s stations?, here are some responses:

  • The elections are a pain in the ass and the results are usually not good. The board should be TOLD that they need to be involved in fund raising, ideas for fund raising, maintaining the buildings, publicizing the station, and more. They should not be a police force or court that only enforces what they think is right.
  • lsb members who are trying to promote their own businesses or their friends businesses or lsb members who think they govern what types of programming should be on the air waves should be addressed—-a member of the lsb might have good ideas for programming but a program director should be allowed to do his or her job
  • Less crappy stupid programming. Less obsession with giving “voice to the community” and more to featuring people who know what they’re talking about and do it well.
  • Have a politically responsible national board that selects itself after an initial board is chosen.
  • Managers and boards should have a close relationship. LSBs, as they exist currently, are useless. If the local board could actually make decisions, then managers would be more likely to attend the meetings as non-voting members. Managers need the ability to change personnel at will, but they must explain their actions to the board, which then has the ability to hire and fire the manager.
  • Evaluating programming on a regular basis and finding ways to continually raise money in a non-intrusive manner. Dedicated fundraisers every other month is not productive.
  • Get rid of agenda based people
  • Have clear cut skills defined for board seats. I would like prospective board members nominated and voted on or off by incumbents.
  • Local management and finances MUST be accountable to the national ED and CFO, who should have unambiguous hiring and firing authority over them. OR — the five stations should become independent Pacifica Affiliates with their own local boards and authority and NO responsibility to or for Pacifica National at all. Pacifica National could then be an independent program distribution service that stations could choose to affiliate with or not. This would make the stations more responsive and accountable to their local communities, and less likely to blame someone else for their failures … thus, hopefully, the stations would be better managed and better governed.
  • comprehensive Pacifica (top tier) budget with benchmarks and fallbacks.
  • Financial control top to bottom. Run it like a truly accountable foundation.
  • Pacifica has evolved from a free speech network run mostly by volunteers, intellectuals and radio non-conformists to a leftist advocacy network in which non-leftists are mistrusted and unwelcome. As long as people assume that Pacifica has an established political line, and programming that deviates from that line is proscribed, stagnation will persist. LSB and PNB members seem uninterested in basic radio management and are more interested in political advocacy and running Pacifica itself as an experiment in egalitarian politics and a stage on which to perform sectarian debates and personal psychodramas that belong elsewhere. Some programmers act like they are the last line of defense for human civilization itself. Consequently, anyone who advocates programming change is subjected to protest, accusation and invective. Managers are too scared of the programmers and their governance allies to change anything substantive. Disruptive and disrespectful behavior that would get you fired anywhere else is tolerated in Pacifica. Such behavior is erroneously assumed to be “political” and “social justice-oriented” and is therefore untouchable. Pacifica has developed into a well-functioning politically correct blackmail system in which change and growth are impossible. Only strong leadership more interested in expanding listenership than in placating political constituencies and being liked would be capable of breaking through this deadlock. Can such leadership be found and would such leadership be supported by the Executive Director and the PNB? Doubtful. Eliminating elected boards will not solve these problems entirely, but the bad feeling, gridlock, noise, and waste generated by the LSBs can be ended quickly. People who want to shape and influence Pacifica would have to do so by contributing directly to the operation of the stations (volunteering in the phone room, volunteering to help programmers, creating new programs, engaging in outreach) rather than making speeches and passing motions in a pretend Congress.
  • Continuing training for all levels and departments. Required evaluation of all personnel a minimum of annually. Required evaluation and change in programming; at all stations a minimum of annually. (2)
  • a signal swap for WBA I and change of management
  • Pay off our debt ASAP!
  • management genuinely accountable to the president and board for satisfactory performance.
  • A national program director with the power to make changes to any Pacifica schedules at all five stations.
  • Negotiate a sale of WBAI in exchange for eliminating that debt–the albatross. The overwhelming debt deters new supporters–they did not create this situation.
  • National Program Director, maybe.
  • we need better meeting technology. not just audio.
  • More volunteers, less paid staff.
  • Wholesale sacking of the dead wood on the air ..that is the MAIN Problem
  • Signal swap for WBAI. New GM at WBAI
  • WBAI should be auctioned off to settle its debts before they swamp the rest of the stations, and any remaining proceeds should used to create a national programming endowment that can restore a national news service for use by Pacifica stations and affiliates, that can commission freelance work from station-based reporters.
  • Sell WBAI.
  • Professional broadcast and engineering standards
  • Whatever its length, produce a gloss of the Bylaws that facilitates comprehension of them.
  • Weak stations should not be allowed to steal the support of strong stations. The pretense that the 5 stations are the offspring of a parent network has to end. That’s not how the confederation known as “Pacifica” evolved.
  • Share more programming between and among stations; foster more training and engagement with youth and POC communities; promote and market stations and programs; more effective and consistent use of social media for promotion/marketing; expand beyond radio to incorporate video/streaming more effectively; lessen on-air squabbling over “dirty laundry” and focus more on Pacifica’s mission to create more understanding and a peaceful world.
  • Make boards smaller. Screen candidates better. Make sure there is no cheating on ballots. Have consequences for causing chaos at meetings. As they say, democrats are like herding cats. While, lefties, from my experience at the station and serving on the LSB, eat their own. Life is short. Set up stop and go signals so boards can function and accomplish something.
  • Reevaluate Bankruptcy as recommended by the CFO Sam Agarwal and Bill Crosier, Peter Franck and reorganize with supervision of a judge.
  • Sell WBAI, pay off that damn loan on time. Also have better ability to fire bad station managers. And end the stupid faction fighting. Perhaps by ability to recall reps on PNB.
  • Student or under age 30 membership – $5, or 5 hour volunteer
  • Some way to raise or generate more income.
  • Use the stations’ websites and on-air promos to drive contributions in between fund drives.
  • Return to Mission, require quality, abandon partisanship, program from archives
  • Hire professional managers to run the stations, not friends of board members
  • Term limit on GM. 5 years max.
  • It is grossly unfair for one member station’s financial irresponsibility to endanger the financial security of a better-managed station, as is the case right now.