RadioPoetics.org

1. Why do you wish to serve on the Local Station Board?

I have been involved with KPFA as a listener-activist since the mid-1990s. I have been able to witness the emergence of the new bylaws that guide the radio network’s governance structure. I have come to appreciate how much time it takes to develop and implement ideas in this environment and one three-year term is not really enough time. It is clear to me that there is still a disconnect between internal station operations and the listener democracy movement that was borne out of the crisis in 1999. The primary reason I am running is to try to help cure this disconnect.

2. What skills, qualifications and experience would you bring to the board?

I have worked professionally in the areas of law, as a paralegal and in public policy as an policy analyst. My experience in the legal field is varied; I have worked in criminal law, mainly in the area of death penalty appeals. This experience has enabled me to gain an appreciation of the importance of key constitutional protections such as habeas corpus and witness the systematic attempts, especially over the last decade, to undermine them. I have also worked extensively in complex commercial litigation and as a public policy analyst for the State of California. In this latter capacity, my responsibilities have included conducting political and economic analysis and making policy recommendation to decision makers on a wide range of issues, from telecommunications to energy conservation. I believe that my professional background adds to my ability to perform effectively as a station board member as the role calls upon board members to develop sound policies, review and analyze the station budget, and ensure that the station does not lose sight of the Pacifica Mission.

3. What can be done to improve the dynamics and effectiveness of the Local Station Board?

Dynamics: There is not enough consensus based dialogue on the board. Instead, the various tendencies on the board rely too heavily on parliamentary procedure to outmaneuver one another and the board meetings tend to be fairly dreary parliamentary wrestling matches that are very constrained and bereft of meaningful exchanges between board members. I would recommend that the board utilize a more relaxed version of Roberts Rules of Order to allow the board meetings to become a space for considered decision making based on open dialogue.

Effectiveness: As I have mentioned above there is still a disconnect between internal station operation and listener democracy; the station board is supposed to serve as a conduit between these two arenas. In order for this to happen it is imperative that both the Local Station Board as a whole and station management and staff cultivate and maintain a positive relationship and that lines of communication remain open – The effectiveness of the board is directly related to how well this relationship works because the board is only as effective as this relationship allows it to be. The board’s specifically mandated powers and authority under the bylaws are limited to hiring and evaluating the performance of the Station Manager and approving the station budget. Beyond that, the board can only make policy recommendations that the station management has the discretion to implement or not. The wisdom, or lack thereof, of the choices made by management in terms of whether or not to implement the board’s policy recommendations are judged by the board during its review of the manager’s performance. If the board and management cannot develop a mutually respectful relationship, a dynamic is created where the management ignores the board and the board is limited to taking stock of the manager’s performance at evaluation time.

4. What LSB committees would you like to join? What Pacifica National Board committees?

I would be interested in serving on the finance committee and the outreach committee at the local level and on the programming committee at the national level. While I am not a finance expert it is clear to me that the station needs to manage its finances in a way that serves the unique needs of the Pacifica Mission. Beyond the technical considerations that go into developing a budget, there are also critical non-technical considerations which I would like to bring to bear on the finance committee. For example, KPFA needs to think more creatively about how to provide resources to its unpaid staff corps, who play a critical role at the station and yet do not receive adequate support from the station. KPFA also needs develop a sustainable budget and prioritize long term financial planning with particular attention to maintenance of its operational infrastructure as the station’s survival as a resource for the community independent foundation funding or corporate underwriting.

5. Would you be interested in serving on the Pacifica National Board, and why?

While I am open to idea of serving on the national board I do not have a particular interest in doing so as I am more focused on local priorities.

6. How do you view the dynamics between the Pacifica network and local station autonomy?

In terms of the finances of the Pacifica network this is a false distinction - the financial health or lack thereof of each of the stations in the network affects all the others, so positive collaboration is critical and autonomy not a real option. Programming affects not only the five stations but also the dozens of affiliated community radio stations around the country and there is a delicate balance between each station maintaining its own unique characteristics and national programming, which tends toward a more uniform sound. National programming plays an important role in cultivating a sense of cohesion within the network as well as raising the networks profile, in turn having an impact on the national discourse. I have no fixed ideas about this dynamic and see it as a constant work in progress.

7. How should the Pacifica Foundation find a wider audience?

I do not believe that Pacifica has a proselytizing mission. The assumption built into this question; namely that Pacifica must necessarily set out to expand its audience - is not necessarily consistent with the original premise upon which the network was founded. The danger in not challenging this assumption is that it leaves Pacifica vulnerable to pandering to mainstream sensibilities and to the lowest common denominator syndrome. Pacifica was founded a vehicle for marginal, dissident voices in both the cultural and political arenas. As such, its core audience is largely self-selecting or based on word of mouth. There is a relationship between the non-conformist nature of the quintessential Pacifica listener and the integrity of the Pacifica mission - the actual number of Pacifica’s audience is incidental to this relationship. I think that if Pacifica’s programming remains, in Lenin’s words ‘as radical as reality itself’ it will naturally remain relevant to more and more listeners, and its ‘audience’ will grow. Pacifica should also not view its listeners as passive supplicants but should constantly look for ways to include members of the community in programming

8. What can be done to preserve and share the treasures of the Pacifica Archives?

Special budgetary and fundraising considerations should be made for the archives, the preservation of which have very particular and capital intensive requirements. The archives also need to be integrated into regular programming in a more routine way through live broadcasting as well as podcasting so that the archives can be more readily available as a resource.

9. Do you have any ideas for new approaches to fundraising for Pacifica?

There are already a range of effective fundraising mechanisms in place. Some are more effective than others. As with question number 7, this question also has a problematic assumption built into it – namely that Pacifica ‘must’ raise more money. Obviously Pacifica, like any other entity needs money to thrive, but I think more attention needs to be paid to making sure that fundraising is based on a budgetary model that is geared toward maintaining and improving infrastructure and operations and ensuring the networks’ long term viability – and that Pacifica remains listener-sponsored - alternative sources of funding should not undermine the importance of listener sponsors as shareholders. I think that there is a tendency for Pacifica to become more and more reliant on ‘paid professionals’ and less reliant on ‘unpaid professionals’ also known as volunteers. I am an advocate of the latter approach because it keeps Pacifica grounded in the communities it serves and helps to arrest the tendency, which afflicts an increasing number of non-profits to become more and more reliant on sources of money, e.g. large donors that decrease its connection and relevance to the communities it serves.

10. How do you view Pacifica’s potential in providing internet content?

Clearly the internet is becoming more and more critical to every facet of life in the 21st century and beyond in both positive and problematic ways. I think Pacifica is already behind the curve in terms of the wide range and infectious heterodoxy of discourses that are mediated through the internet and I am excited about exploring ways in which Pacifica can optimize its potential in this regard.

11. What technologies should the Pacifica Foundation consider for the future?

Rather than recommend any specific technologies I would merely suggest that Pacifica remain flexible and receptive to the constantly evolving range of media platforms available to consumers of information.

12. What can be done to improve our signal strength?

Pacifica needs to conduct an analysis the signal strength of its listening areas and identify pockets that for various reasons, from geographic barriers to interference from other signals, do not receive the signal and develop a comprehensive plan to install additional repeaters at strategic locations. Pacifica may also consider utilizing public access cable networks to reach listeners.

13. Should the station consider relocating the studio to other facilities? Where and Why?

No.

14. How can our station better serve under-represented communities?

KPFA needs to conduct more systematic and thorough outreach to communities whose issues are not addressed on KPFA – at the same time, KPFA needs to make its programming grip more flexible so that it can be responsive to any programming ideas that may be submitted by community representatives. The station board has a bylaws mandated responsibility to conduct community needs assessment and an active Community Advisory Board would be one effective mechanism through which the station can assess community needs.

15. How can our station better serve the many linguistic communities of the signal area?

I think this is an extension of question No. 14 - the success of such an effort will be a function of how well the station conducts outreach. Given the multiplicity of languages in the bay area and the finite number of broadcasting hours the station may consider something like occasional or periodical, e.g. bi-weekly or bi-monthly programs produced by members of different linguistic groups. This is an important issue that deserves deeper consideration given its wide ranging impact, and the station could certainly do more in this regard.

16. What do you see as our station’s strong and weak points?

The stations main strength lies in a combination of its deeply committed and talented staff and its listenership. The station is only weak to the extent the bond between the station and listeners is neglected.

17. Have you ever been party to, or provided support for, a lawsuit involving Pacifica or its employees? When and Why?

I have not been party to any lawsuit involving Pacifica, but along with hundreds of listener activists across the network and as I a member of KPFA’s Local Advisory Board from 2000 to 2003 I supported the listener lawsuit as part of a multi-pronged effort to remove the rogue national board.

18. How do you think the election process for Local Station Board can be improved?

The election process will be vastly improved if the station and board can work together to make sure that listeners are more informed about governance issues and the roles played in governance by board members between elections so that the elections can be more meaningful. The station staff should also provide more airtime for candidate debates and discussion during the election season. In addition, the station should remind listeners during the fund drive that making a pledge gives them the right to vote. As it stands, this is rarely if ever mentioned.

19. What are your hobbies, interests, and other organizational affiliations?

Like many people I have varied hobbies and interests, in my case, KPFA is among the most important to me. I have no formal organizational affiliations other than the KPFA Local Station Board (my term expires this fall) and I am a listener member of KPFA Radio and the Pacifica Foundation.

20. What question(s) would you pose to your fellow candidates?

None in particular, I would mainly be interested in getting to know them at a personal level.