>From: "Lyn Gerry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 09:46:35 -0400
>Subject: {FP} Farrell's "Peace Initiative" and Response
>
>Dear All,
>
>The new Pacifica Board Chair Robert Farrell went on the air on
>several Pacifica stations with the statement transcribed below.
>While there is much that could be said about the content of the
>speech, for the moment what is important to understand is that
>Robert Farrell has repreatedly lied and broken faith with the
>community, has acted based on where he believes power lies (and
>what position will give him the central role his ego craves). For
>example, Farrell had made an offer a few months back to change
>sides in return for the Chairmanship. He is a person without
>principle, as the word is normally understood.
>
>Furthermore, this "initiative" is I believe designed to trick the
>listener-sponsors into donating to replenish the coffers of this
>criminal Board and management, who have already squandered
>millions of dollars in their efforts to dismantle Pacifica, silence it as
>a voice of dissent, and in some cases, line their own pockets in the
>process. Also, it seems that they intend to use this "peace
>initiative" to try to undermine the lawsuits proceeding to trial.
>
>Without going on at length, Farrell's use of the name of the anarcho-
>pacificist Lew Hill is appalling in this context, considering Farrell's
>failure in the statement to take a strong stance against war, and
>the veiled jingoism displayed throughout this piece.
>
>I suggest a response to Mr. Farrell's "leadership" - not a penny to
>these criminals and Beltway flacks.
>
>Following Farrell's comments is a response from three dissident
>Board members, Cagan, Moran and Bramson.
>
>Lyn
>
>-------------
>
>Statement by Robert Farrell, Board Chair, Pacifica Foundation
>(as aired about 1455 PST, 27.09.01, on KPFK, Los Angeles)
>
>The peace initiative that I announce today is an exercise in
>leadership to expedite the process of our reunion and focus our
>attention on our new reality as of Sept 11, 2001. It brings familiar
>voices back to our airwaves; we handle our grievances and
>differences internally; and we request the continuing confidence
>and support of our many listener-subscribers in the Pacifica
>leadership. It establishes a Pacifica role in the American led
>response to the terrorist war brought so violently to our country.
>These activities can be accomplished in the near future. They are
>in response to our national crisis.
>
>I want a unified Pacifica. We need to field the best team available
>as we use our airwaves, so I am asking Amy Goodman to come
>back to a supportive Pacifica; that the Pacifica Campaign pause in
>its activities; and that the Pacifica network news stringers end their
>strike and return home. And I will ask board members who are
>suing Pacifica to please reconsider their suits at this time.
>
>I�m currently in Washington, D.C., to meet with the Executive
>Director and our counsel on the state of affairs of the Pacifica
>Foundation. I will use this information and a series of proposed
>policy matters already prepared by our Executive Director and
>Board member recommendations for a report on the state of the
>Pacifica Foundation. I will obtain independent organizational audits
>of Pacifica as we address our management oversight and fiduciary
>responsibilities. I promise our listener-subscribers that as materials
>are prepared for board discussion that they will be posted on our
>website and that we will develop and use our airwaves and the
>internet to seek their concerns and comments.
>
>As we take this path we must begin to define Pacifica�s unique role
>as America sets forth on its war on terrorism. Central to that role is
>Pacifica Network News and the way that we approach national
>programming on our airwaves. I believe that the expressed
>concerns of station managers, staff, volunteers, and listener-
>subscribers past and present can be addressed and resolved when
>considered in the context of the international crisis that we face
>today.
>
>To support our board and staff in dealing with the new reality I will
>establish an independent panel as advisors in the vital role of
>management of Pacifica Network News. It will be supplemented by
>experts with knowledge of the lands and people most immediately
>effected in this, the first world war of the 21st century.
>
>I want to thank our station managers and staff, paid and volunteer,
>for their services and contributions to Pacifica. I appreciate that
>support. I want to express my appreciation again to you, our
>listener-supporters, who make the Pacifica Foundation, its
>airwaves, management and our leadership opportunities possible.
>
>Now, we will be coming to you again soon, as is our custom and
>obligation, for financial support through our fund drives and special
>appeals. We must all come together to fund and finance our future.
>The Pacifica Foundation and community that will engage the new
>international war and its consequences will require our giving �
>mine, yours, and all the members of the Pacifica family.
>
>What you can expect to hear in the near future is our support and
>encouragement of people like the courageous Representative
>Barbara Lee, advocate of a Department of Peace, Representative
>Dennis Kucinic, information and news concerning the campus
>awakenings as a new generation expresses its concerns about war
>in more than 120 locations across the country; commentary and
>analysis of the war and its consequences put in historic,
>economic, and political context as a guide to civic and political
>action.
>
>What we will also expect of you is your continuing support and
>participation as we review the vision and role of Lew Hill and use
>that as a guide in our own transformation of Pacifica in this present
>day.
>
>Thank you very much.
>
>God bless Pacifica.
>
>God bless America.
>
>==================
>
>Response to Bob Farrell's on-air comments [by Dissident PNB members]
>
>October 2, 2001
>
>An Open Letter to the Pacifica Community in response to Bob Farrell's
>on-air statement of September 27,2001
>
>From: Pete Bramson, Leslie Cagan, Tomas Moran
>
>Last Thursday, Bob Farrell, who was elected Chair of the Pacifica
>National Board by the same majority that added five new board
>members in a plainly unfair and non conciliatory process, delivered
>a previously unannounced message on some Pacifica stations by
>grafting a five-minute statement to the Pacifica Network News feed.
>
>
>This is our response to his statement, which has been dubbed the
>"peace initiative". As board members, we would have liked the
>opportunity to have learned of this communication in advance, and
>to have been offered the opportunity to respond as a dissenting
>minority, in the manner that other institutions offer such
>opportunity. It is incomprehensible to us that our institution, with its
>fifty-year commitment to airing the alternative voice of dissent,
>would not consider the contradiction between its mission and its
>behavior.
>
>As of the moment we write this statement ,a full four days since
>Mr. Farrell's on-air comments, we feel compelled to publish a
>response to a statement that addresses us directly, but which has
>not been provided to us. Some of us have managed to hear the
>statement on the internet, if we have access to net audio.
>Ironically, Mr. Farrell's online audio is found not in our Pacifica
>Foundation's web page, but rather in the web pages of some of the
>opposition community groups. Other board members have merely
>heard about Mr. Farrell's remarks second-hand.
>
>In an age of instant communications, we are 4-days in waiting for a
>response to our request for a copy of Mr. Farrell's remarks, a task
>that could literally be accomplished with the flick of a wrist and a
>click of a mouse.
>
>Mr. Farrell invites everyone back to the "Pacifica Family",
>promising that accountability will follow. He asks those of us who
>are board members and plaintiffs to "reconsider our case". He asks
>those of us who are listeners to unite and to support the
>Foundation financially.
>
>This is the "peace initiative" that was similarly described to the
>plaintiff board members in a phone conversation with Mr. Farrell
>three weeks ago, in which he unequivocally explained that he
>would be adamantly against the election of any new members to
>the Board in the upcoming September 19th meeting. In a Board
>that was divided 6-5 in many votes, it was Mr. Farrell's vote,
>contrary to his stated position, that enabled the majority board to
>unilaterally add members by its own invented process.
>
>We give Mr. Farrell and the "peace initiative" now the same
>response we gave then. Consistent with our commitment to
>reconciliation and healing for Pacifica, we are putting forth our call
>for a "justice initiative".
>
>As listeners and board members, we have been appalled at the
>damage that has been brought upon Pacifica's assets, upon its
>staff (paid and unpaid), and upon the credibility, the respect, and
>the support of its listeners.
>
>This damage has been brought by the systematic abuse of power
>wielded by upper management, and by the lack of transparency,
>democracy, and oversight of the Board.
>
>A fair resolution to this crisis must include the reversal of this
>damage, as well as the selection of new leadership that has the
>confidence of the listener sponsor and the Pacifica Family.
>
>At the Board level, the damage includes the legacy of a majority of
>members that have been seated by an unfair process, which was
>forced upon the minority directors. The damage includes the
>removal of the power of electing board members away from a more
>democratic system that had previously involved the participation of
>Local Advisory Boards. The courts are still to judge if this taking of
>voting power was, as we allege, illegal, on top of being plainly
>undemocratic and unwise for an organization which survives
>because of the degree of credibility that it has with its listener
>sponsors.
>
>All this damage, and the changes achieved by these undemocratic
>maneuvers, must be reversed. Pacifica must once again have a
>Board that is accountable to the local communities that it serves.
>
>Additionally, Pacifica must immediately start conforming to basic
>practices of fair and open procedure as it conducts its meetings;
>to basic practices of fiduciary oversight, as it relates to providing
>its board members the necessary information to ascertain the
>financial health of the organization and to recommend action
>accrodingly; to the basic practice of management oversight, as it
>relates to taking swift action when its upper management does not
>provide adequate accountability, and makes decisions which are
>not in the best interests of the Foundation.
>
>The importance of Pacifica to the dissenting, alternative voices
>today is as crucial as it has ever been. Should its Board ask the
>listener to simply trust that everything is well in spite of signs to
>the contrary? Or should it be the duty of the members of the Board
>to clearly and unambiguously demonstrate to the listeners that the
>values of this important institution are upheld by our own behavior
>and that of our upper management?
>
>Listener sponsors will respond over the next few weeks to the
>"peace initiative". We expect that the message to the Pacifica
>Foundation and to those of us on the Board will continue to be
>clear.
>
>The damage must be undone. The unfair practices by the Board
>must be reversed. Our management must be accountable.
>
>Peace with justice. This has been the message that Pacifica
>brings, and it must be how Pacifica lives.
>From: "Lyn Gerry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2001 23:33:46 -0400
>Subject: {FP} The Corrupt History of Pacifica's New Chairperson
>
>HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF AS FORMER L.A. COUNCILMAN
>ROBERT FARRELL IS ELECTED CHAIRMAN OF THE PACIFICA
>NATIONAL BOARD AMID RENEWED CHARGES OF "CONFLICT
>OF INTEREST"
>
>by Stan Ginsburg
>
>For years, headlines in both major Los Angeles daily newspapers
>screamed "conflict of interest" as then City Councilman Bob Farrell
>navigated a perilous obstacle course of investigations for fraud,
>mismanagement, and ethics violations that resulted in multiple
>recall campaigns. Twice targeted for recall by his neighbors in the
>8th district (one of LA's poorest and 85% Black), Farrell never once
>in 17 years found himself free of controversy as he repeatedly
>attempted to line his pockets at the expense of the city's
>taxpayers and his resentful constituents.
>
>The parallels between Bob Farrell's destructive time on Pacifica's
>National Board and his track record as a Los Angeles City
>Councilman serve as a model to study in order to help understand
>the hemorrhaging of financial and human resources, as well as the
>deteriorating spirit now afflicting the Pacifica Network. Farrell's
>studied charm and soft-spoken "management style" belie the
>opportunism and duplicity that has characterized his political
>career.
>
>"It's like similar attacks in the past on other black members of the
>City Council," maintained Farrell during his first recall fight, even
>though the campaign against him was being spearheaded by a
>retired and disabled African-American police officer residing in
>Farrell's district. To this day, Farrell holds the dubious distinction
>of being the only Councilman in LA history to be the subject of not
>one, but two recall campaigns.
>
>After his first brush with recall in 1978 (only four years after being
>elected), he found himself targeted for a second recall attempt in
>1987. This time, an LA Herald Examiner investigation found that
>Farrell, who was then chairing the City Council's grants committee,
>helped arrange for a tiny social services agency [the Improvement
>Association of the 8th District] run by his ex-wife to acquire - for
>free - a building and a parking lot valued at $225,000 from Security
>Pacific Bank. This was in spite of the fact that the Bank had
>initially offered to donate the same properties to the City at no
>charge. Farrell next moved his field offices and staff into the
>donated building and began billing the City $28,800 a year
>($2400/month) to rent the properties from his [now] ex-wife's
>agency. The Improvement Association even continued to charge
>the City $400/month for 21 months after selling the property to a
>private developer.
>
>The leader of the second Farrell recall campaign, Kerman Maddox,
>an African-American and former aide to both Maxine Waters and
>Mayor Tom Bradley, called the conflict-of-interest disclosures, "one
>more justification for the recall." Johnnie Cochran Jr., Farrell's
>lawyer and spokesman, countered that his client, "has done
>nothing wrong."
>
>On Dec. 21, 1987, the Los Angeles Herald Examiner reported that
>the "social services agency [the Improvement Association of the
>8th District] run by Farrell's ex-wife failed this year to provide the
>feeding and tutorial services it promised when receiving two
>federally funded contracts." Two weeks later, on January 7, 1988,
>the Los Angeles Times reported that, the District Attorney's office
>was reviewing Farrell's activities, "to determine if the councilman
>violated disclosure laws by steering more than $350,000 in real
>estate gifts, city rental payments, campaign contributions and a
>government grant to his now former wife's agency."
>
>In another disclosure, the Herald reported that, "the financial
>support began when Farrell was still married � and has continued
>into a period in which his personal financial support of their child
>has remained unresolved." The same investigation found that, "The
>couple's divorce ended with no court ordered �financial obligations
>to his ex-wife or their child even though she sought both alimony
>and child support."
>
>Now compare Farrell's history as a city councilman to his history
>as a Pacifica board member.
>
>1. He gave his word to the KPFK Local Advisory Board that if
>they elected him he would oppose any by laws changes.
>
>2. After being sworn in February of 1999 his first act was to
>vote in favor of bylaws changes, which disenfranchised the Local
>Advisory Boards and made the PNB an unaccountable, self-
>selecting body.
>
>3. The KPFK LAB then voted in May of 2000 to remove
>Farrell from the board, but he and his cronies ignored this vote.
>
> 4. He supported sending armed guards into KPFA (Pacifica's
>Bay Area flagship station) in the summer of 1999 to support the
>lockout of the stations employees protesting the proposed sale of
>the station.
>
>5. He publicly supported moving Pacifica's operations (and
>financial records from all 5 stations) to Washington D.C., where, as
>he put it, "the movers and shakers are."
>
>6. If approved, the bylaw changes would also provide Farrell
>with something he could take to the bank � article 3.16, which
>states: "Compensation...A Director shall be entitled to receive
>reasonable compensation for services rendered to the Foundation
>in a professional capacity." (For 50 years Pacifica directors have
>served unpaid out of a sense of community service. But with these
>bylaw changes, Farrell and the rest of his board, would be free to
>co-mingle their own financial interests with their with their duties as
>Directors of the Pacifica Foundation.)
>
>
>Sources: Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Herald Examiner,
>Proposed by-laws revisions by John Murdock to Pacifica Board of
>Directors For Years The Headlines Screamed "Conflict Of Interest!"
>
>
>Robert Farrell, City Councilman, Los Angeles 8th District (one of
>LA's poorest): 1974-1991 The only Councilman in LA history to be
>the target of 2 recall campaign: 1978 and 1988
>
>June 18, 1978, Los Angeles Times � "The City Councilman
>has been approached on many occasions about the deteriorating
>conditions in the 8th district, which is 85% black," said Dennis
>Hale Jr., a retired black police officer on disability, who has
>spearheaded the recall drive." � Farrell said of the recall
>campaign, "It's like similar attacks in the past on other black
>members of the City Council"
>
>Dec. 21, 1987, Los Angeles Herald Examiner � "A social
>services agency run by Farrell's ex-wife [the Improvement
>Association of the 8th District] failed this year to provide the
>feeding and tutorial services it promised when receiving two
>federally funded contracts�." � "Farrell currently chairs the LA
>City Council's grants committee, a panel that is supposed to
>ensure the city's grant money is well spent and whose members
>have been particularly sensitive to the scarcity of funds�." �
>"Farrell also helped arrange for his ex-wife's agency to acquire � for
>free � a building and a parking lot valued at $225,000 from Security
>Pacific Bank. The Bank initially offered to donate the same
>properties to the City [for free]. Later, Farrell had the city lease the
>properties [from his wife] for the use of his council staff at $28,800
>a year!" � "Farrell has refused to discuss his dealings�
>referring questions to attorney Johnnie Cochran."
>
>Dec 5, 1987, Los Angeles Herald Examiner � "The Examiner
>disclosed yesterday the Improvement Association of the 8th
>District� continued to charge the City $400 a month rent for a
>parking lot even though the group sold the property to a private
>developer 21 months ago."
>
>Dec 17, 1987, Los Angeles Herald Examiner � "The Examiner
>has reported that the financial support began when Farrell was still
>married � and has continued into a period in which his personal
>financial support of their child has remained unresolved." � Kerman
>Maddox, former aide to Mayor Bradley and leader of the [2nd]
>recall campaign, called the disclosures, "one more justification for
>the recall." � "Johnnie Cochran Jr., Farrell's lawyer and
>spokesman �said his client �'has done nothing wrong'"
>
>Jan 7, 1988, Los Angeles Times, � "The district Attorneys
>office is reviewing Farrell's activities to determine if the councilman
>violated disclosure laws by steering more than $400,000 in real
>estate gifts, city rental payments, campaign contributions and a
>government grant to a small social services agency run by
>Essiebea Farrell, his former wife." � "Last week Farrell used
>city funds to send constituents 3961 letters that defended �his ex
>wife's agency, and City statistics show that Farrell sends far more
>mail at city expense that any of his 14 colleagues." Jan 16, 1988,
>Los Angeles Herald Examiner � "Officially separated since April
>23, 1984� the couple's divorce ended with no court ordered
>�financial obligations to his [Farrell's] ex-wife or their child even
>though she sought both alimony and child support."
>
>Aug 13, 1978, Los Angeles Times � In response to
>complaints by residents that a proposed two-acre park would,
>"displace 16 families, some of whom had been in the neighborhood
>for 30 years� Farrell contended that the elderly residents who
>would be displaced 'have lived their lives and we have to look to the
>future�.'"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN-ANNOUNCE: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network - Event Announcements
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=laamn-news>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn-announce>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<http://home.labridge.com/~laamn> | LAAMN | <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
