More below: At 6:14 PM -0800 2/17/08, Melinda Iley-Dohn wrote:
Kevin. I know about the By-Laws. Nobody was refused access.
Yes, look at the transcript.
They were told to follow protocol
There IS NO PROTOCOL especially one that Dan tried to make up out of whole cloth. The protocol is in the Bylaws.
and get permission not to barge in
Despite the fact that directors need no permission or preauthorization, but instead have a duty to look after the health of the Foundation's books and records, we did in fact have permission, from BOTH the IGM and the Business Manager and her bookkeeper. Where did you get the idea that we barged in? By this time you should know that you must really investigate the stretchers told by certain people, every time they make statements.
without authorization.
Again, again, again, the authorization is in the Bylaws. Read them again.
Would you be so understanding if this was done by a Direcor who was a part of the JUC?
Any director has the right and the duty to inspect Foundation records, and in fact has failed in her or his fiduciary responsibility is she or he has deliberately looked the other way even after having been presented with evidence of wrongdoing. Unfortunately when some directors try to thwart others from attending to this responsibility, one can only suspect that there is something to hide.
I didn't think so.It's also about looking at the whole problem not just the books at WBAI. We needto address the fact that the ultimate financial person has not addressed HUGE financial issues.
Or, in fact, has addressed them in ways that need to be looked at closely.
What I want to know is why people keep letting the CFO have a walk.
Perhaps you don't follow the chain of command: the national office has to write off on what is done at each station: when things get overlooked or swept under a rug or become part of a shell game, we have to look at the old Chinese proverb: A dead fish begins to rot at the head. And then the rot travels down to the tail.
The problem isn't in NY it's in California where the person who is paid to keep WBAI in line is letting them get away with out being held accountable.
And this is what the Director's rights to inspect the books are all about. I don't understand why you don't make that connection.
Nobody should have to sneak in.
Well, in fact, they might: when directors went into the National Office, after telling the staff what they were looking for, they found that the files had been sanitized, cleaned out, and that they had been, to coin a phrase, snookered. So there is some rationale behind the Bylaws that do NOT require advance notice, etc.
We should have this working properly without the drama.
Only because the JUC in New York insists that no one should ever, ever know how that station is run is there drama.
That IS after all what he is paid to do.
Agreed, but there is no oversight there: who is watching the watcher? No one.
The Directors shouldn't have to do the CFO"s job for him. That is counterproductive.
Well, they shouldn't, but they must if they are not to be sued for failing in their fiduciary responsibility to keep the Foundation honest. What would anyone have to fear if they were doing a good job?
Take a look at the most recent report from the auditors of the Foundation books, which would tell you what areas have been flagged and which are working as well as they should. Find out why the WBAI LSB has not produced any minutes since 2006. Ask where the weekly reports from station management to the PNB are, that the PNB Finance Committee required to see to determine if the WBAI Recovery Plan was actually being implemented. Ask when the last time the WBAI membership database was examined for duplicates, phony "gift" subscriptions, missing names of volunteers who were not JUC supporters, and other anomalies.
And then ask what the Directors have done about the situation at WBAI. Berthold did a heroic job on the PNB on both the financial and evaluation committees, but was thwarted by the JUC majority at every turn. There are a lot of people who benefit from a PNB that gets all tied up in knots over an ED's severance pay but doesn't want to look at charges of theft, corruption, and malfeasance by its employees. Why would a director at WBAI try to interfere with another director's attempt to examine the sources of these problems, instead of organizing such an inspection her or himself?
You should be looking to the PNB and asking them why every director is not inspecting his or her own station and, if that is in good shape, helping us out at WBAI so we can find the source of our problems.
And re-reading the Bylaws once a month might help you understand the responsibility that Directors have. I'm sorry they don't choose to use it - but "Why not?" is what you should be asking.
Carolyn
Melinda Kevin White <cuitlacoche1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Melinda, please refer to the by laws. A director can inspect the records. ----- Original Message ---- From: Melinda Iley-Dohn <Iley_dohn@xxxxxxxxx> To: NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 12:41:55 PMSubject: Re: [NewPacifica] Re: [PacificaRadiowaves] Re: Directors have to follow rules too!Kevin,Dan Siegel did not say that an audit can't be done. He is asking that proper authorizaton be obtained first. An elected delegate's obligation is first to get proper authorization before they start doing anything with our most sensitive doccumentation. There is a reason that accountants and lawyers have to be liscensed. This is how you keep them honest. Have you ever heard of a CPA or attorney who was allowed to work with a liscense who had a felony conviction? No way. With financial records you aren't allowed to even look at a record much less have access to doing transactions with the accounts involved with them, without a background check. I should know. I have had such a background run on me and I have a file with the FBI that includes my handprints (the whole hand not just the fngers) because the SEC demands it for you to get a liscense.I know Carolyn Birden, I have worked with her a lot and I believe that her intentions were good. Unfortunately if we let the good guys have unathorized access we haveto let the bad guys have access too. Imagine having a Director who demandedto have complete unredacted copies of membership rolls. That would mean that theywould have bank account with routing numbers and credit card numbers for every single sustaining member. We do not run crimminal background checks like theydo for people with financial access in business. All we would need would be to have one person who has a felony background to take such a file. Think of the damage!Melinda . Kevin White <cuitlacoche1@ <http://yahoo.com/>yahoo.com> wrote:Nalini writes: "Dan Siegel is correct when he states that there cannot be a free forall."This is not "free for all." This is an elected director's obligation. There are fiscal problems at one of the five stations. It makes perfect sense to preform an audit.I work for a top 10 wealth advisor with a vast auditing department. Audits keep everyone honest.K [message truncated for space]
-- ----------------------- Carolyn M. Birden 212 932 2422 917 520 1268 -----------------------
Attachment:
Directorsrights1.doc
Description: MS-Word document
Attachment:
Transcript_Siegel_Birden.doc
Description: MS-Word document