WBAI bylaws revision subcommittee straw polls favor the KPFA elecions model - twice
Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:47 am
Subject: WBAI Bylaws votes 29-10-2 for KPFA model
As a follow-up to last week's 15-4-1 straw poll endorsing the KPFA model, the WBAI Bylaws Revision Subcommittee voted last night 29-10-2 to endorse the KPFA elections model, in a straw poll that was not announced prior to the meeting.
The WBAI Bylaws Revision Subcommittee is an official Pacifica body authorized by the iPNB to develop ideas and recommendations for the iPNB and the five LABs, as part of the settlement agreement.
With these two straw polls, the Subcommittee has fulfilled its responsibility and made its recommendation twice -- clearly and unambiguously.
For the record, at least one KPFA model supporter had to leave the meeting before the vote was taken.
From: Andrew Norris
to WBAI LAB members:
below is a posting of Ray on wbaibylaws 11/19/02 which is relevant to the LAB. The LAB bits are in boldface. Andy
I will take this opportunity to post a summary of the straw polls taken during the 11/12/02 bylaws committee meeting.
First, let me indicate, for whatever it is worth, that Susan Lee, who made all the motion leading to straw poll made the request to conduct those poll during the meeting itself, and that consequently, there was no prior notification to the public (as had happened both before our meetings and those of the WBAI LAB), that straw polls taken.
Susan made 6 straw poll motions-and in all votes, participants' choices were recorded as "yes", "no", or "abstain". (Paul Surovell recorded the exact language).
The meeting was attended by about 21 people.
1) The first poll was to ask the Bylaws Revision Subcommittee to endorse
the KPFA Model.
2) The next poll "urged representatives of both the LAB and the New York
iPNB members to support the 'KPFA Election Model'".
3) Bylaws committee invites New York iPNB to participate in its Tuesday,
November 19, 2002 to discuss their views on bylaws process and their votes
on election issues at the next iPNB meeting in Houston (Nov. 22-24).
4) Ask LAB to set up special meeting, before *any* vote is taken on bylaws
election issues and use time for discussions of and answer questions from
public about such issues.
5) Should LAB question period be at least 1 /2 hour, or at least 2 hours?
6) Support for "at least 2 hours"
top of page | bylaws revisions process info page | governance proposals | bylaws etc | home