Saturday, August 3, 2013

The Bored, er, Board vs Evil Fitch: ITEM #12

Gawd, shoot us it the head.  ITEM #12 takes almost 20 minutes to not resolve.  Fitch is sent packing and, added bonus, any observers have been put to sleep, thus protecting the Inner Parties secrets from getting out.  And gives our Elite Cadre a golden opportunity for some ace subliminal propaganda practice!

From audio, approx  05:19 -21:20

Comrades feel free to make corrections/addition in comments, as half these people mutter and mumble and guesses have been made in places.  Important corrections will be made after we return from our Cadre Campout at Mt. Bachelor.

God help us all.

Er, we mean, SOLIDARITY



[Conser]Anything else? Um executive director's we have one a email version? At this point?
I think we can strike that because the executive director is not going to  be available until Sept 9th.  Um, any replies to all please uh um  remove ....address...
-is there uh, in respect of your discussion of budget mediation, since she's not here can we post post that? 
-wait, she is here
-so are you not on medical leave?
-i am on medical leave. I'm here to uh comment on-
-point of clarification:
-I'm unclear on your status. Um glad to see you, a board member I'm unclear what status you're in, because it's my understanding you're on medical leave.  So I think we need to clarify just how to appropriately to proceed.  um
-That would be fine
-First we probably need to deal with the the agenda, we're in the middle of trying to do that.
-I'm of the ----- executive director's report up since(?) Lynn is here and I'm guessing she wants' to get out of here as soon as possible. [laughter]
- I am here to provide testimony, as the board didn't want to do this in closed secession on agenda item number 12. And I am also here to discuss the item...sorry , I didn't have the time to print out my agenda, uh, discussion of finances and development that mark(?) brought up. 
-Point of clarification:  I thinks this is a little, I guess I'm a little confused...because either board has to first establish an agenda, and once the board establishes agenda, we can look to whatever's on there(?).  How we can do anything else. I guess I'm I'm feeling for us to make one decision at a time.
Okay, what's the um...
[cross talk]
-my proposal is to ---executive director's report--indistinct[speak up damn it!]-she didn't want to stay here til the end
-yeah, this is going to be fun to document.  I'll let you guys know ahead of time--
[cross talk]
So you made a motion
-yes, --
I don't know that anybody's seconded it...
-I will second that.
Okay, move to the uh, item number 19 where?
-um--[indistinct] sure
After 11?  before 11?
-before 11
Okay.  So between 10 and 11. Any discussion on the motion?
-Could you repeat the motions please?
The motion is to move item 19 to between item's 10 and 11.
-Guess I would speak in favor of the motion as long as we're moving a conversation.  I would also appeal there's a lot of really important business and I think I want to challenged my fellow board members to be disciplined , and to not be going over things that, things that need to be repeated.  Um, cuz we've got a lot of work to do...
Um okay so, so uh, further..
-There's a motion on the floor [indistinct]
All in favor of moving item 19 to between item 10 and 12 . Okay, one  two three...four five in favor?
-Everybody hands up in favor
One two three four five...are you voting? One two three four--I only see five. Michael do you have your hand up?  No. I see five.  All opposed?  one, two, three, okay, um, abstentions?
okay, one abstention , okay um, ah, motion failed.  So um item, number 2 stays where it is. 
-You mean Item 6
Yeah 6. Okay, so uh, further business on the agenda. 
-I have ta, I'm sorry, I have ta much as I don't like, I have to ask for some clarification. Respecting what is involved with --medial leave of absence.  We as -something- a member we cannot participate as a staff person because of medical leave of absence. Precludes that.  And As much as I'd really like to hear what Lynn has to say, we can't as person decide which part of corporation...[indistinct]  respectful of the original request.  As such I'd like to bring this up somehow[indistinct] mainly that those issues can be uh deferred until she is off medical leave ....
Okay my understanding is that we do not have as far as we know an attorney at the meeting , um but we do have some people who are [something] in policy, and the , from the bounced message I got today, My understanding is that medical has begun, (?)today today. Uh, and that Mark's,  uh, Mark's proposal is is valid , that anyone who is a member (?) can public comment, but not meeting proper, am I am I uh, gotten the policy correct?
-Not a motion.  A clarification. yes.  I think without a doctor's release , it's not appropriate to be engaging in an employer/employee situation.  I'm very sympathetic to her situation.  Would like to hear ...but we really need to be clean?) and appropriate, um, for the sake of[indistinct]
Okay. Um. 
[Cross talk.  Indistinct]
-The board can invite somebody in as a expert(?) witness.[Indistinct]
-Point of information on this!
-The suggestion is that ..
-Just really briefly! You can , you can suspend the rules for the purpose of allowing this person to do what they need to do, and then go back to the rules! You don't need to make it hard.
- We're not "Roberts Rules" 
[cross talk]
-On feluma(?) employer/employee relationship.  It's really more of legal status.
-I heard her say she came to comment,
-testify...I thought
Okay, um, the,
-So Lynn did you come to just comment?  Or...
-Um, in the previous communications with the board I have repeatedly said that item 12 is not clear, don't have all the information, There are things about that that should not be spoken about in open public comment, and i have all the documents that regards that particular issue, and that iff the board acts without this and wants to act without it , happy to put it into my brief case and leave.  as for the agenda Item that has to do with fundraising , financial..without Paula here , I believe it's withing the foundation's best interests to have your development director here. I saw that on the agenda , I thought I should make comment. If you don't want that comment now and you'd like to hear that at the Sept board meeting, happy to do that.
-Can you repeat the point you made though.  the original...
-[indistinct] Opposed to here what Lynn wishes to say to us.  I do not believe there's a legal standing for it.
-My response to that is that's a separate issues, Michael.  Take one issue at a time.  I'm trying to clarify the legal situation we're in.  We're in a delicate situation, and I think it would be inappropriate  and wrong for us to proceed with you as an employ in medical leave, yet engage you as an employee.  So I'm asking you to clarify" are you here as a member to comment at random?  or are you hear as the station navigator? Which if you are I need to share that I think it's completely inappropriate and we need to disengage.
-Historically the board  will engage testimony from the public.  Again, I am happy to leave, It was not my intention to be here. I feel extremely strongly about the board making decisions  and not being adequately informed.
-I would like to apologized for the awkwardness of this, but it's inappropriate for us to participate in an employer/employee conversation. I would look forward to having that very important information in the appropriate forum . Without a doctor's release  this is inappropriate. 
-I would make a motion to table Item number 12 until Lynn returns to active work
Okay motions on the table
-Point of clarification , first we need to establish what we're doing before we --into other business.. in my opinion
Uh so
-So, I would like to make a motion that we are not engaging in a conversation with Lynn as an employee ..
Okay, motion is suspended for the moment , for point of clarification, but will be addressed.. Okay so
-Point of clarification, are we clarifying the employer/employee relationship right now and it's my understanding  since the medical leave began today that we as a board could be liable if we engage the executive director as an employee from now until Sept 9th.  That is my understanding.
-Or until we have a medical release so we can have an appropriate conversation. That will be welcomed. 
So uh with with that in mind, I want to get a sense of the room , uh, is is is there further discussion on this issue? Is there anything in the bylaws or ORS that contradict what Tim says?
-Is there no reason why we can't get this super secret documents in some other way? Do the super secret documents have to go a super secret place? I mean  the problem with this issue is that the board president is being dragged through the mud(Becky Chiao anyone?), all kinds of ways, but because so much of this case is about executive session, he can't even really defend himself. I mean, he's caught in a perfect catch 22, That's the problem with this case. So if there's documents about it, I like them to be filed with someone...though now I understand he would be able to do that, until Sept 9th.
-We can't even have this conversation.
-the board can explore other alternatives. But right now we probably need to clarify what we're doing at this moment.
-Okay...Super secret documents ...
Okay so my um understanding is that we are, we are not able...yes robbie?
-I'm wondering uh, I'm wondering if we have one member of the executive session who doesn't have a conflict of interest in this matter..Matthew?  I'm wondering if Matthew would be able to present these documents if we need to go into closed session to be able to discuss and shed light on this.

-Again, a point of clarification: could we establish the issue of point
-And then we can go into all the other tangents, but right now let's not lose our focus . We need to define our relation ship in the moment.  Please stay on point.
Everyone at this table aside from Lynn in an employer of the[indistinct] so  even Matthew would not be in a position to engage her as I understand
-That is my understanding , that's exactly right, but i think right now the motion of the floor is just be clear and deliberative about our relationship right now. Respect the medical leave and the boundaries, so we have a healthy process that further complicates it
Okay, uh I think our stance has been clarified. So um with that in mind , we do need a doctor's order, in order to legitimately interact as employees with Lynn . At this moment. Now uh, can we go back to Rabia's motion?
[Cross talk]
- I had to clarify we can't engage with her while she's on medical leave...
 My first motion was to table this item until Lynn returns from ---
We're still in agenda at this point.  We made a clarification, now we're back to agenda Items. So what's on the table is to table Item 12 til a later meeting. Is there a second on that?
-No actually we were back to records for mediation...?We were considering doing?
Uh we we we , those got put back on , they can be taken off again --Active motion: Is Rabia's on the table. Is there a second for Rabia's motion to move item 12 ?  Any second for moving item twelve?  Or tabling item 12 Until a later meeting? [Silence]

Okay, motion fails for lack of second. 


  1. Anyone care to explain what Item# 12 is?

  2. Board members to Fitch:

    LA LA LA LA LA - I can't hear you!

    As KBOO circles the drain, it will become increasingly amusing that law firms generally don't want to represent KBOO, since one suspects that legal representation will become increasingly important to KBOO and the board.

    Refusing to talk to Fitch because she is on medical leave? Really?

    1. This exchange is what I referred to in a prior thread. In the mostly good transcription white is mostly Conch, but occasionally other people like MP are also in the white, Red is Lynn, Purple is Timothy, Green is Rabia, Orange was Joe Uris from the audience, Yellow is Lisa Loving.

      What item 12 is all about is trying to sweep under the rug the main problem related to the $1500 Conch spent. I've been working on a summary of this and hope to post it perhaps Sunday night.

      This exchange is early in the evening where Lynn, who felt strongly enough to make an appearance while on leave was rebuffed and told to go home. She had all the relevant "super secret documents" and the KKK members on the board successfully manipulated the newer members who were not on the board last year to "trust us" and refuse to look at the relevant documents. They later voted on item 12 without seeing any documents in either open or closed session, without any actual discussion of the issues, granting Conch a blanket pass on his actions.

      No, try again, this isn't quite accurate. They didn't give him a blanket pardon, they declared as an action of the board that Conch's actions were proper. This is actually worse than saying "ya did wrong, but we'll let it go this time". Remember Watergate? It wasn't the break-in that brought Nixon down, it was the cover-up.

      Rabia's amendment was correct. Table or remove item 12 from the agenda completely. Table until Lynn could return in September and the board could hear what she had to say, or simply give up and ignore the issue. But by insisting that the issue be brought before the board for a third time (twice now in closed session) this re-opens the issue which could have gone away. Dumb. And the motion was worse than doing nothing at all, it demanded that the board not just give Conch a pass, it demanded that it go on record as declaring that the expense and purpose was legitimate. Dumb. Now the entire board is complicit in what happened and fell for the old "trust us" routine. If the new members on the board trusted the results of the prior two closed sessions, they should have supported Rabia's motion to table the item. That way they would refuse to reopen old business, but not make a declaration nothing is wrong and look like idiots. To affirm that there is no problem without looking at the evidence is irresponsible and shows they aren't fit to serve and should be removed from the board en mass.

      And why did this have to come up again? Hadrian tried to get both the AG and press interested in the story. Nothing resulted except Hadrian being booted from the board. It was already over, and had the old board members not panicked and simply waited this would have been history. It wasn't even in the WWeek story at all. WHY HAVE ITEM 12 AT ALL???

      What's particularly interesting is Michael P's repeated objection to the concept that this had to be discussed in closed session. I spoke with MP and got his take on this, very interesting. He said that it should be all in open session or not at all. What's also interesting is that Joe Uris was irritated that the board would act without looking at the actual documents and without any discussion. He said suspend the rules, but the board listened instead to the bogus arguments from Tim.

      In my earlier post in another thread I explained that while Tim seems to be protecting KBOO from liability of having an employee on medical leave participate, but it's a fudge to use FMLA as an excuse as KBOO is not subject to FMLA laws. Convenient ruse to get Lynn out of the room. And while Lynn is on medical leave, she is not getting paid medical leave. So essentially, no doctor's note is required as it's not FMLA related, and as KBOO doesn't have medical leave pay technically I believe she is on vacation.

  3. KBOO is in good hands, Comrades!

    The "processes" are working!

    Nothing to see here!

    "Timothy Martin Flanagan More information sharing and full and public communications are always preferable.
    KBOO is in good hands. With volunteers, members and friends working together in various meetings, KBOO & other alternative media resources can become even
    more vital and effective. The processes (due & creative) seem to be working.
    Timothy Martin Flanagan's photo.
    5 hours ago · Edited · 1"

  4. the purple text is board member timothy welp

  5. 12. Consideration of the legitimacy of legal expenditures for Fall 2012 10 minutes

    Lisa Loving

    PURPOSE: To The Board of Directors shall attempt to come to a decision regarding the legitimacy of legal expenditures incurred between the KBOO Foundation and Sussman Shank LLP to be legitimate.

    MOTION: Based on background information detailed in the body of this item, the Board of Directors deems the expenditures incurred in September and October of 2012 between the KBOO Foundation and Sussman Shank LLP to be legitimate.

    BACKGROUND: In September of 2012, KBOO's employment law firm Sussman Shank was called upon for counsel and documentation by KBOO Board President S.W. Conser, acting on time-sensitive Foundation business between regularly-scheduled Board meetings. In the absence of a viable Executive Committee, the Member-at-Large having been recently removed, and with the newly-appointed Interim Station Manager traveling abroad, the Board President acted under authority of Article VII, Section 6 of KBOO's bylaws.

    At this time, counsel was sought from Sussman Shank regarding circumstances discussed in closed session of the Board on September 24, 2012. Following this closed session, related action was not immediately taken by the board but was set in motion, at the suggestion of the Board, by the Interim Station Manager, as indicated in the Interim Manager Report (Item 8/Management: "We are revising volunteer/access policies") delivered at the October 22, 2012 Board meeting.

    Subsequent access-related incidents, discussed in closed session of the Board on November 26, 2012, led to action by the Board, namely "Removal of a KBOO Foundation Director for Cause."

    Documentation was also sought from Sussman Shank in September of 2012, based on a need arising from related circumstances discussed in closed session of the Board on November 28, 2011 and December 19, 2011.

  6. you should type up the text when item 12 was discussed during the meeting, it's pretty ridiculous. (I know that's asking a lot).

  7. In the endless search for more lulz, when does KBOO go through its annual budget process?

    Be pretty funny when reality intersects with this crowd, and they realize that the Gods of the Copybook Headings can't be thrown off the board, can't be told to shut up because they are on medical leave, and that the board can't pass a resolution deeming KBOO's financial resources to be adequate.

  8. Item 12 is confusing because Loving is combining 2 completely different incidents where Conch spent KBOO money on legal expenses and this was done with urging and consent from the majority of the paid staff while the E.D. (Lynn) was out of the country on the 1st incident. The 2nd incident, Lynn told Conch she was taking care of a certain issue and not to contact legal counsel and run up bills. He did it anyway, once again at the urging of a few members on staff. Both times, as far as I was able to find out, the Executive Committee was never brought together for discussion before money was spent. The combined bills were well over $1500. Both incidents were related to the same newly elected Board member that the majority of the staff did not want to have on the Board. Loving seems to have a hard time walking and chewing bubble gum at the same time, so I guess I get were it gets confusing. Lynn is highly organized and competent, and would have shown written proof of the 'issue' to the rest of the Board. She makes sure she has done her due diligence. So I'm sure Glorious Leader and her Squeeze, do not want Lynn to talk to the Board and probably sent 'sekrit' hand signals to the 'Puppet President' to remove Lynn from the meeting. Of course the Board is now top heavy with the Elite Cadre that share 1 brain between them. So, maybe the union staff-collective-employee-who runs the station behind the real Managers back, just has to close her eyes and think real hard and send esp messages to the puppets on the Board. Kind of like the BORG do in their collective. Not quite as flashy of a show as the 'twinkly fingers' we got to witness on the video from May's board meeting, but more effective.
    It's even more funny that all these meetings are being recorded. KBOO might be able to afford damages in 1 more lawsuit, hope there isn't more or the Board may need to take out a mortgage on the building. Plus, how can people actually enjoy listening to themselves act like complete idiots in a public setting? Or is this another ploy of the Inner Circle to throw Evil Fitch off her guard and increase the members of the Inner Circle and fill up the re-education center in Happy Valley with happy campers?
    The budget cycle for next fiscal year should be getting put together now and final in September. That should be an entertaining process and result, since the Glorious Leader and the union-staff-collective-self proclaimed manager and guardian of KBOO have sent in some loyal and trusted cadre to 'help' the finance committee make the budget for the Puppet Board to approve. I wonder if anyone will think to look at real income potential to see if it will pay for all the new shiny toys the union-employees will get that KBOO can't afford or if they will just draw up an employee contract that KBOO will be bound to. Well, bound to it until there is no money left. As for the Board restricted operating reserve; I think that can be called the Evil Fitch trust fund (thanks to the constant incompetency of the Elite Cadre and puppet Board. It's good to be the Glorious Leader. You can scream, kick your feet, tell any manner of paranoid lie and then blame someone else for the mess you encouraged. I just hope they budget for a really pretty padlock, we like shiny objects!

    1. Remember Traitor Brown's resignation letter from May:

      "For the past several years, KBOO has operated in a deficit. The Foundation
      has used most of it surplus to continue operations. Now, that surplus is
      nearly depleted. Unless changes are implemented in the immediate future,
      KBOO will find itself without the necessary funds to continue operations."

      Yeah, paying for a bunch of shiny new union benefits will work well.

      One thing that the Inner Party fails to realize is that financial crises accelerate - once word gets out that KBOO is in real financial trouble, vendors will start demanding payment in advance, and anyone with a financial claim on the station will demand immediate payment, lest they never get paid at all.

      I suppose they could try to mortgage the building, but how much money is an Evil Bank willing to loan to an organization pretty transparently entering a death spiral?

  9. KBOO webchimps got too excited with the wrench again:

    Site off-line

    The site is currently not available due to technical problems. Please try again later. Thank you for your understanding.

    If you are the maintainer of this site, please check your database settings in the settings.php file and ensure that your hosting provider's database server is running. For more help, see the handbook, or contact your hosting provider.

    1. Site STILL off line? It's been almost 11 hours...

    2. Surely you don't expect the site to be fixed on a weekend, Comrade?

      What counts at KBOO is ideological reliability, not technical competence!

  10. I've been told that new board members don't know how to get a KBOO account, and post content. There was a very long discussion at the last BOD meeting that it would be good if there was a central email account for people to contact the entire board with, and that many of the members of the board had not posted an existing email account linked to their names on the website. Oh well, there are over 500 volunteers who can do this. Apparently the new leaders of the BOD have been asking other members to post and fix content, as we've seen they can't even get the dates of the next meeting fixed themselves.

    One KBOO member has told me that the server is so unstable that it needs to be rebooted almost daily. And I think there was mention that there is a new web consultant, not the same one who responded to the prior blog threads about the website.

    If the website stays offline long enough, will anyone besides SKFSK notice?

    1. "If the website stays offline long enough, will anyone besides SKFSK notice?"

      Or dare say anything?
      Anyone know who runs the KBOO Facebook page?

      That seems to be used in lieu of the website for announcements.

    2. "And I think there was mention that there is a new web consultant, not the same one who responded to the prior blog threads about the website. "

      Caught that. It's like Conser's friend wants to distance himself (and the Clinton Street Theater) from this fiasco...

    3. Perhaps comrade Loving could find a new web consultant, I hear she has some experience at recruiting web "professionals".

    4. Now we don't even get the drupal message that something's wrong. Either I searched in the moment someone is actually rebooting the server, or it's gotten way worse. Right now the web browser tells me there's no response from

    5. same here
      Server timed out error
      wtf? and the facebook page's got nothing
      do programers not check the website?
      this place is supposed to be open 24/7

    6. "this place is supposed to be open 24/7"

      LOL. Normal organizations also respond to inquiries from their bank in less than two months.

      You can't sprel "competence" without KBOO, Comrades! Oh wait - maybe you can...

  11. Good grief, we don't even get the generic error 404 page not found. Nothing, like the site never existed.

    1. Now that the Inner Party has triumphed, we have no further need to communicate with you disgusting proles.

      Besides, the money we save not having a web site is money that we can use to help fund the Iron Rice Bowl!

      You need to have priorities!