Return to Houston Radio Report homepage

KPFT’s Local Advisory Board Routinely Violates Federal Law, Does not Perform Its Required Duties and is Not Reflective of the Houston Community

In return for receiving federal dollars (through the Corporation of Public Broadcasting), non-profit radio stations are required to have regular public meetings of a community advisory board (CAB). The purpose of this group, called the local advisory board (LAB) at Pacifica, is to review whether the station is meeting the community’s needs.

The current KPFT LAB is non-functional and in violation of federal law. Specifically:

A. KPFT’s LAB is not performing its legally required oversight and advisory role.

According to federal law, the purposes of the CAB are:

review the programming goals established by the station,

review the service provided by the station

review significant policy decisions rendered by the station,

advise the governing board of the station whether the programming…is meeting the specialized education and culture needs of the communities. The advisory board may make recommendations to the governing board to meet those specialized needs

(US Code Title 47, Section 396(k)).

We have been regularly attending the public session of the LAB over the last year (3/2101, 4/18/01, 5/23/01, 6/20/01, 8/22/01) and can report that the KPFT LAB has:

-Not reviewed the programming goals, services or decision-making at KPFT.

-Not made any recommendations or offered advice to KPFT management.

LAB meetings are comprised of a short (uninformative) report by manager Ganter, followed by silence from the LAB and then (universally negative) comment from the audience on the LAB’s performance. Manager Ganter refuses to answer audience questions and instead gives an (equally) uninformative wrap-up to the meeting. Any and all audience suggestions (or agenda points offered by LAB member Teresa Allen) are taken into executive session by board Chair Susan Darrow, never to return.

B. KPFT’s Lab Violates the Federal Telecommunications Law on Public Meetings

The Federal Telecommunications explicitly details the conduct of meetings for the LAB

(4) Funds may not be distributed pursuant to this subsection to the Public Broadcasting Service or National Public Radio (or any successor organization), or to the licensee or permittee of any public broadcast station, unless the governing body of any such organization, any committee of such governing body, or any advisory body of any such organization, holds open meetings preceded by reasonable notice to the public. All persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the board, or of any such committee or body, and no person shall be required, as a condition to attendance at any such meeting, to register such person's name or to provide any other information. Nothing contained in this paragraph shall be construed to prevent any such board, committee, or body from holding closed sessions to consider matters relating to individual employees, proprietary information, litigation and other matters requiring the confidential advice of counsel, commercial or financial information obtained from a person on a privileged or confidential basis, or the purchase of property or services whenever the premature exposure of such purchase would compromise the business interests of any such organization. If any such meeting is closed pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph, the organization involved shall thereafter (within a reasonable period of time) make available to the public a written statement containing an explanation of the reasons for closing the meeting.

(US Code Title 47, Section 396, emphasis added)

The KPFT LAB is specifically in violation of the above law in that:

Some of the LAB meetings have had no public notice whatsoever. A few have had 1 day’s notice (via a web posting), and the 7/18/01 meeting was publicly announced at 1PM and then cancelled at 5PM on the day of the meeting. After the public confronted the current LAB on this issue they cancelled all public meetings and have been in "executive session" without any notfication whatsoever.

None of the issues taken into executive session at the last several meetings fulfill the criteria outlined in the above law. Topics such as new appointments to the LAB, a listener proposal for a programming council and an audience proposal for changing the time limit for speakers from 2 to 5 minutes were all taken into private executive session by LAB Chair Ms. Darrow, in violation of federal law.

The LAB has never given any public written notice of the reasons for its executive sessions, as clearly required by federal law.

C. The Membership of KPFT’s LAB is not reflective of the community

Federal law states "the composition of its advisory board are [2] reasonably representative of the diverse needs and interests of the communities served by such station:" (US Code Title 47, Section 396, emphasis added)

Most of the current LAB’s problems stem from the fact all but 1 of its 6 members were pre-approved and appointed directly by the station manager. All are upper-class white professional and business-types with no contacts or participation in Houston’s progressive community.

Chairwoman Susan Darrow, a bank executive, doesn’t seem familiar with either meeting etiquette or federal law. Her husband Doug Darrow, also a LAB member, rarely attends or speaks. David Eisen, an attorney, is another of the silent men on the LAB. Russell Setzekorn, a marketing executive, recently pushed a vote to close LAB meetings to the public, a clear violation of federal law. Barney Goodman, a CPA/accountant, has never to our recollections spoken publicly at a meeting. Only Teresa Allen, who has deep ties to the Houston folk music scene that KPFT claims to represent, takes her oversight and advisory responsibilities seriously. Lucy Seward, an attorney and Diane Maben, a bank executive, have recently resigned. Of the remaining six members, four are white upper-class businessman and professionals, and the other 2 are professional white woman.

The KPFT LAB members, by its repeated violations of federal law, are putting federal monies to KPFT in jeopardy, alienating the concerned listeners of the station and making a public mockery of their oversight responsibilities. We believe that the first step towards healing and change at KPFT needs to be the decertification of the current LAB and its reconstitution as a democratic body that takes its responsibilities and its mandate seriously. The new board should be drawn from listeners and community members from a much wider range of interests and backgrounds.

Return to Houston Radio Report homepage

Visit the dissenters' kpftradio webpages

Email Houston Radio Report