MINUTES
Fresno Free College Foundation Board of Directors
May 9, 2000
Call to Order: Meeting called to order at 7:15 p.m. at the Unitarian Universalist Church, Fresno, California.
Determination of Quorum: Catherine Campbell, Sari Dworkin, Bruce Kennedy, Robert Munce, Dixie Salazar, Deborah Speer, Rand Stover, Alex Vavoulis and Rych Withers present. Absent: Ben Amhirkanian, Kent Stratford.
Approval of Minutes: MOVED (Dworkin) / SECONDED (Munce) to accept minutes. APPROVED.
REPORTS:
President’s report: No report.
Financial report: KFCF Executive Director Vic Bedoian distributed the most recent P&L statements.
1. Resolution establishing ground rules for recall. (Continued from March 21, 2000 meeting):
Campbell and Salazar object to
open nomination process, preferring that only slates be nominated.
Speer notes that open nominations allow all members to nominate and vote
for whomever they choose to, rather than be restricted to the choices made by
factions they may not belong to. Additional discussion about definition of
slates. Kennedy insists discussion
stick to the recall process, and asks if recalled board members would be
permitted to stand for re-election. Campbell
asks board to offer resignations. Vavoulis
objects. MOTION
(Kennedy) / SECOND (Dworkin) to
remove language from resolution regarding nominations and elections and deal
with recall issue only. MOTION
PASSED.
Campbell proposes compromise
figures for the number of words allowed each side for ballot statements and
rebuttals. Kennedy points out the
number of words should fit on a standard-sized sheet of paper, single-spaced,
and in a font size large enough to be legible. Kennedy suggests the form used in the state electoral
process and ballot pamphlets so that all statements are likely to be read
together, including word limitations. MOTION
(Campbell) / SECOND to amend the resolution to allow 425 words maximum for the
ballot statement and 225 words maximum for the rebuttal statement. MOTION
PASSED.
Campbell objects to any restrictions in content. Kennedy points out that there are legal restrictions
pertaining to libel, and other conditions.
MOTION (Campbell) / SECOND
to amend section 3 of the resolution to strike all language
restricting the number of signatories and use of affiliations.
Kennedy suggests all signatories should be co-authors, with limitations
on the number to five as specified in state election code, and not counting
against the word count of the statements. Salazar objects, with the
understanding that signatories and titles would subtract from the word count.
Kennedy objects on the basis that substituting names for merit of ideas
constitutes ad hominem argument. Dworkin
points out that many people do pay attention to the groups that support ballot
statements in making decisions. Campbell
states that the board members wishing to limit the number of signatories are
afraid of the use of influential community members to influence voters and is
attempting to censor them. AMENDMENT (Dworkin) to specify that signatories must be co-authors
of the statement signed and Foundation members, and may include other
organizational affiliations. All names and affiliations will count against the
word total. MOTION FAILS.
MOTION (Campbell) / SECOND
(Salazar) to limit
number of signatories to 10, including all other language in the previous failed
motion. Kennedy reiterates
position that the limitation should be consistent with state election code.
MOTION FAILS.
MOTION (Dworkin) / SECOND
to limit the number of signatories to no more than five; the signatories
will be co-authors and members of the Foundation, and a line indicating a
signer’s outside and primary affiliation will be permitted.
MOTION PASSES.
MOTION (Campbell) / SECOND (Dworkin) To amend resolution to include two one-hour long debates to be aired on KFCF, with numerous on-air announcements well in advance to be aired as well. Kennedy states that while the information about the recall needs to be in the hands of voters as much as possible and both sides need to get their message out, other issues arise as to ensuring the information presented in any debate is actually heard by the voting membership, what programming would be preempted, under what conditions a debate would take place, would other positions be represented besides the two board factions, etc. Bedoian reports there is capacity in the studio to take phone-ins, but there is only one line available to do so. Gunnar Jensen suggested the League of Women Voters oversee a debate. Stover pointed out that broadcast of a political debate falls under FCC equal time provisions, and there may have to be equal time provided to any reasonable request for it to represent additional viewpoints. Stover offered to research FCC regulations that may affect an on-air debate. Campbell argued that she doubted the FCC would care about a debate with only the two sides represented. Campbell stated that if the board failed to approve a debate, it would go into her ballot statement favoring a recall. Kennedy said it was irrelevant if it goes into the statement or not, if equal time provisions apply to a debate, we will have to comply with the FCC on the issue. Kennedy said if he were to oppose debates, it would not be an effort to prevent information from being presented, but to avoid running afoul of legal provisions of the FCC that may jeopardize the station license. Salazar stated the board should not be debating legal issues that aren’t known, and move forward. Kennedy proposed broadcasting a debate in the form of two board meetings of an hour in length during the evening. Campbell proposed the debate take the form of a community meeting with established ground rules, recorded and aired. Stover suggested if such a broadcast were to occur, it should be on a weekend during airtime already taken by KFCF-produced programming. Jensen asked if the League of Women Voters could be enlisted to moderate. Withers suggest a mailed notice to all members informing them of any debate well in advance. Potential dates and times were discussed. Speer asked if there would be agreement to move forward on the resolution, with finalization of plans for any debate a matter of consensus with members discussing available personal dates, ground rules, etc. taking place after this meeting when all have been able to consult personal calendars for availability. Campbell recommended that one person be responsible for organizing a debate if the board is in consensus for one, with both sides represented, and an open mic. Bedoian expressed concern that community speakers be evenly divided so that the mic isn’t dominated by one side’s speakers. Jensen reiterated that the League of Women Voters has experience in moderating such debates and would be best suited to set ground rules and moderate a debate. There was general consensus with this idea. Stover was concerned that audience participation not dilute the debate process. Salazar said the League would insure fairness of debate. AMENDMENT (Campbell) The motion will state that there will be, with details to be worked out in the future, a discussion of the pros and cons of the recall election, by the members of the board, in equal numbers and the public is invited to submit questions live on the air, moderated by the League of Women Voters. SECOND (Salazar). Kennedy says to bear in mind that not all board members think alike on all subjects, and in fact there are some great differences of opinion on many subjects, therefore all board members should be allowed to speak rather than through chosen representatives of one side or the other. AMENDMENT (Kennedy) to allow all board members the opportunity to articulate differences of opinion with the factions being represented. Campbell accepts amendment. MOTION PASSED.
Campbell inquired about the reasoning behind having the FFCF accountant act as election proctor rather than the League of Women Voters. Speer cited legal sanctions that apply to CPAs if there is found any tampering, etc. Kennedy stated that we may not wish to further burden the League with responsibility for tallying the election as they are already being asked to moderate a debate. Speer explained that by mailing ballots to the CPA’s public office, it eliminates any possibility of accusations of ballot-tampering by Board or staff members if they were to be delivered to the FFCF office. Questions arose about cost. Further questions arose about availability of either the CPA or the League offices to receive hand-delivered ballots. Carol Bequette inquired as to the potential number of ballots that may be cast. Vavoulis raised concern about the potential for an appearance of a conflict of interest as the League has been involved with the Foundation as sponsors of the Board of Supervisors broadcasts and other activities. Salazar said the Foundation CPA would have at least an equal conflict, as she is retained by the board for accounting services. Richard Stone of the Center for Non-Violence was suggested, but all agreed that since he signed the recall petition, he should not count the votes. Speer asked what the objection to the CPA was. Dworkin said there was probably little difference between having one or another CPA count votes and would support the use of the Foundation’s CPA as election proctor as called for in the resolution.
Everyone was asked to go over revised dates, as approximately 15 days were added to the dates in the original resolution to accommodate the tabling of the resolution from April 25 to May 9, 2000. Withers suggested the section on ballot package mailing include an announcement of debates. Kennedy said inclusion should be considered tentative until agreement is reached on time, place and format.
Campbell asked that the words
“Before and after” be added to the beginning of section G of the resolution,
regarding on-air announcements of the election, and add “debate.”
MOVED/SECOND/PASSED.
MOTION (Speer) / SECOND (Munce) to accept the recall resolution as amended. MOTION PASSED.
2. ANNUAL BANQUET: Speer reported that she had been contacted by Bedoian regarding availability to meet, but not by Stratford and asked that if anyone should speak with him to remind him to let her know when he can be available for meetings.
3. OTHER BUSINESS: Kennedy reminded the Board that action will be required to follow up a certified cease-and-desist letter previously approved by the Board regarding the unauthorized use of the Foundation’s initials in a domain name, and use of original FFCF Web site materials for use as the Community Radio Coalition Web site. The letter was prepared and ready to be mailed following the meeting.
The next meeting of the Fresno Free College Foundation board of directors will be June 27, 2000 at a location to be announced.