Re: the nomination period
Bill Crosier
For anyone wanting to extend the nominations deadline, please read that section of the Bylaws and tell us how we can do so without violating them. I don't see how we can.
For anyone who does not have a copy handy, the bylaws are at http://kewg.org
I suggest we help our LESs publicize the elections and individually work to recruit candidates who are interested in helping Pacifica and our stations to grow stronger financially and to get more listeners and members. We all should have been doing that for the last few months, anyway.
Bill
At 11:33 AM -0700 6/15/10, Renee Asteria wrote:
>Hello,
>
>The nomination phase is in full force right now. We will do our best with the time we have. I don't make the call.
>
>Renee
>
>On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Richard Uzzell <<mailto:richard_...@hotmail.com>richard_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>I think moving the deadline to July 31 would help at all stations. Who makes this call? NES???
>
>Richard
>
>
>
>From: <mailto:grace...@ca.rr.com>grace...@ca.rr.com
>To: <mailto:p...@pacifica.org>p...@pacifica.org
>Subject: Fw: request to extend the nomination period
>Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 11:19:52 -0700
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:kim.k...@att.net>Kim Kaufman
>To: <mailto:lilag...@roadrunner.com>'Lila G' ; <mailto:grace...@ca.rr.com>'Grace Aaron'
>Cc: <mailto:epea...@earthlink.net>'Ed Pearl' ; <mailto:alexander...@gmail.com>'Jonathan Alexander' ; <mailto:al...@KPFK.ORG>'Ali Lexa' ; <mailto:kena...@ca.rr.com>'ken aaron' ; <mailto:temc...@mac.com>'Terrence McNally' ; <mailto:LilaG...@adelphia.net>'Lila G' ; <mailto:iancm...@gmail.com>'Ian Masters' ; <mailto:nets...@DaClubHouse.Net>'John Wenger'
>Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 11:14 AM
>Subject: RE: request to extend the nomination period
>
>I agree with Lila. I'd like to see a consistent "July 31" date for all concerned.
>
>Kim
>
><http://caf.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=NPB6PU2UKpSxErk5956wXmFYyj9cpXH7>What Is An Emergency? Afghanistan Or Our Children?
>
>
>From: Lila G [mailto:<mailto:lilag...@roadrunner.com>lilag...@roadrunner.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 11:05 AM
>To: Grace Aaron; Kim Kaufman
>Cc: Ed Pearl; Jonathan Alexander; Ali Lexa; ken aaron; Terrence McNally; Lila G; Ian Masters; John Wenger
>Subject: Re: request to extend the nomination period
>
>Excellent letter. Very clear, logical and persuasive. I just wonder if two weeks is long enough. I believe the nominating period should be extended for more like six weeks so people get a chance to catch their breath after fund drive, have a chance to find really qualified candidates who may be overlooked in the time crunch, and so that the new executives can really familiarize themselves with the job. A truly democratic election, which is our mission, should be thought through, not rammed through. Thanks for starting the ball rolling. Lila Garrett, Host CONNECT THE DOTS.
>
>
>On 6/15/10 10:31 AM, "Grace Aaron" <<mailto:grace...@ca.rr.com>grace...@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Carolyn Birden <mailto:cmbi...@gmail.com><mailto:cmbi...@gmail.com>
>To: Grace Aaron <mailto:grace...@ca.rr.com><mailto:grace...@ca.rr.com> ; Shawn Casey O'Brien <mailto:iris...@verizon.net><mailto:iris...@verizon.net> ; Joseph Wanzala <mailto:wan...@gmail.com><mailto:wan...@gmail.com> ; Luzette King <mailto:luzett...@yahoo.com><mailto:luzett...@yahoo.com> ; Mitchel Cohen <mailto:mitche...@mindspring.com><mailto:mitche...@mindspring.com> ; janet coleman <mailto:catrad...@gmail.com><mailto:catrad...@gmail.com> ; Delphine Blue <mailto:delp...@nyc.rr.com><mailto:delp...@nyc.rr.com> ; Max Schmid <mailto:msc...@rcn.com><mailto:msc...@rcn.com> ; <mailto:rober...@optimum.net>rober...@optimum.net
>Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 8:54 AM
>Subject: request to extend the nomination period
>
>Set to George Reiter and Arlene Engelhardt today:
>
>Hello, George,
>
>I'm writing about the elections process here at WBAI. It is moving very
>slowly, and I am afraid that we will not have enough time, or energy, or
>personnel, to do effective nominations. Our new Local Elections Supervisor
>is quite unfamiliar with the processes, the on-air presence of election-related
>information has been under-whelming, and I'm afraid that not enough people
>will know about the elections, the nomination process, or the several deadlines
>coming up. The result will very likely be the same old suspects running and perhaps
>voting, but the major purpose of the elections. to organize members and
>familiarize them with the issues around Pacifica and the individual stations, and to
>run models of the democratic participation of all members, will be lost without more
>time and energy spent on the process.
>
>I now think it was a mistake to shorten the nomination period, and given the
>problems with new appointments and inexperienced supervisors, I hope
>that the PNB can consider extending the nomination period by at least two weeks,
>hopefully long enough for local supervisors to pick up the slack and follow the
>elections protocols. Otherwise I am afraid that the Foundation will be faced with
>litigation from anyone who does not get elected, got nominated late, did not have
>time to campaign well, etc., all because we got off to such a rocky start (not just
>at KPFK, but also at WBAI and KPFA). Given enough time, the new local
>election supervisors can familiarize themselves with the issues, create the
>mandated election committees (hasn't happened yet at WBAI), and determine
>who is trustworthy, which advice is in the Foundaton's interest, and how STV
>works, for starters. I'm sure there would be some basis for extending the bylaws-
>mandated nomination period, given exigent circumstances all around the Foundation.
>
>As you may surmise, I am quite discouraged about the prognosis
>for fair, efficient, unbiased elections this year, but hope that, with enough time and good will,
>we can get up to speed and make them work. Otherwise I fear not only failed elections, but
>successful legal challenges to the process itself.
>
>Don't hesitate to call or write if you would like more information or clarification about
>any of the above.
>
>Best,
>Carolyn
>917 520 1268
>
--
Bill Crosier
kp...@crosierbiomed.com 713-641-4941
Support KPFT - Radio for Peace - 90.1 FM Houston http://kpft.org
Progressive Action Alliance http://progressiveactionalliance.org
Shawn Casey O'Brien
We extend deadlines all the time. If we had Les Radke's report as required by the bylaws -- no one seems upset at this blatant violation -- we'd see that deadlines were surly moved last year by the NES.
And the NES's response below should give the PNB pause for serious thought. I mean, really, if the NES is suppose to be autonomous and independent, common sense dictates that she "makes the call".
Of course, common sense is just one of the things that's been in short supply around here lately.
Enough said,
Shawn
Melinda Iley-Dohn
to be returned to allow us to meet quorum on elections as well. It might be a good idea to extend the date given the fact that the LESs were not hired until recently, IMHO.
Melinda Iley-Dohn
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759
--- On Tue, 6/15/10, Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net> wrote:
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups "PNB Elections Committee" group.
> To post to this group, send email to pnb_el...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> pnb_election...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pnb_elections?hl=en.
>
>
Renee Asteria
My job as National Election Supervisor is to ensure that there are no Bylaws violations. So far we are on schedule - no violations have occurred.
- On June 1st the Nomination Phase opened
- LES's where hired and in place
- All Nomination packages where complete and available
- Webpage was complete
Come midnight, June 30th, if there is a need to extend beyond what the Bylaws dictate, then we will deal with that reality and make logical extensions.
Renee
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Jan Goodman
1. Part of the "Nomination Phase opening" means that the nomination packets are on line. This is yet to happen in the KPFK Station area, so the nomination phase has not opened here yet.
2. Part of the Nomination Phase Opening" is publicizing the fact that the nomination phase has opened to the membership, via the airwaves, meaning carts, announcements, etc. -- it seems that this began happening this last weekend, June 12th.
3. I'm also unaware of the time & location of the petition signing parties which the information states will be held.
4. Not to be too picky, & I haven't read all of the information on line, but it certainly does not speak well for us when the second paragraph says (& here I have merely cut and pasted):
Immediately (see page 5) in electronic
format (email, .doc, .txt, .pdf)
to the Local Election Supervisor so we
can post it on Pacificaelections2010.org
and begin promoting your campaign!
1
that I see
So, we are already behind and haven't really started here in L.A.
It seems to me that
Jan Goodman
(310) 458-7213 or (310) 729-2394
Carolyn Birden
problems at several stations should provide ample justification for
anyone requiring it.
Carolyn
Jan Goodman
I heard (3rd hand) that at some point somebody at KPFK wanted him to do something for the station and he asked if doing that job would jeopardize his ability to be the LES again, and he was told, "No, it wouldn't be a problem".
then, when he applied to become the LES again, that he was knocked out because he did exactly what he had been cleared to do.
Michael Sanchez was the most competent, calm, thoughtful LES that KPFK ever had, and if the above is true, the NES, & everyone else involved should do whatever is possible to rectify the situation and get him into this crucial postition.
Russell Dale
Carolyn,
The only reasons you give in your initial letter about this for extending the nomination period are (1) that the LESs should be given more time to get up to speed with the required processes, (2) that YOU are "under-whelmed" by the on-air announcements, and (3) that people will sue if they are not elected.
(1) The Bylaws don't state that people hired as LESs should be perfectly familiar with all the processes involved with an election. They just need to be competent to do them, and we all always must give the benefit of the doubt to the NES that she has chosen competent LESs. I see no reason not to be confident that this has occurred this year.
(2) I have heard some of the on-air carts about the elections and I have thought they were very very well done, especially given the short time that Nichole Justice-Hylton has been on as LES at WBAI.
(3) If the Bylaws-stipulated time line for the election is being followed, and it is, then nobody will have any legal ground for suing the foundation in this regard.
My personal opinion right now, which I am willing to change given reasonable argument, is that we should stick to the deadline the Bylaws stipulates, which is 30 days after the opening of nominations on June 1.
--Russell Dale
WBAI LSB
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Renee Asteria
It is the PNB who creates the Bylaws. It is my job to make sure the elections are run in compliance with the Bylaws. I will NOT violate the Bylaws unless absolutely necessary. So far no violations have occured and there is no reason to extend the election.
Renee
Renee Asteria
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| In all fairness to Renee and our respective LESs, let us not forget that our elections time line is running behind schedule. here is the link to the section pertaining to the elections. http://kewg.org/bylaws/art4.html These people are contractors whose positions are only for the period of the elections. Let's stand behind Renee and our local elections supervisors to help in any way possible so we can have a good clean election with large pools of candidates ready to carry Pacifica forward. Thanks, Melinda |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
| --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net> wrote: |
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| Per the By-Laws, the Executive Director hires the National Elections Supervisor to work as a contractor. Iderally the NES position should be filled in March because they then have to hire the Local Election Supervisors. The PNB is not involved in the running of elections. It is done entirely by independant contractors. Check this section of the By-Laws. It explains everyrthing. We have been running behind schedule this is why things got started late. http://kewg.org/bylaws/art4sec4.html |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those
who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
--- On Tue, 6/15/10, Kim Kaufman <kim.k...@att.net> wrote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carolyn Birden
Russell Dale
Carolyn,
I understand that you feel there is not enough time under the framework provided for us by the Bylaws. Your arguments, however, are arguments for changing the Bylaws, not for extending the period we are obligated as fiduciaries of Pacifica to keep to. We should generally stick to the Bylaws until we agree as a group to change them.
--Russell
Russell,Your arguments tell me that you miss a good deal of the purpose of the elections, which is not to stick to a timeline, but to engage listeners and give them the opportunity to nominate someone, join the station so they vote, and execute their rights as members to participate in the process. They can't do that if they don't know the process is ongoing, and most don't.This is not Renee's fault, or Nichole's (in WBAI), but is due to the process this year. When the PNB EC was considering hiring an outside firm to take on much of the work of the elections, we agreed that we needed a person, or a company, or both, with experience running contentious elections, and we sought out people with experience running union elections, those being the most contentious and thus the best training for Pacifica's. We also tried to find people familiar with STV/Choice voting: not an easy job. As Shawn Casey O'Brien points out, the Bylaws say "The local elections supervisors preferably should be experienced with election procedures and supervision." This year there was evidently not enough time to address these desiderata, to search for the kind of experience that in past years we had considered ideal. Nevertheless, we now need to give the supervisors time to catch up, figure out what they need to know, and move ahead. Failing that, I believe we may be disadvantaging both members and candidates.At the moment the listeners are the losers: they haven't been encouraged nearly enough to join before June 30th. They don't know what the governing board does. The don't know how to become candidates, if that is what they want to do, or how to work with the station to help the elections go smoothly. (How many stations have already formed their LES's election committee?, or put carts on the air around the clock beginning June 1?) This is an educational process, and because LESs were hired so late in the game, and are not familiar with the routines from having been part of the process in previous years, the listeners are not going to be taught much of what they need to know in order to become engaged, and vote. It is not a question of good will or basic organizational competence, and I don't think you should make that the issue: there just has not been enough time for even the most experienced of supervisors to put into motion what the voters need to vote intelligently. Many will not bother to vote in a process from which they have been removed, I'm afraid.So while we may stick to the timeline, and congratulate ourselves on that, we may not make quorum because too few voting members bother to become engaged in the process: the result? The elections may have to be delayed anyway.If you look at the complaints at other stations, and look at the delays in posting information, disseminating it, publicizing the process, and creating forums and fliers, the people who will be most likely to run and vote are those who know the drill from past years. New members, likely members, new candidates, prospective members trying to find out why they should join the station, will be left far behind, and we will have the sameold sameold candidates and participants unless we give ourselves a little more time and a lot more energy. The incumbents will be advantaged, the newcomers left out of the process, and the foundation will not benefit from new blood, the members and candidates who could be engaged if there were more weeks in which to work.Sixteen (16) members of the Committee to Strengthen KPFK signed a petition to the NES asking for a July 31st deadline for nominations: they point out that carts and announcements should have been running on air since June 1st, which they have not (here or there). The also make the following points:"Most critically, extending the nomination timeline will allow stations to avoid the conflicting demands on staff and listeners posed by fund drives at KPFK, KPFA, and WBAI. With an extended deadline, the stations will be able to provide broad and compelling public notice, both on air and online, of the election process and the invitation for listener members to nominate themselves as candidates. It will also provide inexperienced Local Election Supervisors more time to conduct fair and representative elections. Further, it will give all parties more time to make certain that the election process conforms to all bylaws and protocols in order to protect stations and the network against potential legal challenges."Proper notice, advertising, on- and off-air forums, are all legal requirements that can be met if we extend the timeline. I agree that it should be extended.Carolyn
At 7:29 PM -0400 6/15/10, Russell Dale wrote:
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| Russell, In the period since 2004 we have had several times that we had to change the dates such as a low return of ballots and there have been years where we had fewer than enough candidates to fill the positions available. This has always been the duty of the National Elections Supervisor to make this determination. As Renee has pointed out, she are going to be waiting till after July 30, the deadline that we are given as the standard. At that time, if we need more time, she will make that decision. This is part of her duties. It sounds like Renee has everything in good order. So far so good. |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
| --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Russell Dale <russelle...@gmail.com> wrote: |
Russell Dale
Dear Melinda,
Thank you for the information. I will keep it in mind.
I didn't think the issue Ms. Birden had raised was so much about quorum, though, as about her having a sense that there won't be enough candidates given the June 30 deadline for nominations. That seems like quite a different issue.
Quorum by the voters is one issue, and whether or not we should extend the nomination period is another, isn't it?
Yours,
Russell
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| I don't know what the exact date is but frankly at this point we need to move forward. I have been a part of elections when we had a iED instead a fully involved ED. This is a huge improvement. As our NES is a contractor we need to have a full time ED to assist when issues arise from our local station elections. With Pacifica, it is always when not if. We need to remember that the By-Laws were written as a clean slate without any means of knowing that we would find ourselves with this many forest fires for our ED to face as the election time line rolled around. Arlene has had four out of five GMs to hire, a national audit and more headaches than Tylenol can handle. This election is Arlene and Rene's baby now. I have worked in two of the past elections and I think that we are off to a good start from what I am seeing thus far. |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
| --- On Tue, 6/15/10, Kim Kaufman <kim.k...@att.net> wrote: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bill Crosier
Note, though, that I would not be opposed to extending all the deadlines by up to 2 weeks, IF we can get a legal opinion that we won't have a problem with violating the Bylaws and opening us up to more lawsuits, and IF we extend all the later timeline dates by the same amount.
1. Delaying the close of nominations might seem reasonable due to the delay in hiring our NES (first week of May rather than by March 1 as should have been done were it not for so much time being required to deal with other serious problems, including Pacifica's finances, a terrible audit, and no permanent GM at 4 of our 5 stations). However, as our NES has noted, she had all the critical items in place by the beginning of the campaign period and has done an amazing job, in my opinion, in making all those preparations. I personally went to the http://pacificaelections2010.org web site on June 3 and downloaded candidate packages so I could check them, so I know they were there and available. (I know listener candidate packages were available there for download even before the end of May, although the staff packages took a few days more to get ready/update, but I know they were there by June 3.) And all stations have had links to http://pacificaelections2010.org from their individual web sites for a while, too (I think since before June 1, although I'm not sure about this for all stations). All PNB and LSB members at all stations should have been recruiting candidates before June, regardless of whether election announcements were being broadcast.
2. I heard carts about the elections and the national web site on my station (KPFT) before the end of May, and announcements about the elections and running for the board for several MONTHS before then. All of the PNB should have been talking about this with management of our stations well before June and before the LESs were hired, and getting this info on the air. This is nothing new, everyone on the LSBs and PNB know about the elections, and the Elections committee has been reminding everyone of the timeline since January.
I don't know why a fund drive was scheduled at one station during the nomination period, but I'm guessing that's why election carts may not have been played during that time. Complaints about who was hired as LES may have also distracted people from thinking about getting nominations going. But there's still plenty of time for candidates to download their packets, fill out the forms, get their petitions signed, and turn in everything by June 30. For all of the Pacifica elections I know of, most candidates wait until the last day anyway to turn everything in.
3. Please remember the reasons why the election timeline in the Bylaws was modified with a Bylaws amendment in 2007: We kept running into fall fund drives at all stations, and conflicts with the state/national/local elections in November (and heavy campaigning before that). In addition, the earlier timeline in the bylaws did not provide enough time between the closing of nominations and the ballot mailings for the LESs and NES to do all the work required for the mailings. (Extending the nomination deadline but not the ballot mailing would re-create that problem.)
The Bylaws do allow the election supervisors to extend the deadline for return of ballots in order to achieve quorum, but not the deadline for nominations. The Bylaws allow the PNB to change the dates, but only if decided the year before. If it was me, I would not have made the Bylaws so restrictive, but read them and see for yourself what they say.
So even if we can find a way to extend the nomination deadline without running afoul of the bylaws, I'd be opposed to extending it by more than 2 weeks, and if we do extend it we should extend all the later dates by the same amount, for the reasons noted above.
Again, see Article 4, section 5 of the Pacifica Bylaws, which specifies the timetable and the lack of flexibility on the nominations period.
For reference, the latest bylaws are at <http://www.pacifica.org/governance/bylaws_rev.html>http://www.pacifica.org/governance/bylaws_rev.html
The PREVIOUS version of the Bylaws, with the OLD timeline, is at http://pacifica.org/governance/PacificaBylaws-new.html (NOTE:Outdated even though it says new, amended, and restated)
4. The Bylaws do not require that local election committees be set up at all, much less when they should be set up. Article 4, section 4B of the Pacifica Bylaws say "each local elections supervisor may appoint a committee of volunteer Members..." Please read that paragraph if you think there has to be a local committee established by any particular date. Who's on it and when it's established is up to the LES and no one else. I believe that our LES last year did not set up a committee until after ballots were mailed out.
Bill Crosier
Chair, PNB Elections Committee
At 9:00 PM -0700 6/15/10, Melinda Iley-Dohn wrote:
>I don't know what the exact date is but frankly at this point we need to move forward. I have been a part of elections when we had a iED instead a fully involved ED. This is a huge improvement. As our NES is a contractor we need to have a full time ED to assist when
>issues arise from our local station elections. With Pacifica, it is always when not if.
>
>We need to remember that the By-Laws were written as a clean slate without any means of knowing that we would find ourselves with this many forest fires for our ED to face as
>the election time line rolled around. Arlene has had four out of five GMs to hire, a national audit and more headaches than Tylenol can handle.
>
>This election is Arlene and Rene's baby now. I have worked in two of the past elections and I think that we are off to a good start from what I am seeing thus far.
>
>
><http://kinkyfriedman.com/index.html>
Alex
not, but if it is why should any other deadline be extended? As far as I am
concerned our election campaign period is already much too long. It ought to
be cut down by 2 months not just 2 weeks. Also having a nomination period
end on July 1 when lots of people start vacations is another dumb idea that
was imposed on us by a very ill-thought out bylaws amendment.
Having a 5 month campaign period for an organization of this size makes no
sense at all. There are entire countries in Europe that manage to nominate,
campaign and elect their governments in far less time.
Alex
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"PNB Elections Committee" group.
To post to this group, send email to pnb_el...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
pnb_election...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pnb_elections?hl=en.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2931 - Release Date: 06/15/10
14:35:00
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Folks,
Alex makes some excellent points here. While some scream about extending the filing deadline for 20 days, little is mentioned about the overly long campaign time. The only real by-product of this very fair and needed 20 day extension is more people will file to run to be Delegates.
Although the thought of more candidates make some little clicks uncomfortable because they fear daylight - More Candidates is (are?) Good !!
See Ya'll Friday - Please vote YES to extend for 20 days.
Thanks,Richard
> Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 02:44:30 -0400
> From: ale...@optonline.net
> Subject: RE: [PNB_Elections:564] Re: the nomination period
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Yes, nothing matters but deadlines, if your trying to ensure that only "insiders" get a shot at running. Which appears to be what is being advocated here.
Shawn
Renee Asteria
- On June 1st the Nomination Phase opened
- LES's where hired and in place
- All Nomination packages where complete and available
- Webpage was complete
Come midnight, June 30th, if there is a need to extend beyond what the Bylaws dictate, then we will deal with that reality and make logical extensions.
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| I have concerns that I would like to state that I firmly believe that the PNB members need to consider as our Elections begin. This is the work of the NES and the respective LESs and that ED ONLY .....for a reason! I hope that the PNB will understand that the By-Laws does not give them authority over the decisions made by the National Elections Supervisor. She is answerable directly to our Executive Director alone for a reason. This was a good thought when they were written by virtue of the issues of influence that could have bad repercussions if the PNB could influence the outcome of any future elections which would conversely influence the LSBs who elect them. This is why they work autonomous and the desire in hiring supervisors is to hire persons independent of the system. This would be way out of line had they been written otherwise. Pacifica Elections have a very short election cycle with a lot of last minute decisions that need to be made without having to explain every single action. As a longtime member of the Pacifica governance group with experience in several elections, I have seen the huge amount of work that is involved with running an election on the local level and worked closely enough to hear about the issues confronted on those long conference calls with the NES as the process played out. There is a lot to be done and little time to do it in. I would hope that the PNB would maintain their focus on pulling our fat out of the financial fires that have been long overdue in being addressed. They also need to consider what we are going to do with the advent of new forms of media diversity that has taken a lot of attention away from radio, to insure the future of this foundation. |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
| --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net> wrote: |
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| Shawn, Right now the National Elections Supervisor has a ton of forest fires to put out in a short legnth of time. I'm sorry that your preference of a temporary LES was not selected but this is not a locally made decision for a reason. If the local LSBs and the PNB chose the people who run the elections we would have a mess of dramatic proportions. This is why our By-Laws has an autonomous election group hired on a temporary contract basis answerable only to the Executive Director. Rather than second guess Rene, why don't you ask your new LES what you can do to help them get things running? They could use the help.....trust ne! Get off her case and let Renee do her job. |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
| --- On Wed, 6/16/10, Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net> wrote: |
Terry Goodman
>Excuse me. First, the NES says it's the PNB's job to extend deadlines,
<snip>
This reads far more into the terse comment "I don't make the call"
than was there. If the NES was referring to the bylaws timeline
"making the call" regarding the nomination close date, then there was
no implication that the PNB could do so. There is no clear bylaws
authority for the PNB changing election-related dates except "in the
year preceding Delegate elections... by November 30..." (Art. 4, Sec.
5, as amended), but the PNB has previously interpreted certain dates
in bylaws as being "of the nature of rules of order" that may be
suspended by a 2/3rds vote. I don't know that this was legal, but
there is the precedent.
The NES language "if there is a need to extend beyond what the Bylaws
dictate, then we will deal with that reality and make logical
extensions" is similarly vague as to the identity of the "we" making
extensions.
Understanding that the PNB usually doesn't meet frequently enough to
be consulted on such immediate questions, previous National Election
Supervisors have extended deadlines on their own authority. This was
before the timeline amendment of Article Four, which arguably limits
the PNB's authority over the timeline whenever "the schedule... cannot
be executed due to exigent circumstances" by its specificity. If I'm
remembering the rule correctly, when something in bylaws is
specifically permitted, other things of the same class are normally
interpreted as prohibited. This is precisely why an extention of the
election close date beyond the specifically permistted two weeks is
arguably illegal under our bylaws.
Recognizing the serious nature of any bylaws violation in the context
of her job description, which presumably includes the phrase "to
confirm said elections' compliance with these Bylaws" from the job
description in Article Four, Section 4(A), Renee may not have given up
on seeking PNB ratification of such a decision if an insufficient
number of nominations demonstrates its necessity when the deadline
specified in the bylaws is reached.
Alternatively, the word "we" from the NES might mean the NES herself
in consulation with the Local Election Supervisors.
If the PNB wants to maximize its opportunity to be consulted by the
NES on this issue, then it should schedule a PNB meeting for a day or
two after the nomination close date. If it does not, then the PNB
Elections Committee might want to do so. The committtee does not have
authority to suspend a bylaws date, but it could register its support
for or dissent from an NES decision to do so or not do so, especially
if such a vote is requested by the NES.
--Terry Goodman
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Shawn
Arlene Engelhardt
To “All Who are Concerned about the Election”:
Please back off the email exchanges for a few days and give Renee and the LESs a chance to do the jobs they were contracted to do. It is very difficult for people to do effective work in the midst of the current controversy. Please give your energies to helping your local election supervisors get the word out and spreading the word that people should apply for their local boards.
If the election is not proceeding according to the bylaws, I will then take action. In the meantime, let’s give our contractors a break! If we need to extend the filing deadlines in some or all locations, we can take that action when it is obvious that it is needed. In my experience it is human nature to wait until close to the deadline to file. If we do not have a reasonable number of candidates at that time, we can take appropriate action.
Thanks to everyone for their concern and consideration.
In peace and harmony,
Arlene
Arlene Engelhardt, Executive Director
Pacifica Foundation
1925 Martin Luther King Jr. Way
Berkeley, CA 94704-1037
510-402-9880 (cell)
510-849-2617 (fax)
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2941 - Release Date: 06/15/10 23:35:00
Melinda Iley-Dohn
I wager that KPFT will have far more candidates signed sealed and delivered BEFORE the rest of the network......WATCH KPFT LEAVE YOU BEHIND IN OUR DUST!!! We will have far more than you will when July 30 rolls around!! Watch the numbers....read 'em and weep!
Melinda Iley-Dohn
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759
--- On Wed, 6/16/10, Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net> wrote:
> From: Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net>
Carolyn Birden
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| You're welcome Kathy! Carolyn Birden and myself have served on the PNB Elections Committee so we are fully aware of the amount of hard work that faces you and the other LESs with the deadline upon us of June 30th. We are both committed to good fair and clean elections. NOW.....let this challenge begin Ms. Birden! We CAN do this and we CAN meet the challenge of having a full slate of candidates BEFORE the deadline.What we need to do is to fill out our paperwork and seize every opportunity to help out our fellow candidates to obtain the signatures that are required by attending signature parties! KPFT, is famous for our ability to MAKE IT HAPPEN! This will be no different! What do you think would be a suitable challenge Carolyn? Should we have kuddos on the Pacifica web page with bragging rights for a good campaign start......I'm all ears pal. We are savoring the victory.....the others are already folding! Kathy has noted our rapid start.....we had signatures in our meeting last night. We will be having parties to get them there as well. What are YOU guys doing to meet and BEAT this challenge of the midnight June 30th deadline?? Let's get a friendly competition started................. |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor
safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
--- On Thu, 6/17/10, KPFT Local-Election-Supervisor <les_...@pacifica.org> wrote:
|
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| LSB Elections are the responsibilities of everybody at our respective stations. We the members of our respective signal areas should accept full accountability to bring in a suitable pool of candidates. We have many resources to work with. We can contact people who were on the board previously who are able to run again. We can contact our fellow volunteers who we believe would be an asset to our LSBs. The packets are down landed from our web pages. If the respective LSBs want to be competitive and rise to the challenge they can have a signiture party. In past elections we have encouraged LSB members to be available on the deadline to sign last minute candidates to ensure as many quaified candidates as possible. I personally have been known to haul carbonated beverages, ice and veggie trays from Costco to provide refreshments for a last minute autograph party. We have a saying in Houston.....failure is not an option. We are ready to rise to the challenge because we are in it to win it! We know how many positions we need to fill and we know that we need to have a viable pool of back up members to fill in if resignations occur. The rest is up to our respective signal areas. KPFT is going to be ready......are the REST of you guys? |
Bill Crosier
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Shawn Casey O'Brien
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| Shawn, I was KPFT Elections Chair for TWO campaigns in 2004 and 2006. In that capacity I picked up beer kegs, bar-b-que and bottled drinks and ice for election forums. We backed Bobby Muldoon and Tucker Bradley all the way because there were never enough hours in the day. The PNB did not intend for our stations to sit idle waiting for others to get things done! We could just sit around and complain if we don't hear others putting out the word or we CAN rise to the challenge. These are OUR elections not the responsibilities of others. We have known that this was an election year since January. There is no excuse for our LSB members to not know at least one person they can contact and encourage to run. NONE. If you are not up to the challenge of meeting the deadlines you might want to get out of the way of others who are. We should be helping these Local Elections Supervisors to meet the deadline. It is reachable. We're on track at KPFT......We're in it to win it. Failure is not an option here! |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Shawn Casey O'Brien <iris...@verizon.net> wrote: |
|
Subject: Re: [PNB_Elections:569] Re: the nomination period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken
Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2944 - Release Date:
06/17/10 04:33:00
Melinda Iley-Dohn
| Ken, Can't you tell by my accent that I am from Texas? KPFT is in Houston Texas.  You
do turn a girls head with your compliments,I am never a proponent of shoving GMs or anybody with our stations. Elections are not the duties of the GM. They have enough to keep them busy with the financial concerns and other duties involved with the day to day running of the stations.It is the LSBs who have the ultimate responsibility to not pass the buck. We knew that we had elections this year. We knew all along that we had members with term limits. This is why we have an obligation to email,send messages via Facebook and Twitter to keep up with people who are there when we need help. It's our membership that this is about. We have the duties to do the work. PERIOD.My thought is that any LSB member who admits that they have no interest in finding new volunteers that perhaps they should step aside. This is not how we serve the interests of the Foundation. The interets of the Pacifica Foundation are our first responsibilities PERIOD. This is the only way that we will meet our future challenges. Currently our ED is busy trying to hire full time General Managers, She has serious fiduciary duties to address and she has a lot of other issues involved with keeping Pacifica competitive.Let's support Arlene and stay out of the way of progress. She's doing an awesome job. |
Melinda Iley-Dohn Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin Historical Review of Pennsylvania 1759 |
| --- On Thu, 6/17/10, Ken <kena...@ca.rr.com> wrote: |