Is the staff contemplating a return that ratifies the exclusion of Sawaya and Bensky? That looks demented. You don't go out and then come back with the proviso that two of your leaders are screwed.
Second thought is, how does anyone propose to deal with a situation where a particular program stinks? Insofar as the staff favors maintaining the status quo of programming, what is the mechanism to do something that somebody on staff doesn't like? One does not have to support the Board's machinations to see the salience of that. If I was running PFW here in "D.C." (see appendix for technical details), I sure wouldn't rest w/o making a few changes.
The question is, does the Board have a web site where its position is put forward?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The following contains the Pete Bramson Press statement
ommitted in the last update: . . .