the sorry situation at WBAI (and I agree with your assessment of same) does need to be addressed - and many of us are trying to do just that. However, it is the very same cast of characters who are taking WBAI down its current ruinous path who are the main supporters of selling the station. The idea of selling the station (or any Pacifica assets), while not legally prohibited, is politically not feasible - in other words it would meet with the same opposition that stopped the original plan and led to the lawsuits. Indeed, the bylaws provide that there would need to be a majority vote by all members of Pacifica - i.e. all subscribers - in support of such a sale, in order for it to happen.*
Rather than pursue the idea of a sale, I think the better path is to do some forensic accounting of the books at WBAI and at the Pacifica national office (which a slim majority of the current board continues to oppose), fire people who can be shown to have wilfully contributed to the problem, and fix the problem through sound fiscal measures and get WBAI back on track.
Joe W.
*Article Three, Members of the Foundation, Section 5: Rights All Members shall have all rights granted to them by law or by these Bylaws, including without limit the right to vote, on the terms and in the manner set forth in these Bylaws, on the election and removal of Delegates; on the sale, exchange, transfer or disposition of all or substantially all of the Foundation's assets; on the sale, exchange, transfer or disposition of any of the Foundation's broadcast licenses; on any merger, its principal terms and any amendment of its principal terms; on any election to dissolve the Foundation; on any amendment to these Bylaws for which Member approval is required or permitted as set forth in Section 1(B) of Article 17 of these Bylaws; and on any amendment to the Articles of Incorporation.
http://www.pacifica.org/governance/PacificaBylaws-new.html
>From: knowknot at mindspring.com
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Why Not Sell WBAI?
>Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 12:09:31 -0400
>
>On 7/22/05, "Joseph Wanzala" <jwanzala at hotmail.com> said in part:
>
> > The Pacifica Foundation which owns the licenses
> > of WBAI [and of the the other Pacifica stations]
> > (is a California not-for profit Corporation and subject
> > to California Corporations Code. WBAI is a New York
> > station, but part of the national network. Any
> > decision pertaining to the sale of assets of the
> > Foundation would be subject to board approval.
> > Pacifica has already gone through years of litigation
> > on this very issue (sparked by the leak of the memo
> > below) and it has been deemed that the sale of Pacifica
> > assets would be inimical to the mission of the Foundation.
> > * * *
>
>This is not entirely accurate, unless "has been" as used above is construed
>to mean "was" (at the time of the dispute referred to).
>
>Presumably, those participants of this List interest in this sort of Stuff
>know that Mr. Wanzala he is correct that a memorandum apparently suggesting
>the sale of WBAI and, perhaps, also of other of the stations, written by
>then self-interested members of a national board run amok in violation of
>the basic principles of Pacifica's charter at the time who were then
>apparently interested in dis-assembling Pacifica while profiting themselves
>and their apparent political and large corporate interest allies was one of
>the triggers of the litigations and related political action to which Mr.
>Wanzala refers.
>
>But one of the key purposes of the settlement of those lawsuits that
>resulted in the creation of a new Pacifica Board of Directors was the
>promise of substantial reforms at WBAI, internally, in important part to
>try to insure against the sort of racialist politicking and spendthrift
>cronyism, which, however, (though with a slightly different cast of
>characters - the putative former "outs" who had once been the "ins" until
>ousted by the now "outs") is apparently still going on and, most important
>for that station, externally, in terms of not just improved but instead
>actually good programing that would attract a growing (of course, even if -
>indeed, one hopes, especially if - of course, "diverse" audience), although
>(and despite the fact that this seemed hardly possible during the Times of
>The Troubles) programming quality at that station has degenerated (except,
>again, notably/commendably, for Doug Henwood's program and an increasingly
>smaller and so now very tiny number of others).
>
>The present Board, like the former, has fiduciary duties towards Pacifica.
>The question addressed by this thread is whether, unlike the former Board,
>the present one actually will act in accordance with those fiduciary duties
>-- a question re. which it certainly is not correct to say that the "very
>issue" that was decided as part of the settlement of the recent lawsuits
>was whether, in light of what has been occurring and is occurring at WBAI
>the question whether to sell that station ought be addressed openly by the
>present Pacifica Board (albeit, obviously, with meaningful attention given
>to the sorts of cautionaries referred to by Prof. Perleman and, more
>basically, to guard against the profiteering exacerbating the sort of
>political/cultural betrayal apparently too many of the former national
>Board members seemed to be considering).
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
_________________________________________________________________ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/