Sunday, October 21, 2018

KPFK is part of Pacifica, so paying for WBAI's misdeeds.

The financial state of KPFK in LA is totally dependent on what is spent, not only locally, but for any other radio station that it TIED to each other thru the Umbrella called Pacifica Radio Foundation.

Another website in NY is still current, discussing the loans that all 5 stations are paying and dependent upon, thu their commentators there. Occasionally, we will copy, paste, and share honestly what is written in those Eastern country web pages to insure that if info is of value to anyone still donating/ paying/ supporting our Local station, that the details we never hear anything about are revealed here, as it is at WBAI related blog.

So with no plagiarism or borrowing, here are some selective & edited for readability only, [no information is changed or corrected or distorted ! ] may be reposted here, with the original source post listed to go read MORE there... 

Every station claims, pretends, denies and lies when they ask for 'donations for your radio station' by not mentioning anywhere, not on their websites, certainly not on Pacifica's sparse website [bylaws are there tho ] nor on-air is any back-room deals, audits, loans, financial shenanigans or 'other costs not related to Your Radio Station' given.


So here is the source:   http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/      
     

The articles are light but the commentators provide much more in details and varied shared info that is not found elsewhere ...any more... While the prior KPFA blog with info about the Pacifica National Board members that were causing problems [apparently] and a bit of the financials too, has gone relatively silent since April 2018. 
[Names are often excerpted out with "..." inserted instead, tho some may slip thru. ]
 

here are some selected quotes [edited for read-ability]: by   Jara Handala  Oct 19, 2018

http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/2018/10/a-response-handala-to-manfredonia.html#comment-form


"probably the most authoritative source on the FJC loan terms, the latest Pacifica auditor’s report, for FY2016, dated 31 May this year, produced by Regalia & Associates. This is what it says, in full:

“Loan covenants: Under the loan, the Foundation is subject to specific loan covenants, some of which are summarized as follows:

• Submission of audited financial statements within 120 days following the close of the fiscal year. 


• Submission of paperwork signed by the CFO certifying compliance with all covenants within 120 days following the close of the fiscal year.
 

• The Foundation shall not make capital expenditures for its stations in excess of $150,000 during any fiscal year without the prior written consent of the lender.
 

• The Foundation shall not, except with the prior written approval of the lender, incur any debt in excess of $25,000 in any one instance other than customary trade payables.
 

• A ‘Reserve Account’ in the amount of $379,000 must be created.
 

• The Foundation must be in compliance wit4h [sic] every material provision of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).”

 (note 17, page 19 – http://pacifica.org/documents/financial/audit_2016.pdf )

Relevant are the first, second, & last terms. (The other three are repeated in the spurious summary of the loan, circulated under the authority of PNB chair ......)

FY2017 audited statements may be ready for FJC either side of Christmas. The 2018 are likely to extend beyond any second six-month compliance waiver FJC may grant: 


bookkeeping disarray tends to be cumulative, becoming increasingly intractable, unearthing nastier surprises, bringing longer delays, sapping morale. The Pacifica accounting labyrinth will drop into a new dimension.... The antithesis of dizzy with success.

For 2018, will CFO-the-Third be Maxie-the-Third?  [new ED hired Maxie’s spoken at four broadcasted meetings, & he’s no money man ..... Buzzwords:   best practice (never a mention of satisficing practice); the network effect; curs’d be patchwork programming. Strangely quiet on diversity, #earsofcolor – but he knows the interests of the key people on the PNB, so he’s not going to go all identitarian when what’s needed is “the network effect”, a stress on *common identity*, not particularist identity. In any case, he doesn’t want to become embroiled in useless squabbles: for him a priority is managing his Pacifica time well so he can devote the necessary hours to his other money-making activities. So, many reasons why he won’t emulate Tommy-..... in being a party to a serious violation of the Pacifica by-laws: “neither the Secretary nor the Chief Financial Officer shall serve concurrently as the Chairperson of the Board or the Executive Director” 


(Article 9, Section 1 http://pacifica.org/indexed_bylaws/art9sec1.html ).

The auditors, not surprisingly, refer to “CFO”, not ED, as the qualified Pacifica *employee* to take the responsibility, ...


something that Pacifica can’t contractually palm off to an agent, like Anita-from-NETA. This term was worded before Pacifica decided to outsource the bulk of the accounting work, so perhaps FJC will agree to a double certification by the ED & NETA, with the PNB deciding to de facto dissolve the position of CFO. As director.... knows, this is just one of those “technical things”.

The last term refers to a long-established member of the Pacifica herd, the pensions elephant. Ever-present, never spoken of – until that chilly Californian spring morning, when the IRS came knocking … & the DOL … & who knows who else. Just more of those “technical things”. 

                                         AND more comments from another posting 

                           





[google images ]               Image result for kpfk images

  1. Jara Handala Thursday, October 18, 2018       1 of 6

    ..... the main difficulty is that the FJC loan contract is not publicly available, & matters are made worse because there’s little documentation to rely on. There seem to be only two relevant written public statements that can help us:     

    departing CFO Sam Agarwal’s resignation letter, 28 March 2018; & what PNB chair N.... calls a loan summary, distributed by her Saturday, 16 June, in time for the Californian LSB’s that weekend. In addition there’s a sentence – yes, we really are down to scraps – by iED Tom L....in an undated email (seems to be early April this year) .... I asked her for details of the two loans, FJC & SoCal. 

    (The latter usually has ‘supporters’ added, although this is disingenuous given that the last auditor’s report says they consist in “Board members and other individuals”, directors who to this day remain un-named   (FY2016, note 17, page 19) – http://pacifica.org/documents/financial/audit_2016.pdf .)

    I consider each document in turn, finishing with an addendum on who FJC are & what this can mean for Pacifica.

    1) Sam’s letter was kindly published by.... [WBAI's  on his blog:]  http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/2018/03/why-agarwal-cut-out.html . The relevant part is his point (e), cited here in full, & I have emphasised 4 passages, using paired asterisks:

    “Recent PNB action in approving a $3.7 million loan has put me in an impossible position. *The loan mandates extensive accounting and financial reporting requirements which cannot be met in any foreseeable period of time.* 
    We do not produce Balance Sheets monthly, so cannot track/report our liabilities on a current basis. We generate Balance Sheets only at the time of audit which is running about 500 days late. *Under any loans, it is almost mandatory to produce current audit reports in a reasonable time. We cannot comply with this requirement.* 
    *There are other documented delinquencies like non-compliance and non-payment of Retirement contributions which puts us in direct breach of loan covenants.* 

    I have repeatedly informed PNB of my serious concerns, but it has had no effect in its decision making. It is unconscionable for me to wait for a few months and then report default *when it is clear that we will not comply at the outset.* Our accounting and reporting is so deficient that, at the present rate of progress, it will take years to come close to meeting the demands. 

    This is ONLY IF, extraordinary resources are devoted for improving the situation, which I have not seen happening in last two years.” (original caps)

    It’s worth noting, especially as he speaks of “reporting requirements which cannot be met in any foreseeable period of time”, that he doesn’t draw attention to another unsatisfiable basic: the need for Pacifica to be solvent. 
    But perhaps it was so obvious it was better not to rub it in. Even so, it is a contractual requirement according to Nancy’s spurious summary, so I’ll address it there.

    The giving of the waiver by FJC is consistent with Sam’s assessment, as without it Pacifica “will not comply at the outset [of the contract]”. 
    But how patient will FJC remain? Will they keep giving waivers provided the quarterly interest carries on rolling in? As I said last month, & I repeat it below in more detail, FJC doesn’t wait for a borrower to default: they sell on the loan when it is merely “potentially impaired” (see the FJC “delinquent & impaired loans” accounting policy described in any of their auditor’s reports for at least the last 10 years – links below). 

    So whenever it suits FJC they can declare that Pacifica’s principal, $3.265m, is unlikely to be paid on time, c. 31 March 2021, & sell the debt – & there’s nothing, absolutely nothing, Pacifica can do about it. The loan is FJC’s asset, theirs to dispose of at will. 
    Yes, putting the vernacular at its most refined, Pacifica is FJC’s female dog.

  2. 2) The ‘loan summary’ some may have seen, all two-and-a-bit pages of it, seems to have been originally sent on 16 June by PNB chair Nancy ... to a KPFK listener.

    On 7 May he’d asked [her].... & the National Office for a copy of the loan agreement, but received no reply.

    (Ah, this is what “the Pacifica family” means, as spoken about by iED Tom Li... at the 6 September PNB meeting; this embarrassing, creepy phrase has now been used at two out of three public meetings by his replacement, Head Coach Maxie-the-Third, as he gets down-n-dirty...   )

    Our neglected listener, not to be deterred by the rudeness of being ignored, on 22 May asked the whole Board. Eventually, 16 June, chair Nancy sent him this document, saying,
    “[a]s it turns out there is a confidentiality clause in the loan, but we [the PNB?] are authorized [by FJC?] to release this summary of the loan agreement to you.”

    http://www.mediafire.com/file/5omp58qwbm59f7j/Summary_of_LENDER_loan_to_Pacifica_f._Grace_Aaron.docx/file

    One must say it’s a curious document:
    no title; no author; no date (but it’s pre-22 March because that day the Fed prime rate went up by 0.25 percentage points from 4.5% – page 1);

    it doesn’t say it’s written on anyone’s behalf or authority; &, importantly, at no point does it say it’s a summary of the loan. The PNB, the iED, & presumably the ED, are proud of this agreement, so why is this ‘summary’ still being hidden under a bushel, its existence oblivious to nigh all & sundry?

    Why isn’t it pinned to all of Pacifica’s homepages, station & national?

     Why is the default secrecy culture so permeated & obdurate that it even hides from view the only statement from the PNB on the loan terms?

    Why are they so contemptuous of the need for management & elected officials to be transparent about their dealings to the very people who either pay their wages or put them into office? Why are they so shameless?

    Just to make three key points.

    First, as I said a month ago, “[t]he ‘loan summary’ currently doing the rounds is not a summary of the loan: it’s a summary of what may be a discarded draft of the loan.” It’s also crafted to ignore crucial matters.

    Conclusion: it’s misleading as a summary, & knowingly so; as such it’s distributed under false pretences. It can’t cope with these simple questions:

    • is the loan made, as is typical, via FJC’s Agency Loan Fund, or from another anonymised FJC conduit, such as one or more donor-advised funds of FJC’s clients?;

    • is it subject to FJC’s publicly declared ‘potentially impaired’ loans test, & sold on to “a private foundation”, or, as the [chair] ‘summary’ puts it,
     “[i]f there is an uncured event of default, all amounts owed under the loan become immediately due and payable” (page 1), meaning a fire sale of at least one of Pacifica’s station buildings, perhaps two, & other highly liquid assets?

    Which is it? In support of the latter one must recognise that the phrase ‘Agency Loan Fund’ (& this “private foundation”) has *never* been uttered in any audio in the Pacifica archive, be it a PNB or Finance Cttee meeting (nor in the Audit Cttee, although this is beyond its purview).

    Yet, in favour of the former, with reference to loans (so provided by donor-advised funds), FJC’s auditors only speak of the ‘potentially impaired’ test & selling the debt on, never “all amounts owed under the loan become immediately due and payable";

    • does the contract identify conditions that will designate the loan as ‘potentially impaired’, allowing it to be sold on, something I address below in the last section?; &

    • lastly, to ask the obvious, what happens temporarily if Pacifica breaches the contract, be it for a month or somewhat longer? For example, does the interest rate go up (the speculation is that it’s of the order of 17%, rather than the current 8.25%),

    rewarding FJC’s clients for choosing a risky investment?

  3. 3 of 7

    Second, as I pointed out a month ago, the ‘loan summary’ says “Pacifica is required to remain solvent” (page 1). 

    That means having net working capital, that is, net current assets, enough cash available to pay all liabilities falling due within 12 months.

    Thing is, it’s been nine long years ...since Pacifica achieved this at the annual audited balance-sheet date (the momentous day of 30 September 2009, c. $1.3m).

    The latest, year-end FY2016, gave net current liabilities of c. $6.7m.

    At the 2009 date, Pacifica had $1.53 for every dollar due within 12 months (current assets $3 748 913, current liabilities $2 454 180); at the 2016 date, things had flipped, every dollar of current assets was being chased by $11.55 from creditors (current assets $637 716, current liabilities $7 356 997).

    ESRT’s court submission of satisfaction of the judgment was dated 27 March, so the FJC loan had already been made, thereby making the six-month waiver expire in late September.
    Even with the loan paying some current liabilities (such as ESRT rent), has Pacifica made up this $6.7m in the last two years? Everyone knows the answer – even though Pacifica doesn’t have a computed balance sheet in real time, perhaps never has. No new waiver has been announced, so on the solvency ground alone Pacifica is currently violating the contract with FJC. 

    Not that the PNB Finance Cttee, for example, during these long six months, has ever mentioned the coming gloaming, the darkness sweeping in upon the face of the deep. The Pacifica family. Family secrets.

    Finally, the ‘summary’ says, “[i]n addition [to the real property: buildings & land], the Collateral includes accounts receivable, tangible goods, equipment, rental income, sales proceeds, contracts, intellectual property, furniture, cash and proceeds of insurance or sales – in short, virtually every real, tangible and intellectual property right in which Pacifica has an interest” (page 2).

    That’s worth re-reading, don’t you think? *All Pacifica’s property has been collateralised to FJC*, not just the three station buildings, Berkeley, LA, & Houston. Even the petty cash.
    Even that cherished Paul Robeson recital. And even the broken abacus used by He-of-the-Augsburger to make his daily entries into QuickBooks – quick in, quick out, shake it all about. All property.

    Can this really be true? Were Pacifica ground down *that far* by the end of the negotiation? ... Welcome to RealWorld, PacificaWorld. Bit different to stymied PNB meetings, bit different to jumping about in the PacificaPlayPen. Head Coach Maxie-the-Third really has his work cut out, trying to make... https://twitter.com/spartymcj3 .

    The earlier piece I’ve referred to, Chris kindly put on his blog: http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-slippery-pnb-slope.html .

    3) The last evidence is Tommy-C R...’s single sentence. Director Grace ...kindly forwarded to me an email exchange, starting 4 April, about Pacifica’s loans. During this, iED Tom L... was asked by a Pacifica member,
     “[w]hat are the ramifications of signing the FJC loan that is immediately in default since the financial requirements cannot be met?”

    His response: “[t]he Board has been told it has a 6 month waiver of the loan covenants.” That was it. No content given. Not even the expiry date. And no indication of its possible extension, nor how amenable FJC would be to granting this favour – nor, crucially, what FJC may ask for, even insist on, in return.

  4. 4 of 7

    The matter of there being another party with its own perceived self-interest is *always* missing whenever the FJC loan is spoken of. It’s as if FJC is Father Jimmy Christmas, the proverbial good Samaritan, just waiting to give the helpless a helping hand.

    FJC, the people’s friend, embodied pecuniary altruism. By contrast, what are FJC decision-makers hoping to get from saddling Pacifica with the largest loan in its over-70-year history?

    Obviously the loan generates income for FJC’s clients, but, let’s be honest, what expectation could FJC ever have that Pacifica could raise the $3.265m to pay off the principal by c. 31 March 2021?

    So for FJC, what’s the end-game? The PNB has never publicly acknowledged any of this, let alone publicly discussed it.
    And no PNB director, or LSB delegate, has publicly declared that they are aware that these questions exist, let alone recognised how significant they are.

    4) My final point, Ed, takes advantage of a choice in your vocabulary. You described the contract as a “covenant”, & with this you captured something about FJC, perhaps without realising it.

    A puff piece about them, by a woman called Julie, tells us something no-one else seems to mention. She’s quite open about it, speaking plainly when explaining how FJC started out:

    “[i]n light of UJA’s reluctance to use donor-advised fund capital for mission-related investments, [L...name excised out ] decided to pursue the idea on his own.

     A new community foundation was created to pool donors’ funds and permit investments for social good before the funds were eventually used for charitable donations. [L...]’s family and others officially launched FJC (Foundation for the Jewish Community) in 1995.” (UJA is United Jewish Appeal)

    So, *FJC = Foundation for the Jewish Community*. Of course, one shouldn’t confuse FJC with JCF, the Jewish Communal Fund.

     (Yes, I know this is getting rather like ‘..., what with the JPF & the PFJ,... but these are the facts.) No doubt like others, I’d assumed ‘FJC’ was an abbreviation, & wondered what it stood for.

    But there was nothing obvious on their own website, nothing at all. Indeed, the masthead reinforces the alternative idea that it’s just letters, saying “FJC [–] A Foundation of Philanthropic Funds”.

    But if one perseveres, exercising the patience of Job, one finds in the ‘News’ section two press releases, both undated, mentioning the just cited article by Julie Hammerman

    ( http://fjc.org/uploads/user-uploads/image/FJC%20$250%20million%20press%20release.pdf & http://www.fjc.org/uploads/user-uploads/image/Charity%20Navigator%20Highest%20Rated%202016.pdf ;

     the article itself is at jlensnetwork.org (bottom of homepage, in ‘Case Studies’), her SF Bay Area operation, but although they’re tweeting, their website is down at the mo, so the article’s here:
     http://www.mediafire.com/file/lpqnww1krnixbw2/Julie_Hammerman_JLens_on_FJC_9Oct13.pdf/file ).

    (On the liberation movements..., the JPF & the PFJ, not to forget the JPPF, the Judean Popular People’s Front, please enjoy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0BpfwazhUA .)

    Conventionally, there’s a threefold categorisation of businesses managing donor-advised funds:
    single-issue; community; national. FJC seems to have started off projecting themselves solely as a community fund:

     hence their choice of name, Foundation for the Jewish Community. But as they grew they looked to a wider market, but leaving enough markers of what they see as their communal purpose, not least in volunteering where some of their directors used to work:   http://www.fjc.org/board-and-staff .

    So it tries to ride two horses, neatly captured in these words by their recently replaced CEO, Leonard G...: “FJC has deep roots in the Jewish community. We describe ourselves as a national organization that has no specific ties” (11 November 2015     http://jewishweek.timesofisrael.com/the-abcs-of-donor-advised-funds/ ).


  5. 5 of 6

    And there’s another FJC, the Foundation for Jewish Camp. But that FJC only operates in North America. ‘Our’ FJC works the world, & they channel a fair proportion of their clients’ money to Palestine, including some that no doubt helps Jewish ‘camps’ on the land seized by aggressive war, & so illegally, in June 1967.

    By contrast, the Marty & Dorothy Silverman Foundation (MDSF), about which more anon, send very little to Palestine. The annual grant lists of both foundations are in their IRS Form 990 (for FJC, Schedules F & I;
    for MDSF, Part XV schedule, end of PDF) – search the Registry of the Charities Bureau, NY State Attorney General’s Office, https://charitiesnys.com
     (oddly, the full name of MDSF draws a blank, so use its EIN, the IRS’ Employer Identification Number, 22-2777449).

    MDSF is a big part of Pacifica’s picture because that fund guarantees FJC loans by buying them, without discount, if things aren’t going according to plan; that way there’s no loss for FJC’s clients.

    To help their assessment, FJC differentiates “delinquent loans” from “impaired loans”:
    the former are “loans that are 30 days or more past due in payment of principal and/or interest”; the latter, “120 days”.

     (Perhaps Pacifica’s reporting requirements, as a borrower, are subject to the same.)
    Crucially for Pacifica, *FJC’s policy is not to wait for a loan to become impaired*: they get MDSF to buy it when it’s simply “potentially impaired”
    (
    latest FJC auditor’s report, year-end 31 March 2018, dated 22 August 2018, note 2, pages 10-11 http://www.fjc.org/uploads/user-uploads/image/FJC%203-31-18%20FINAL.pdf ).

    *So, importantly, FJC don’t call in loans, they farm them out to the foundation.*

    *Indeed, FJC sold to MDSF more than nine loans, totalling at least $6.712m, in the four years FY2013 through 2016.
    Two were comparable to Pacifica’s $3.265m: one of $2.676m in 2013; the other, $2.1m in 2016.*
    These large sales were only disclosed by reference to post-balance sheet events described in the corresponding prior auditor’s report (FY2012, page 10; FY2015, page 15).

    So FJC have had their fingers burnt in recent years, twice – yet they’ve taken on Pacifica. Why?
    What’s to gain? (
    FJC’s auditor’s reports, https://charitiesnys.com/RegistrySearch/show_details.jsp?id={6F88AFBC-CE80-46CB-B364-FBB4333B345D} ).

    Somewhat troublingly, these facts have *never* been mentioned in any publicly available Pacifica audio or written statement.

    No PNB director or LSB delegate has publicly demonstrated any awareness either of FJC’s policy in this area, or of this third party, the Marty & Dorothy Silverman Foundation.

    Also none has acknowledged that two “impaired” loans, comparable in size to Pacifica’s, were sold on in recent years by FJC.

    To the contrary, director Carole T...went to great lengths at the 16 June KPFA LSB to reassure fellow delegates, Pacifica members, & listeners, in replying to a question:

    "FJC […] has not, er, called in default on any loan that they have given, ever [...] They had a station in Idaho, that for three years did not pay any, any of the payments on anything, and they did not call them into default.
    So there may be some technical things in, in the documents that allow for a default, but FJC did not give Pacifica a loan because it was goin' make a lot of money or because, er, it's a fun group to deal with, but because they're in favour of public radio, and they think that Pacifica's a valuable place to have survive, and so it is John C...'s assessment [...],
    he has said, that FJC has not once called a loan in on default. So, yes, that may be correct, & I, you know – [at which the Carolebot abruptly stopped functioning]" – 1:32:46 https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/kpfa/180616/kpfa180616a.mp3 .

    Contract commitments? Just technical. Just facts. What’s important is will, wishful thinking. Ask Donny Drumpf.

  6. 6 of 7

    One would think, if only out of self-protection, when a Pacifica prominent decides to publicly give reassuring words to the faithful, not least when they also sit on the PNB Audit Cttee, & when more than 10 weeks have passed since the signing of the largest loan in Pacifica’s history, the director would have a command of the relevant publicly available information.

    The members & listeners deserve no less, especially when asking direct questions to the director.

    And with that thought, turn now to more sedate matters. Sometimes, when a coloniser feels safe & secure, comfortable, amongst friends, they spill the beans. This happened at a recent event organised by our J...:
     the Jewish Impact Investing Summit, at Fordham University, NYC, 5 December last year. She seems to be connected with very senior operators, including government officials in Israel.

     So up popped the Director for Economic Affairs at the Ministry for Strategic Affairs & Public Diplomacy, no less. This ministry, attached to the Prime Minister’s office, was set up to combat BDS, the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions campaign, that is trying to get Israel to obey international law, rather than allow collusion with its recidivism.

     The post-1967 occupation needs to be called what it is: a criminal enterprise.
    That it is pervasive throughout Jewish-Israeli society was candidly & succinctly put by Director Itai Nixon: “the term ‘profiting from the Occupation’ […] I don’t think there’s a company that operates in Israel that in some way doesn’t – isn’t involved in some way in the Occupation.” Your words, Itai, not mine
    (38:51, also 12:54 & 29:05 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbSJvDP1QXo ; the event’s programme & bios (Itai Nixon, page 5) http://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/3aa597_0a07b1c254ac43a599ae256b65867790.pdf ).

    You may well ask why Julie is so well connected. Her bio from another conference calls a spade a spade:

    “JLens represents the Jewish community in two influential global movements – Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). In 2015, with seed investments from Jewish institutions, JLens launched the $50M Jewish Advocacy Strategy to invest in the 300 most powerful companies in the US to advocate as shareholders on Jewish communal concerns – religious tolerance, Jewish social and environmental issues, and support for Israel (including combating BDS efforts to cut investor and corporate ties to Israel).”
    OK. Makes sense.
    https://www.israeliamerican.org/iac-national-conference/team-member/julie-hammerman

    Finally, this summer, 8 August, KPFA rammed down the barrel a mix of concrete & rancid dairy product, summarily silencing ‘Guns & Butter’.
    Not only that, they deleted, without warning, its 16-year archive from the station website.
    One reason given by Q... (General Manager) & Kevin ... (Program Director) was “your uncritically airing of views by a holocaust denier” (not ‘Holocaust’). I

    t must be said, it’s highly unlikely that the boss of FJC lobbied for action to be taken, or that anyone at any Pacifica station knew, or indeed knows today, the communal focus (& activities in Palestine) of FJC & MDSF.

  7. 7 of 7

    Thing is, because of the default secrecy culture of Pacifica management, directors, & delegates, combined with the ‘conspiracy’ bias of quite a few ‘Guns & Butter’ peeps, what seems to be a coincidence may not be understood as such.

    Instead they may think FJC is a ‘deep’ actor, trying to make Pacifica more ‘friendly’ to Jewish-Israeli supremacism, or trying to make it carry adverts (see the last section of PNB chair Nancy Sorden’s spurious summary of the FJC loan, page 3).

    They may even think that because neither Pacifica nor FJC have said that the loan comes from the Agency Loan Fund, that it comes via another anonymised FJC conduit (see J...’s piece, page 2), namely from particular clients; or maybe from just one client . . . maybe, just maybe, this is the Machiavellian way our Amy, Amy Goodman, is wreaking revenge on Pacifica. Now there’s a thought . . .
                            
                                  *****************************************

    There is MORE info at main WBAI site. Remember that each post person has their own opinions, research, contacts, and viewpoints too...so there are NO FACTS that are uncontested or confirmable for sure anywhere to be found...

    but  more info - if of any interst to anyone near LA - KPFK - is what is needed.

    We believe in EXPOSURE, IN OPENNESS, IN TRANSPARENCY AND HOPEFULLY, IN SOME ACCOUNTABILITY, HONESTY AND RELIABLE INFO FROM SOURCES THAT HAVE even a bit of power and control over what happens to KPFK, and Pacifica, Wbai, et al too

    the author has the copywrite and responsibility for their quoted above words, not us replicating info to provide a wider readership of what is otherwise so cleverly, regularly hidden, denied, secreted and faked by those who are LSB's, PNB boards, as are general managers, program directors,  Exe Directors [shift in  & out regularly, frequently  now] and colluding paid staff at each/every radio station within P.

    shared here to further TRANSPARENCY and promote INTEGRITY ...to protect and inform all donors, pledged payors to their local radio station for expenses not explained to them, and for listeners who trust the organizations that do not play fairly with them. 

    (c) for our comments, opinions, words only, not the quoted materials. Bbt 2018





 



Monday, August 6, 2018

This may be our last sharing of KPFK's / Pacifica's hidden doings, quotes here:

Below are more quotes from another NY focused website. If we have inadvertently Repeated any blurbs/ comments here, please excuse us. 

the glazed eyes syndrome comes upon any readers of too many words to consume intelligently. The many comments begin to blurrrrr together and need much time/ attention to sort and put together in a logical manner. We have unfortunately not been able to do that for our readers. Sorry. 

But our intent is to do the final clear-out of what we have kept for this TRANSPARENCY PROJECT that pertains to Our Radio Station- KPFK -  and it's being under the Pacifica top heavy loaders and the old By-Laws, many of which should have long ago been updated and corrected, but, as usual, NOT done. 

Below are some comments re-posted from WBAI - NY's focus as if NY were so much more valuable or relevant than LA's KPFK. Not. Except in bad deed done that are now encumbering all 5 radio stations, turning what was barely financially viable before...now paying loans, interest, court settlements, attorney, etc etc etc and more... some of which is detailed by others below here:


                                       Image result for money  images[google/hackernoon.]


    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

comments here are copied as found, to provide a bit, not much, of information re KPFK too...


Jara Handala has left a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"3 of 3

"Lastly, whenever anyone speaks of Pacifica's big loan it should always be termed 'the FJC variable interest loan'. This is because even PNB directors, including some on its Finance Cttee, didn't realise it wasn't fixed. 


"Again the Trump technique: it was first spoken about as a 7% loan (wrong figure, but hey), really good for the likes of Pacifica, we're so lucky. And that's how it got fixed in people's heads, a specific number – so fixed, not variable. 

"So at the last Finance Cttee meeting, Tuesday 10 July, director Tony L___gasped on hearing the news (6:38, Ken Aaron, KPFK Treasurer speaking, Gasping Tony gasping "who knew that?!?" in the background at 7:10 – & no, I never want to see the gif – https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/finance/180710/finance180710b.mp3). 

"Guess Director Tony, also member of the national Finance Cttee, never got round to reading the FJC webpage (http://fjc.org/fjc-agency-loan-fund – incidentally, how Pacifica satisfied the FJC Loan Cttee's third bullet-point mandatory condition, only G-d knows)."    ###

yet another's words here reposted:

"As for your question as to the Large Loan, so far as I know, .... there’s a great deal, particularly as to specifics, that isn’t known, that’s simply not available to the listeners, to the public. 

"The ‘democratization’ and ‘openness’ Pacifica claims are on the whole quite simply lies and false claims

"Most critical business, pretty much anything involving money in any meaningful way is kept in ‘confidence’ in ‘Executive Session’ meetings. Sometimes there’s information available post facto, but often it’s simply never available, and in those cases where it is available, it’s almost always so long after the actual decision and expenditure that it’s of only slight historical interest.
"We know almost nothing of the terms of the loan, really. All significant specifics are still in ‘confidence’. Even many board members simply aren’t informed, and if they are informed it’s only after the actual decisions have been made by a far smaller group.
"In a sense, anyone who’s interested has little choice but to rely on a combination of rumors, the occasional leak or two, and a few bits of fairly hard information occasionally actually reported.
"The overall picture is what really matters, I think, and we do know that the overall financial picture is still very bad. Estimates as to total indebtedness for the large loan, pension obligations, etc, seem to range from about $6m and north from there

" It’s possible that the ‘housekeeping’ efforts with the new accounting firm, etc, will result in firmer estimates.
"The key, though, as I’ve mentioned and as I see it, is simple: Pacifica programming simply doesn’t appeal to enough people to keep Pacifica alive.
"Unless truly radical positive changes are made, all evidence strongly suggests it will in time collapse.
"Then again, that threat has existed in various forms for decades and they’ve managed to squeak along, largely unchanged, and with very little audience, serving really only themselves – which seems, sadly, to be all they really care about, rhetoric notwithstanding.      ####


"You are by no means the only one who wonders about that. There are many secrets and where they’re are secrets there are, as we all know, things to hide— we really need to know what they are hiding, and why. ###
                 
MORE HERE :   yet another's words here reposted:

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"I’m neither an attorney nor an accountant, and memory is ever and always a fallible instrument. Also, of course, hard information is nearly nonexistent. 

"All that said, my impression is that KPFK is in a sense directly vulnerable in that I think the space used for Pacifica Archives, which I think is owned and/or controlled by KPFK was used as part of the collateral for the Large Loan.
"In a sense, though, particular properties being ‘owned’ by particular stations is something of an illusion. Don’t forget, that all five station, plus the archives are part of Pacifica, which means that in reality, legally, as I understand it, Pacifica owns everything, and the debts of any entity or combination of entities is all owed to Pacifica.
"There are consistent rumors, incidentally, that the loan agreement precludes Pacifica filing for Ch 11. If that’s the case, and the financial picture worsens, it may be the case that Ch 7 dissolution is the only option. Again, I’m not an attorney, I’m not an accountant, and very nearly no one has seen the actual loan agreements, and those who have seen the full documents ain’t talkin’.
"There are longstanding rumors that factions supportive of KPFK and/or KPFA want WBAI’s frequency t to be sold and those monies used to ‘save’ themselves (KPFT is sort of up on the air in these rumors, and for that matter, so is WPFW, and there are some pretty clear differences of opinion between KPFA and KPFK).

"t was pretty clearly factions from Southern California that fought the proposal of last fall to file for Ch 11 protection and reorganization, preferring the strategy of the Large Loan and the hiring of Mr Livingston.

" Frankly, I have no opinion as to which might be the better strategy – I simply don’t have enough information as a mere member of the public, and I think it’s safe to say that very, very, very few of these people are to be believed or trusted.
"As ... said, I see the core problem as the lack of talent, and the lack of programming of any substantial merit. Thus their relegation to history, obscurity, and irrelevance.
"As  stated previously at tedious length, I see the abandonment/betrayal of the original foundational principles in favor of narrow, strident political advocacy as the fatal error. That transition occurred somewhere in the mid-1970s and onward. 

"Amongst other problems it meant that the criterion for access to air was no longer whether or not the person or persons ‘did good radio’ but whether they were in accord with the reigning political line and reflective of that ‘correct’ mindset.
"Such unimaginative, closed-mindedness is not likely to lead to fascinating radio, nor to drawing audiences. As has been demonstrated now for about… what, three or four decades?
"Pacificans seem to be rather slow learners, I suppose which, given the original foundational goals and purposes, and the first few decades, is a shame.. but so it is, and so it has
long been.  "   ###

READY FOR MORE ? HERE'S  another's words here reposted:

"have not seen the breakdown of the massive buyout of the ESRT lease.
"How much for interest?
"How much for penalties?
"How much for rent owed?
"How much for penalties?
"For how many months was the lease bought out? What was the cost for each month? Was there a discount applied for the months that remained?
"When a commercial lease is broken, the remaining obligation of the lease comes due. Ergo, quantify the amount saved by breaking the lease?
"Let us all stop the nonsense."    ###


yet another's words here reposted - IF ANY ARE REPEATS, FORGIVE THESE TIRED EYES WE'VE COME TO SUFFER FROM...[po' lit'l us..... ]:


Jara Handala has left a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"2 of 3

"Pacifica provided documents to FJC in support of the loan application, including its plan on how it will repay the loan by c. 31 March 2021. Unbelievably, this central text, supposedly regulating what the Foundation does for the next three years (well, 32 months now, 11% fundraising time already lost), has not been distributed to the directors as a whole; 
 
"this lil fact emerged at the end of the latest PNB open session, Thursday 5 July. Point-of-order-Madam-Chair A____ put questions to A____-from-NETA & Mr Tom (38:55 & 46:18 – https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/pnb180705/pnb180705b.mp3).
 
" First she asked A___ if she has two documents: Pacifica's cash-flow forecast thru to 30 September 2019 (the end of the fiscal year); &, more importantly, Pacifica's plan to pay its debts. Simple, really. So simple that Chair N____ functioning as Praetorian Guard N____, immediately intervened to say A____ would sent it to Mr Tom who would then send it to the directors (40:18).
"Eventually A____-from-NETA got her chance to speak about the first document: "yes, Tom sent it to us, so we do have it, & we're starting to, ah, review it [then she talked about NETA Cash-flowGuy doing that work ...] so, yes, we do have it".
"Then A____ asked A___, in a confusing way, presumably thinking of the FJC loan in particular but knowing that Pacifica is going all strategic these days, whether Anita also has a copy of "the strategic plan to repay our debts" (41:18). "Yes we do", replied A___, in a definitive, self-assured voice. Well that seemed all done & dusted; straight questions, straight answers. All above board.  
"But this is Pacifica.
"A ____got a chance to repeat her request that the PNB, & so all directors, receive these two documents (46:18). She asked Mr Tom directly: if NETA can receive documents from you, why can't the PNB? Mr Tom betrayed that he was a bit rattled here, pinned back into the corner by Adriana-the-people's-Rottweiler, & wilted under the pressure: 
 
"A__ was, er, er, mistaken about [Mr Tom] having sent that to them: 
"I have not seen it [one document or two?] myself, er, it was, er – we have access to Sam's computer, um, and, er, yer, we were, the, what the auditor has said is that this was something that was sent to him, so I'm looking for it, um, I, er, in his, er, I, I have a, a gotten access to the email that changed the password & so I'm looking, & I will be glad to send that to you as soon as I can find it.
 
"And if you believe that you'll believe anything. (Sam Agarwal, Pacifica's last qualified Chief Financial Officer, finished working at Pacifica on Friday 8 June
 
"So Mr Tom had the data in front of him for four whole weeks, but lacked the competence to find them. Some iED & acting CFO.)
"Anyway, A____ just took Mr Tom's floundering as an upfront response, straight away asking him something else. A___ didn't ask A___ why she said what she did if it wasn't true, especially as she talked specifically about CashflowGuy flowing thru the cashflow. (
 
"Yes, A____ was probably off the call, but that's beside the point.) And A_____ didn't ask Mr Tom, the acting Chief Financial Officer (unqualified), how he's managing without both the fiscal year's cashflow forecast & 'the strategic plan for paying Pacifica's debts'. 
 
"Such trifling pieces of paper, so why ring Doug R____ or Sam E____ for a copy? Shucks, no. Maybe he'll find it on Sam's computer. Maybe he won't. 
 
"But, guys, these are Pacifica documents, so they're hardly worth anything to anyone, right? 
 
"That's some acting Chief Financial Officer (unqualified). But it's unfair to call him Mr Tom. As I said a few weeks ago, he is qualified: he's Tom L_____ BS. 
 
And it's only because his political opponents at Pacifica are so ineffective that his BS is able to smother them, it's only in the dull reflection of this crew that Mr Tom looks qualified. "  ###
                                
                     here's  another's words here reposted:

a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"By ‘housekeeping’ ....referring principally to moving to put financial affairs in something at least resembling coherent, sane function:
"While the Ch11 v Massive Loan argument had valid points on both sides, so far as I could see, at least a decision was finally taken, and the massive loan was used to buy out WBAI’s crushing lease obligations at ESRT, and to move WBAI, complete with a new transmitter, to 4 Times Square, slashing unsustainable operating expenses.
"Similarly, the wildly overdue FY 2016 audit was completed and submitted, avoiding the immediate threat of the loss of charitable status for Pacifica.
"Similarly, also, steps were taken to hire a new firm to consolidate and carry out Pacifica’s book keeping functions, and to bring in people to assess and consider how to deal with Pacifica’s retirement fund short-funding problems.
"None of these is fully accomplished, but real, tangible, substantial steps were taken, and if carried forward, will begin to put Pacifica in a coherent financial state.
"That leaves open, however, whether Pacifica’s programming can be revised/improved/resurrected/transformed/whatever in such a fashion as to make Pacifica relevant to anyone other than itself, and to actually draw an audience sufficient to repay that massive loan and to move on to financial sustainability.

"These questions, those beyond ‘housekeeping’ are the ones that matter most and will matter most, and the failure to address these issues for decades is/are what has led Pacifica to its present status as invisible, inconsequential, irrelevant, and often reliant on scams of various sorts to attempt to survive – all of which was exhausted long, long, long, long ago.
"In a sense, simply to further speculate, much may depend on what sort of General Manager Livingston is able to recruit, and what actual authority they will have.
"Those are the questions that matter, if Pacifica is ever to matter in any meaningful sense, and I wouldn’t give odds on that happening.
"It is, in my observation, as I said, very highly resistant to any actual change. It was able, reluctantly, with a great deal of strife, still visible just beneath the surface, to accept steps desperately needed to avoid immediate implosion, which I’ve referred to as ‘housekeeping’.
"Anything more substantive, however, seems to me very doubtful. I’d guess that at best they’ll continue to barely survive, as a fever dream hobby-holiday for their producers.That’s at best, and as I said, I wouldn’t give odds even for that. " ####
 
 more words here reposted:

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":
"Pacifica, as a product of its history and the time of its first creation and earliest evolution, is exceedingly resistant to any assertion or claim of authority in any and all forms.
"For that reason, the default position makes it extremely difficult if not impossible to remove a program, for very nearly any reason.
"This has long been the case and is, I would argue, the central determinant in very nearly all Pacifica decisions – inertia, one aspect of which is incumbency ". ####

need  more words here ? more reposted=

a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"it is always surprising, tho it should not be, that OTHER PACIFICA radio stations may replicate the same, similar stories & problems reported here re NY's WBAI.
 
" At KPFK in far away LOS ANGLES the latest returned GM may be adequate [tho loved by staff for his 'sweet personality' and ways but the effectiveness of management is not apparent in positive changes in how the station sounds, or probably operates. no names mentioned, no law suits needed, thanks.

and KPFK has as racially slanted, biased and prejudiced - not in European heritaged people against the darker skinned people....but the applauding, admiring and seeking approval from those who emerged from further south: like African identified folks, or Latino's who dominate a whole segment of evening in only Spanish-Spoken-There prgms and another whole Friday afternoon, + more.
"There does not need to be a 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 of dominant census based populations or their cultural preferences, leaving out the rest of the real world. But the disproportion and the sounds of OUTRAGE ! Righteousness as if there is only "1 Truth" and we know it and shout it. or Anger, attacking, and diss'ing anyone or profit earning businesses as "they must be evil" somehow ! etc.
"Then: Aligning ONLY with victims, as the old 60's ideals held but couldn't produce the solutions that lasted hardly. But still demanded as if 2018 had reverted to a time when KPFK or other Pacifica stations elsewhere were relevant, and anti-war when there was a war to be anti.
"So there is going to be way toooo soon another "fund drive" - money money give give US more more more ! sessions with special repeated old pgms....

"and in-credible-ly [not believable, credible] high-priced exaggerated claimed products to produce those perfect, healthy, happy beings everyone dreams of being but knows it is imagination and not all that promises imply either.
"OK, so why complain more here about the Other station, [KPFK] whose property was mortgaged for that loan to help WBAI survive - was that how it went ?
"...because there is little information, revelations allowed to the stakeholders, donors, public listeners or anyone other than those rare self-serving 'press releases' by some management chief. so KPFK is silent, doesn't respond to questions, not at LSB meetings by public questioners either, and provides no honest, real feedback. Sad. too bad.

...
"as to how to make actual positive changes, [not selling t-shirts and arguing about which color would sell better... please ! ]is dis-cussed on Pacifica group emails but the actions needed to ACTIONS AND CULTURE AND POSITIVE DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENTS are apparently not risked nor dared nor tried.
"Or are they ? where ? what has been Done? Anywhere ? who knows. maybe better, who cares ? by this time.
"some try to share more publicly, openly, transparently. Like here.
like Pacificainexile.org which seems to have gone silent for last few months.
"is the whole shebang gone dulled and the comments, concerns, questions 'just blowing in the (desert )  winds "   ####

 yep, always more.... words here reposted

Jara Handala has left a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"1 of 3
 
"not only the breakdown but even something as basic as the size of the settlement (ending the contract prematurely) has not been disclosed. And of course the settlement should not be confused with the judgment, the court judgment, that preceded it. 
 
"The same two things apply to the judgment: its cost has not been disclosed, nor how it was make up. But isn't a $1.8m figure bandied around, sufficing for most as the size of some Empire State problem or other? 
 
"And that's the problem with casual talk: we all think we know what's being referred to, but the imprecision allows the nitty-gritty to slip thru the fingers – and that always lets those in positions of power (& responsibility) off the hook.
"And that's the situation here. Pacifica's information gatekeepers have consistently pursued an approach that Trump often uses: choose a quite different thing, cite it, cite it again, & keep citing it. That thing is the judgment, the 4 October 2017 NYC court judgment, which refers to unpaid rent of c. $1.8m – 
 
..."which seems to be the amount outstanding when Empire State Realty Trust made its application to the court on 23 November 2016. The $1.8m actually excludes the following: the subsequent rent due prior to judgment; interest & penalties as per the contract; interest at 18% levied by the court for delayed payment of the judgment sum; court fees; the legal fees of Pacifica; & the legal fees of ESRT. Plus, no doubt, some less obvious charges. 
 
"So $1.8m? No, the judgment alone – & this is apart from the settlement – is a fair bit more than $1.8m.
"So, why the hell have the Pacifica administrators & PNB not given the facts to the members & other listeners? Why are we all in the dark about the cost of the judgment, & its breakdown, & the cost of the settlement, & its breakdown?
 
" Why? The answer is anyone's guess – is it to help politically those who pushed for the loan, to suppress bad news, done to help the very people who went on & on about the process costs of bankruptcy, the alternative course? 
 
"And given this disclosure deficit, why the hell are there so few directors (i.e. the PNB) & delegates (i.e. the Local Station Boards) demanding that this info be released to the members & other listeners? Why? Life, even that of a zombie radio network, moves on. 
 
"And like Trump, keep leaving issues in your wake & they sink to the bottom of the ocean, forgotten by all.

And it seems only a few directors have been given copies of, or sight of, the FJC & Socal loan documents. Who decided on this apparent restricted distribution? Using which criteria, criteria agreed by which PNB meeting? 
 
"The very Finance Cttee of the PNB has itself complained, without success, to the iED & the PNB that it hasn't seen these documents (or even received summaries, written by which privileged employee or fellow director, on whose orders?). 
 
"How can all this be other than a dereliction of duty? Why does the PNB, & indeed the members, tolerate this? But worse is to come."  ###
 
another comment  here reposted=
 
new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"Question : Tho this blog is all about only NY's WBAI - Null was a prime seller / distributor for many years on KPFK in LA.... but is he still on elsewhere, or at KPFK?
"And Null and other 'guests', sales promoters, workshop promoters, etc. are not listed on the schedule on website either. Who's to know ? Do you ?
"Some of us barely can tolerate the other false-claim hawking and racially-motivated slants to listen to anything past old recordings replayed from other distributors {Soundstrue, Nader, Watts' son's site, etc ] - while Ian Masters is the most balanced/ exposing various view by academics and some politicians - at KPFK, that is.
"So it is unhelpful and uninteresting to be a 'listener' any more.
"How is it elsewhere? Are any/ many programs replayed at the other Pacifica stations that are worth hearing from 1 ? "   ###
    
                                more words = here reposted:
 
a new comment on the post "Has Reimers called Cosby yet?":

"who knows, and can tell "the rest of us" how those producer/programmers = the long-termed-forever-clinging to their On-Air Access spots and never releasing the space for any other views, demographic set, or more updated viewpoints CAN hold on for so long so tightly, and on and on.....?????
"Who decides if that same program can remain on-air forever after ? By what standards, criteria, or reviewed values is it Determined that those, once-in, never get out ?
"Is it the GM, PD or LSB or ????? And who informs the stakeholders of why, and HOW those decisions of POWER are made ?
"Who holds those reins and controls it all - to stay stuck in the long-past repetitions ???
"This is not a facetious but honest want-to-know question"  ####

end of quoted words - whew !


   $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


WOW  ! no more  words here being re-posted- ....whatever else was written in July 2018 must by now remain elsewhere, as if ever single written utterance contained some so! important ! data, or  fact, or  information-needed ? =  not.

                     
                        Image result for completion images  [google - unsealed.org ]


we are so ordinary sometimes ! as in always thinking of More to share, to find, to want to help FIX IT ! 

but we know, we can do so little, except flap wings, look shiny, attract attention to what is not being revealed / nor admitted.....

 and then let the rest do whatever "happens". or doesn't. both /either/ all is OK as IS.

                 Image result for butterfly wings images [google provides beauty ]
we are not concerned with what we cannot even know or is beyond our mere human actions or comprehensions.  

We are responsible for OUR CHOICES, our doings, our intentions and our
 doing-the-work-in-volved.    period. 

                                 Image result for butterfly wings images[google loves pretty things too]

The rest  is UP to whatever else occurs or doesn't, .... just as life evolves, revolves, randomly or with patterns. All is done as each wing or wave or seed can offer it's own energy to the Whole. we are. so too.

Enough. 

(c) mj ++ 2018                            [a collective work done ! ]