NALINI: "...This is not about the past incidents, but about how the organization is going to deal with future requests..." The past is not past. Who was at the meeting that put forth this proposal to institutionalize the stonewalling that management used in the past? Lonnie Hicks, who was blocking inspections "in the past", and Dan Siegel, who was doing it just a few weeks ago. They would love to be able to say "the PNB told me to do it this way". NALINI: "Who calls who? Who does what? In what timeframe?" Duh! The director who wants to inspect calls the manager of the office to be inspected, IF he or she CHOOSES to give advance notification. The experience at Pacifica has been that advance notice is used to put records out of reach (by hiding them or, for all we know, by destroying them). It also serves to alert enemies of transparency (such as Bob Lederer and Ray LaForrest) to converge on the scene in an effort to harass the inspectors. Who does what? The director GOES to the office, and says: I want to look at ______; please show me where you keep it. In what timeframe? From whenever the director can get there until the director has inspected all that he or she wants to inspect. If it takes longer than "2 or 3 hours", so be it. Obviously Hicks, Siegel, Lederer et al. hope to use a recipe from the past to sabotage future inspections: three years ago, management stalled until one of the directors (in NYC for a PNB meeting) had to return home. I suppose Nalini understands the Bill of Rights as limiting freedom of speech to whatever times and whatever forms are convenient for the government. --Frank LeFever =============================================== --- In NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Nalini Lasiewicz" <LasiewiczN@...> wrote: > > --- In NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Carolyn Birden <cmcb007@> > wrote: > > > > Any restriction, no matter how "reasonable," is a restriction on an > > absolute (the word is in the California code) right of directors. > > > I will pose the same question to you as I did to Joeseph. > > Please draft a little few sentences that would be part of an > operations manual. > > Here's the set up. A Director wants to review records. Now what? > How do they go about it? > > I can't ask this in any simplier way. I trust that you understand > that a corporation documents it's policies and procedures. Please > tell me what you think the reasonable procedure is. This is not > about the past incidents, but about how the organization is going to > deal with future requests. how would you do it? Who calls who? Who > does what? In what timeframe? > > Nalini ===================================================