>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is to honor and appreciate the man who had a Pacifica blog about our NY radio station WBAI and recently deceased, left his blog with a comment from us as the last one shown there.
http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/
which notes that this discussion site was written from 2012 thru 2019. There is no indication if his friends will keep this site ongoing or it will remain a dormant website now.
This is copy of Chris Albertson's front Home page blog site. Many articles are written there, some by his friends, and lots of comments are added to each article by Pacifica loyalists from other radio stations nationwide as well. This site remains a source of opinions, information, and honest criticisms that was intended to save and improve the way WBAI was deteriorating, losing audiences and funding. If interested, look thru which articles may reveal what else needs to be exposed and remembered ...that continues to diminish the entire Pacifica network of radio stations as well. Continually and still now. Sadly.
Only by looking at his Wikipedia bio did we realize that he had died, as there were no clear indications in his last writings there. We do not know or find other information on the search in Google about who has access or may continue his informative blog - that mostly focused on his favorite radio station in NY, but also included bits of info occasionally from other Pacifica stations too.
His last blog post was April 16, 2019, and which copied a comment written by our correspondent, "KPFKcommentator" .
[coincidences all ways surprise us, as connections are revealed thru unusual circumstances - as was this last posting - done without our knowing it was or had been posted, till it was.]
We are honored to be connected to the only other website we can find -nationally - outside the attached to each station own promoters/or those programmers' selling their own -
- these 2 blogs, are on-line sites that attempt to Help and Improve our local Pacifica radio station's -for the stations' difficulties, as in :
mostly lack of transparency, or accountability or any feedback to their stakeholders/ donors. The closed-dark-halls-incommunicado of 5 Pacifica stations = except what is audible on-air [ only 1 way out, nothing 'in' allowed - apparently ].
See prior posts here about attempts to communicate with KPFK staff -
and no replies, no acknowledgements, no nutin responding back.
Same happens elsewhere at Pacifica stations, which then creates needs for blogs and comments to be the only way to expose and communicate with donors' ' local "non-profited" / community radio station'.
Admittedly, a closed Yahoo group for Pacifica interested [must be selected to be let-in to write to group] writers barely provides any information since a few usurpers use the site to email-each-other or divert from any Pacifica issues to their own personal interests and in-fighting, so that site is useless to provide or to obtain actual, factual information regarding the radio stations. Sadly so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -
Wikipedia's pix - from "2006"
"Christiern Gunnar Albertson (October 18, 1931 – April 24, 2019) was a New York City-based jazz journalist, writer and record producer"
- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -
see more at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Albertson
some pertinent exerpted quotes from above website are here :
" ...In the mid-sixties...[he worked at] Pacifica Radio's NY station WBAI, where he eventually became General Manager....."
Surprisingly, Wikipedia did not mention his blogsite =
http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/
at all, tho it is apparent that he was dedicated to putting work, effort and attention there, being concerned about the management and future of WBAI .
This is the Pacifica network radio station in trouble due to debts incurred that has indebted all 5 stations nationwide. He continually criticized and exposed the mis-doings at his local radio station, with careful attention to the goings on there.
More articles about him are of course listed on search engines, as in :
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1&q=chris+albertson
as Chris Albertson's fame centered maybe more on his works in jazz and on
his "Bessie Smith biography by Chris Albertson" book.
There is a NYT article about his death and his works, and also another site also has information brief :
https://syncopatedtimes.com/chris-albertson-biographer-of-bessie-smith-dies-at-87/
The jazz focused site above noted : "His landmark achievements were a reissue of her complete recordings and the definitive biography of her life." + "Bessie, published in 1972 and revised in 2003, set out to dispel the many myths about her, some of which that had been intentionally spread by John Hammond. It is considered one of the best jazz biographies of its kind."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Remembering that Wikipedia is not all factual, actual or inclusive, because of their dominators - who are not official 'monitors' either - but who continually insistingly to include only what the chose [see other problems at Wikipedia of serious censorship[s], misuses for promotions.
And even KPFK broadcasters who have a page listing ONLY their work promoting themselves with no biographical, personal or other info included - thus being promo pieces... still Wikipedia does provide some references to be researched and some info briefly noted therein.
tricky plays like the title "PACIFICA news" in search links to KPFA, only 1 of 5 stations, misleading the researcher by work links ? huh ? why is this ?
Nor is Chris's blog site: WBAI-nowthen mentioned in Wikipedia under Pacifica Foundation either. Obviously it is unimportant or unwanted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Checking further on Pacifica's page too - to see if Chris Albertson is listed there? = Not.
No mention of Chris Albertson at all there . Wonder why ? Because he is unimportant or was 'reverted'-deleted if written in some time ? There is mention of 2006 Greg Guma... and 1991 Sawaya....2009 Grace Aaron....but 60's was so long ago, who cares about the WBAI station back then ?
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacifica_Foundation
or what was included in WBAI's Wikipedia information or what eliminated, neglected about Chris?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WBAI
Yes, there is just 1 mention, or admission that Chris Albertson existed and was connected, concerned, and continually involved.... even tho Chris continued to write, to contact, criticize, listen and donate to WBAI.
At end of article is a list of "notable alumni" and Chris's name IS there !. wow. as a link to his own Wikipedia page [see above].
Even tho WBAI is noted to have " First air date January 8, 1960
(c) mjj 2019
Thank you for this post about Chris. He was a decent man, a kind man, a gentle man. Respect.
ReplyDelete1) Last night, W26June, i posted a comment to his blog about Pacifica's FY2017 auditor's report which was presented on M24June to the PNB Audit Cttee. It was a Pacifica first: the auditors issued "a disclaimer of opinion" concerning the financial statements. What does this mean? The conclusion of their audit, such as it was, & i use the standard professional phrases, was that they could NOT make an opinion concerning the 'material accuracy' of the figures constituting the financial statements prepared on Pacifica's behalf by their sub-contractor, NETA. This was primarily because of 'the auditor's inability to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence about multiple elements of the financial statements'. The deficiencies were 'material & pervasive'. This reality required the auditors, Rogers & Co., to issue "a disclaimer of opinion".
The Audit Cttee decided to recommend to the PNB that it accept the auditor's report; the PNB meets tonight, Th27June.
2) My comment sent to Chris is posted below as the next comment.
3) IMPORTANT NEWS . . . Coincidentally, a few hours ago Facebook published what seems to be THREE sets of loan documents, etc. entered into by Pacifica, including a $2.075m loan that no-one talks about. The three are: the $3.7m (now $3.265m) FJC loan; the $0.5m SoCal "bridge loan"/"friendly loan"; & the $2.075m loan.
The docs are downloadable from here:
original FB posting: https://www.facebook.com/groups/PacificaRadiowaves/permalink/1264765520345396/
the mediafire posting it gives: https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e1lo0t30pd4wc/?fbclid=IwAR27qUsmwsc6oPjp6YtHX23k-IvIEMAx7-CNER32z7bm7OU4fA4SZONI_uM
1 of 3
ReplyDelete1) Hi, Chris, & to all. Much has happened, all having to be seen through the lens of the progress of the spectre haunting us, The Creep . . . creep, creep, creeping technocratic politics undermining democratic politics, albeit warts & all.
But I restrict myself to money matters. The FY2017 (to 30Sep2017) auditor's report was presented to Monday's Audit Cttee, 24 June, & was approved for submission to this Thursday's PNB. It marked a Pacifica first: an auditor giving their report the Black Spot (Second-Order) of the $$$RealWorld$$$, what's known in the trade as a disclaimer (the adverse opinion is darker still). What's that, you may ask? The auditors found they had a problem, a big problem: the audit resulted in an 'inability to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence'; they found themselves unable to judge the material accuracy of the financial statements. The auditors simply couldn't say one way or the other. Better ask that lady dangling the crystal on a string, or ask that guy hawking the elixir of life. So no problem for Pacifica, then. Yet another false alarm.
Auditor Scott Mitchell (Rogers & Co.) spoke of the lack of supporting documentation, the overall state of what counts as the record of financial transactions, & the continuing inability to reliably quantify the pensions liability. So expect to see this standard phrase blighting their report, explaining why they were unable to make a judgment concerning the material accuracy of the FY2017 financial statements, those produced by NETA, Pacifica's bookkeeper & accountant: 'the auditor's inability to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence about multiple elements of the financial statements'. Crucially, the auditors' inability was both 'material & pervasive', requiring them to issue the disclaimer rather than FY2016's qualified opinion (also termed a scope limitation).
https://www.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/research/standards/auditattest/downloadabledocuments/au-c-00705.pdf
A crucial point about the disclaimer needs to be made: this has a fundamental effect, *one not recognised publicly by even one of the Audit Cttee members*, an effect turning on whether accounting figures & financial statements are declared to be *materially accurate*, bona fide, as it were, reliable. The significance of this can hardly be overstated. Because the FY2017 financial statements have *not* been judged materially accurate by the auditors, this defeated the hope Pacifica had to present soon an *uninterrupted* sequence of audited *materially accurate* financial statements to grantors, including the famed Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Grantors almost always insist on an *uninterrupted* sequence: they need a demonstration of not episodic but *sustained* financial responsibility & even of organisational performance, that rather than good intentions or testimonials. Therefore Pacifica has to start again, possibly with FY2018 – I say possibly because that year's financial records, or lack of them, precede NETA's arrival in late 2018, & are an exacerbation of FY2017, & likewise will almost certainly eventuate in 'the auditor's inability to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence about multiple elements of the financial statements'. Scott of the Savannah (shorts, not skis) even explicitly mentioned that the FY2018 audit may be finished before the pension liability is knocked into shape, given a figure that is materially accurate. (Sounds like abuse to me.)
2 of 3
ReplyDeleteSo when can one expect, at the earliest, the availability of a run of two audited *materially accurate* annual financial statements? It would be February 2021 (those for FY2019 & 2020). What's the CPB application cycle? They give an illustration: "NFFS [Non-Federal Financial Support] earned in a grantee's 2018 fiscal year will be used to calculate the CSG [Community Service Grant] awarded in CPB's fiscal year 2020, which begins October 1, 2019" (Financial Reporting Guidelines: Fiscal Year 2018, p. 1 – PDF p. 5).
https://www.cpb.org/sites/default/files/stations/frg/2018_frg.pdf (the current edition)
So the first CPB Radio CSG disbursement competition that Pacifica could enter would be in CPB's FY2021 (coincidentally, the same year-end as Pacifica's), with the first CPB money dropping into the coffers in FY2022, in fall 2021 & spring 2022. Oh: that's six months after the end of 'the loan'.
But if CPB were happy with a single financial audit, when could the first money come in? Pacifica's FY2019 audited statements of finances *& listenership, etc.* may be available, at the earliest, in February 2020; CPB would scrutinise them in their (& Pacifica's) FY2020; & a grant would be disbursed during FY2021, in fall 2020 & spring 2021. So just before the end of 'the loan'.
It should be noted that the CPB rules do not speak of the need for any run of such annual statements, even two. But let's get real. The CPB themselves explain why *positive* audited financial evidence is necessary:
"[t]he primary objective of the auditor's examination is to determine whether the financial statements fairly present the entity's financial position and financial activity in accordance with GAAP [Generally Accepted Accounting Principles], applied on a consistent basis with the preceding period. To determine this, the entity's accounting system and related internal control structure are reviewed to ensure that they are operating effectively and that adequate records are being maintained" (CPB, Financial Reporting Guidelines: Fiscal Year 2018, p. 23 – PDF p. 27)
Pacifica's FY2017 audit couldn't deliver the demonstration of 'fair presentation by the financial statements', nor 'effective operation of the accounting system & related internal controls', nor 'maintenance of adequate records'. And why would anyone think the FY2018 will be any different? Moreover, picture yourself sitting in a CPB office, in March next year. Pacifica's application comes up on your screen. Would you be happy approving an application testing the financial health criteria solely against the FY2019 financial audit? Or, knowing your career rests on the quality of your decision-making concerning the shelling out of taxpayers' money, would you take the longer view, one longer than the last 12 months, penning a memo, starting off by saying that the previous three audits came in as qualified opinion, disclaimer, disclaimer? And after noting that this radio network has made a run of 13 consecutive years of losses, the last annual net income being that of FY2006, would you conclude that the only reasonable way to protect public money requires Pacifica, at a minimum, to show a run of two years of 'clean' (unmodified) audits? Fair's fair, yes?
That's the significance of that intangible asset, credibility.
3 of 3
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, Pacifica has to cope with 'the loan': the fifth quarterly interest payment is due next week (from the dedicated bank account required by the lender for the first six payments); the final six of them start c. 31Dec2019, from Pacifica's general account (if there's anything in it); & the $3.265m principal is due c. 31Mar2021. This loan has been provided by profit-making donor-advised accounts held by the Foundation for the Jewish Community, known outside 'the community' as FJC, & is located in NYC (Julie Hammerman, JLens Investor Network, 9Oct2013, bottom left of the homepage, in 'Case Studies').
https://www.jlensnetwork.org/
Under 'the loan', Pacifica has to find, at the current interest rate of 8.5%, $277 525 a year, so a monthly $23 127, & for the 18 months, $416 288. If the rate goes to 9%, it's $293 850 a year. *It means that in FY2020, Pacifica needs to achieve the best part of a $300k surplus just to pay the interest that year*. How likely is this, after what will almost certainly be *this run of 13 consecutive years of losses*, which started on 1Oct2006? The final quarterly interest payment is due c. 31Mar2021, an important date, as that's when Pacifica is also contracted to pay the $3.265m principal. Can Pacifica survive until then?
Survival requires planning, which in turn requires competence, including knowledge. Importantly, concerning the auditors' FY2017 disclaimer, are its consequences clear to Pacifica's finest, the aristos, the members of the LSB's, the PNB committees, the PNB itself? Each one of them should be asked directly what they see as the significance for Pacifica of AU-C section 705.
2) Almost forgot: FY2017 was a loss of c. $86k, the lowest in the current 11-year sequence of consecutive losses (pushing into second place FY2015's $168k), & a great improvement on FY2016's $2.031m. (Yes, Pacifica's last annual net income was FY2006, $1.663m.)
3) To acknowledge a contrary opinion on CPB, this was made at last night's Finance Cttee, Tu25June, by CFO Tamra Swiderski (also a senior NETA employee: no conflict of interest?). She didn't mention the FY2017 auditor's report, nor the significance of its disclaimer, but in replying to a query from WBAI's R Paul Martin, she said this concerning the earliest Pacifica could receive CPB money, by using the FY2019 auditor's report: "I believe the funding actually would be in [FY]2021" (the topic occupied the last 7mins of the meeting). Poor Paul seemed a lil shocked. Even here I suggest she was trying to let Pacifica down gently; no-one should be surprised if it takes a year longer.
KPFK and Pacifica: Update 2019
ReplyDeleteby Kim Kaufman
https://medium.com/@KimKaufman/kpfk-and-pacifica-update-2019-11fcef73e2d9