20Dec2020 [with some updates]

Here’s the 25-year series (thru FY2018) [UPDATE: now 28yrs, thru FY2021], & the list of auditors. These are the annual general audits of Pacifica Foundation, Inc.; the annual pensions audits aren’t publicly available. Pacifica’s year-end is 30Sep: so fiscal year 1994, FY1994, ends 30Sep1994.

And when are the FY2019 & FY2020 auditor’s reports expected?

~

2022 ….. ???

~

A Pacifica by-law mandates the directors to ensure that “an annual report” of a financial nature, effectively both a balance sheet & a net income statement, is made public within 120 days of year-end, so by 28Jan:

[t]he Foundation shall cause an annual report to be prepared and furnished to the Board not later than one hundred and twenty (120) days after the close of the Foundation’s fiscal year and, upon payment of reasonable copying costs by the Member, to any Member who requests it in writing, which report shall contain the following information in appropriate detail:

A. The assets and liabilities, including the trust funds, of the Foundation as of the end of the fiscal year;

B. The principal changes in assets and liabilities, including trust funds, during the fiscal year;

C. The revenue or receipts of the Foundation, both unrestricted and restricted to particular purposes, for the fiscal year; and

D. The expenses or disbursements of the Foundation, for both general and restricted purposes, during the fiscal year.

The annual report shall be accompanied by any report thereon of independent accountants, or, if there is no such report, the certificate of an authorized officer of the Foundation that such statement(s) were prepared without audit from the books and records of the Foundation.

https://pacifica.org/indexed_bylaws/art12sec6.html

Coincidently, ‘within 120 days’ is also required by the Foundation for the Jewish Community, FJC, which agreed on 2Apr2018 to lend Pacifica $3.7m, but with a much stricter term: “audited annual financial statements” (emphasis added). The last time Pacifica had those was for FY2016. [UPDATE: this was rectified with the FY2020 ones . . . then repeated for FY2021 – but not since. See, for each auditor’s report, ‘Opinion’, page 2 (being page 4 of the PDF), https://pacifica.org/finance/audit_2020.pdf & https://pacifica.org/finance/audit_2021.pdf.] The relevant clause of the FJC loan agreement:

[s]o long as Borrower is indebted to Lender under the Note and this Agreement is in effect, Borrower shall provide to Lender within one hundred twenty (120) days following the close of each fiscal year of the Borrower, audited financial statements of the Borrower certified by a certified public accountant acceptable to the Lender, each of which financial statements shall be in a form and substance acceptable to Lender and shall include, without limitation, balance sheets, statements of income and statements of fund balances. The Lender shall also be provided with copies of any management letters prepared by the certified public accountant issuing the financial statements promptly upon receipt by Borrower.

Section 6.1, Financial Statements, page 10 (page 11 of the PDF – the section quoted in full), https://mega.nz/file/AI0iUYga#QzMtaBd0iRTZJ_YNmh2KZ1xKu7Qh_hQ6IcPMVkGWX94

How often has Pacifica achieved this? Thru Jan2020, twice in the last 25 years – FY2006 & FY2007, 19Jan & 14Jan respectively. [UPDATE: as of Jan2025, this period has now extended 30 years.]

(It’s not publicly recorded how often the cited Pacifica by-law, requiring the public annual financial report, has been complied with. So, by default, one can only conclude twice, in Jan2007 & Jan2008.)

~

2025 … (don’t ask)

[UPDATE: as of c. mid Aug2025, EFFECTIVELY PACIFICA IS NO LONGER A REGISTERED CHARITY.

To repeat, EFFECTIVELY PACIFICA IS NO LONGER A REGISTERED CHARITY: IT HAS BEEN SUSPENDED BY THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL.

Meaning?

As per the CA AG, “[a]n organization that is delinquent, suspended or revoked is not in good standing and is prohibited from engaging in conduct for which registration is required, including soliciting or disbursing charitable funds” (emphases added).

So . . . by law, no fundraising . . . by law, no paying staff or creditors.

Oh.

Why has this LEGAL ban on Pacifica conducting ANY monetary transactions been kept secret from the members & staff? Why?

[This action by CA AG Rob Bonta seems to have been per the automatic suspension of a registered charity that’s mandated by CA Code of Regulations, § 341(a)(2), for breaching the three-year rule. This was detailed months ago on PacificaWatch, & appears below in a note with all relevant links.]

[UPDATE: the wonder continues coz the FJC loan doesn’t appear in the next Form 990, that denoted 2022, using the unaudited FY2023 financial statements: see the liabilities section on the balance sheet page – p. 11, being p. 15 of the PDF. (Note, the preparer seems to have mixed up their lines 23 & 24, coz $11 560 is the closing balance on the previous 990 as an unsecured total, only to appear as the secured opening balance.) Another curiosity lies in the item in the net income statement that’s the correlate of an interest-incurring liability. Incongruously, given the testified absence of the $3.165m liability re FJC, Pacifica’s annual interest charge has hardly shifted: $250 196, FY2020; $215 807, FY2021; $188 446, FY2022; & $224 539, FY2023 – all per the 990’s (the first two figures are also as per the respective auditor’s report). So who’s creaming off this ~$200k if it isn’t going to FJC’s donor-advised accountholders? The people deserve to be told. (This latest 990 was posted to https://pacifica.org/finance_reports.php on Tu7Oct2025 or a few days earlier; it’s dated 23Sep by ‘The Breeze’, & M29Sep by Jie Chen, who prepared it on behalf of Rogers & Company – see the unpaginated first page of the 990, p. 4 of the PDF.) By the way, no-one at a public Pacifica meet has even mentioned that huge operating losses were made for FY2022 & FY2023: $2 048 558 & $2 262 987 respectively, totalling over $4.3m. Expenses are running ~25% above revenue . . . 25% (FY2022, 10717425 ÷ 8668867 ⇒ 23.6%; FY2023, 10608628 ÷ 8345641 ⇒ 27.1%). Deafening silence.]

[UPDATE: lastly (at least for the time being), there’s also the small matter of CA AG ‘Ever-Smiling’ Rob ordering, on 12June2025, a $500 fine directed at Pacifica, all because ED Steph ‘The Breeze’ proved incapable, yet again, of managing Pacifica, resulting in her failing, yet again, to stay within the law. So will the PNB make her pay it out of her own pocket? And why has this decision by the CA AG not been disclosed by ‘The Breeze’ herself, or by PNB Chair Odious Young?

[By CA law, late fees cannot be paid by Pacifica: they count as “avoidable”, & so cannot be paid out of charitable funds. By CA law, late fees fall due, not surprisingly, to those with the famed fiduciary responsibility, namely amongst the directors sleepwalkers, trustees, & officers of the corp – those embodying, & so personifying, “waste” & “damage”, effectively as stated by the administrators of justice:

“Charitable assets are restricted to use for charitable purposes and cannot be used to pay these avoidable late fees and penalties. Avoidable late fees and penalties generally constitute waste of charitable assets and damage to the charity. A director that has committed a breach of fiduciary duty or breach of trust by allowing avoidable penalties and late fees may be held liable for any damages to the charity. (See, e.g., Bus. Prof § 17510.8; Corp. Code, §§ 5210, 5231, 5239.) Directors, trustees, and officers may be held personally liable for payment of all Late Fees and Penalties.”

CT-453 letter from CA AG to Pacifica, 21Jan2025, unpaginated (p. 2 of the PDF), emphases added – in the registry record it’s towards the top of the ‘Filings & Correspondence’ section, denoted ‘CT-453 Suspension’, & was sent to two addresses, the former KPFK building in Cahuenga Blvd. West & presumably the home of ‘The Breeze’. (There’s more on this letter below.)

[In the deafening silence, the same refrain: of course no-one’s asked . . . no-one’s explained . . . it’s as if it doesn’t exist.

[Re the 12June AG letter, in the registry it’s denoted ‘CT-547 Missing Documents’, at the very top of ‘Filings & Correspondence’. The AG insisted that Pacifica “file the reports listed above within sixty (60) days of the date of this letter”, so by M11Aug (18+31+11). Notably, this included the FY2022 audited financial statements & the corresponding auditor’s report. (Letter unpaginated, but all this is on p. 1 of the PDF.)]

[UPDATE: the three-letter agencies have detected a spike in comms, assessing that Pacifica has exploded, now in meltdown. Why?

Auditors.

Off the job.

Oh.

Maybe coz Pacifica can’t legally pay them, after being suspended as a charity by the CA AG?

Plus indicating they would give a ‘modified opinion’ for FY2022 & FY2023, prps even a ‘disclaimer of opinion’, the lowest grade, as they gave for FY2017, FY2018, & FY2019?

[The first public inkling was at the W10Sep WBAI LSB – not during directors’ sleepwalkers’ reports but during public comment. By Alex Steinberg, outrageously suspended by the Th14Aug PNB from all governance posts thru 31Oct2026. Remarking the auditor is no more, he offered no reason: “[t]he auditor who was supposed to conduct our audit seems to have been withdrawn or has withdrawn.” (2:13:53, statement read by Jack DePalma, emphases added; starts at 2:11:08). https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/play/5fDLGrF_dYw84lABDlWVQr79WBFFYk7Kz5AAZwnifnR0pEeNhFzA-rpd-ym3mJYWS47rqakJ5lEViIjT.fmRWfZJQRrZcNQLM (passcode, +8Vz=#yB ), via https://kpftx.org/archive.php.

[Evidence of ‘a prob’ was a flurry at kpftx – and maybe even of snow. Two meets called within 24hrs: late Tu16Sep, an emergency PNB for the Thursday, albeit a closed meet; then the next afternoon, a PNB Audit Cttee for the following Wednesday, 24Sep, this thankfully public – but remember the membership, restricted to directors sleepwalkers, coz under the new by-laws no-one is elected from the local station boards, keeping out the riff-raff, snuffing out the wrong questions. The Audit bods are all listener-delegates bar WBAI’s Sally Gellert, & consist in the yes-men & the largely spineless. The yes-men: Evelia ‘ok, can’t make head or tail of a cashflow statement but I do know when to raise my hand’ Jones, KPFK; Sean ‘hell yeah!’ McPherson, KPFT; & Minerva ‘the Lord truly works in mysterious ways: I’m doing so much for New Day – then my dad dies’ Sanders, WPFW. The largely spineless: Donna Carter, KPFA; Sally Gellert, WBAI. So don’t hold yer breath. Speaking of which, it’s a capacity Donna herself will soon lose, being the latest on the block as the Pacifica purges keep on keepin’ on: the axe is being passed around, getting sharpened for her disciplinary hearing at the Sa20Sep KPFA LSB. Donna cuts a solitary figure, the only director sleepwalker at the station not in New Day. Happy days indeed for the protectors of free speech radio – https://kpftx.org/pacalendar/cal_show1.php?eventdate=20250920.]

~

[UPDATE: before the two sets of remarks, here are separate comments on the details given in the table above re the auditor’s reports of FY2020, FY2021, FY2022, & FY2023.]

• Note on the FY2022 & FY2023 auditor’s reports

[UPDATE: after the original paras, quite a few updates have been needed given the enduring inability of Executive Director Stephanie ‘The Breeze’ Wells to do one of her most basic jobs, getting the annual audit done – or in this case the last three, those for FY2022, FY2023, & FY2024. The current set of directors sleepwalkers are publicly oblivious of the three-year rule, the legal existential threat bearing down with increasing imminence upon Pacifica, as detailed below. This whilst the breaker New Day majority is preoccupied with (1) maintaining the suffocating employee structure, heavily skewed in favour of KPFA, & (2) pushing thru a counter-revolutionary new set of by-laws that (a) gut Pacifica of its wider-membership participation in governance, & (b) install un-democratic, centralised rule by the New Day clique, ably aided by two WPFW scabs, Minerva ‘yes, New Day worked out how status conscious I am, how needy & impressionable, how superficial & shallow, so they made me Vice Chair of the foundation & now they’ve bought my vote’ Sanders & Julie Clueless, legally known as Julie ‘Clueless’ Hewitt. This preoccupation came easily to them, rather than the imagination, & hard work, needed to develop a network development plan, for the five stations, beyond the Age of the Crystal Set. But as stoic Ivan said in the Stalingrad Tractor Plant, in the depth of winter, 1942-1943, we are where we are.]

The expected FY2022 & FY2023 completion dates of Mar & June2025, respectively, are inferred from timid, hesitant remarks at the 5Dec2024 PNB by Executive Director Stephanie ‘The Breeze’ Wells: “I would anticipate . . . that . . . they will p-probably s-s-s-start within the next . . . , you know, couple of weeks. Again, we’ve been sending them things already, so it’s kind of been this ongoing process [Chair Young interjects] and so maybe we’ll probably be finished by June [‘June’ intoned as a ‘rising questioning’]” (48:59) – https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/pnb241205/pnb241205a.mp3. June.

On a related matter, she has repeatedly used in public a highly ambiguous phrase: that the auditors are ‘doing them together’ – so, auditing financial statements pertaining to a 24-mth accounting period, or as consecutive years? This has gone unchallenged by the accounting illiterate directors sleepwalkers – “of courrrrrrrrrsssse!!!”, cries Cenk. Just to say, the former is implausible, not least because audited annual financial statements, & the data they include, are required for two kinds of annual submissions: the IRS Form 990 tax return, & CPB financial reporting.

But, you may ask, these days Pacifica doesn’t receive CPB money? True, but according to ‘The Breeze’ (although no doc has been made public, nor quotation given – and no sleepwalker has even publicly called for transparency), CPB has told Pacifica it isn’t eligible to make a good faith application for the Radio Community Service Grant until it brings up to date its submissions of Annual Financial Reports (the famed AFR’s) – even though these correspond to years when it didn’t receive the CSG (sic) – reports that both use audited annual amounts & require, as support, audited annual financial statements. Generating the absent AFR’s is no small task: besides this series starting FY2012 (sic), all of the double-entry bookkeeping has to be reviewed so as to extract those entries that correspond to the bespoke item & category codes that CPB insists are used by a grantee or aspiring grantee in its own accounting record, codes that Pacifica stopped using when it lost CPB eligibility, per CPB’s 28Mar2013 management determination and required actions letter. (A reminder of the AFR generation cycle, using as an example the last ones submitted: the FY2011 AFR of each of the five stations, using the FY2011 auditor’s report, was handed in during FY2012 to earn its FY2013 CSG – the last payments received being in Oct2012, the 70% instalments, coz the Mar2013 balances, of the order of $250k (estimated from the auditor’s reports, FY2010 to FY2014), were withheld due to rule-breaking.)

Re what Pacifica has to do, no-one has publicly mentioned three crucial points: yes, the letter required corrected re-submission of the FY2009 & FY2010 AFR’s, but completely absent is any special prospective AFR compliance scenario or regime (though presumably CPB has the prerogative to change its demands); second, although CPB insisted in 2013 that Pacifica return the $137 506 overpayment, & Pacifica eventually did in 2020, no sleepwalker or ED Lydia Brazon or CFO Anita Sims or the PNB Finance Cttee, so 29 peeps in all, not one gave an inkling that they knew CPB had already written off this debt in 2017 (sic): “Dollar value of disallowed costs written off as uncollectible […] $137 506” (p. 11); &, lastly, what about the withheld Mar2013 instalments ($250k or so), although that was probably quickly disbursed elsewhere by CPB, given the terms of its annual federal appropriation? – see CPB, Semiannual Report. Office of Inspector General Operations, CPB Audit Resolution Activities: October 1, 2016 – March 31, 2017, 2017, https://cpboig.oversight.gov/reports/semiannual-report/semiannual-report-office-inspector-general-operations-cpb-audit-4; CPB corroborated this in an email sent to PacificaWatch.

PNB Finance Cttee (by station, sleepwalker, then treasurer): Chris Cory (Chair), Sharon Adams; Polina Vasiliev, Fred Blair; DeWayne Lark, Teresa Allen; Nancy Sorden, Nick Arena; James Sagurton, R Paul Martin.

~

[UPDATE: the June2025 completion date for the auditing, given by ‘The Breeze’ to the 5Dec PNB, was soon blown out of the water. Almost 6wks later, at the 14Jan2025 PNB Finance Cttee, ‘The Breeze’ breezily, without as much as a murmur from the august assembly, announced a delay – surprise, surprise – from the beginning of the year by at least 6wks, saying unfiled 990’s, for FY2022 & FY2023 – who knew? – would first have to be submitted to Uncle Sam (who has probably sent a series of increasingly nasty letters), although she failed to mention that this would be of unaudited amounts, albeit attested to by the preparer, “the audit firm”, which, curiously, she chose, yet again, not to name, although the public record gives Rogers & Company (not least per her own written report to the 21Nov2024 PNB). The mellifluousness, the flow of honey coating 14Jan: “our taxes will be filed by February 15th, 2025, and then upon completion of the 990’s our auditing process will officially begin” (20:00) . . . so add on 6wks – no, being more realistic, make that 2mths; https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/finance/250114/finance250114a.mp3. (The 21Nov report was re-published by R Paul Martin, WBAI treasurer, in his 11Dec2024 report to his local station board (pp. 1 & 4) – https://glib.com/treasurers_report_2024-12-11.pdf.)]

~

[UPDATE: on Tu21Jan2025, Trump Day #2, the California Attorney General laid into Pacifica, raising the question whether there’s any point doing these mandatory annual audits. Subject line: “INTENT TO SUSPEND OR REVOKE [followed by relevant para §§, all that annoying law stuff]” (original Trump-all-caps). Why? Simple: delinquent with respect to CA law:

the registration of the entity captioned above will be suspended or revoked unless the organization cures its delinquency or submits the enclosed Appeal and Request for Hearing* within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of this Notice

(CT-453 letter, unpaginated, page 1 of the PDF; emphases added) https://rct.doj.ca.gov/Verification/Web/Search.aspx?facility=Y (just pump in ‘Pacifica Foundation’; towards the top of the ‘Filings & Correspondence’ section)

[And there’s more:

[a]n organization that is delinquent, suspended or revoked is not in good standing and is prohibited from engaging in conduct for which registration is required, including soliciting or disbursing charitable funds [then more §§]

(same para, emphases added) . . . so no transactions at all, either getting money in (the donors) or paying anyone (staff, creditors) – and that’s Pacifica’s current status

[No-one will be surprised to learn that none of this has been mentioned publicly at any Pacifica meeting: not by ED ‘The Breeze’ or one of the 22 directors sleepwalkers at the Th30Jan or Th13Feb PNB [nor the 20Feb one], not by ‘The Breeze’ or one of the five sleepwalkers or five treasurers at the Tu11Feb PNB Finance Cttee, & not in the W12Feb regular reports by any of the 12 sleepwalkers & three treasurers to the local station boards that elected them at KPFT, WPFW & WBAI [& also no mention at the W19Feb WBAI Finance Cttee]. This deafening silence is what counts as both transparency & accountability at Pacifica, a prps $8-9m a year public charity – one that violates CA corporate law by (1) not having a chief financial officer since 22Sep2022 (sic), (2) not filing its FY2022 audited financial statements & auditor’s report by 30June2023 (or even to this very day), & (3) ditto re the FY2023 ones by 30June2024 (or even today), with (4) the dead cert that the FY2024 ones won’t be filed by 30June2025.

[Isn’t it negligent that the sleepwalkers & ED ‘The Breeze’ mismanage Pacifica’s financial function & fiscal reporting so badly that the public charity breaks the law, & repeatedly so – and continues to do so? When will the breakers stop breaking Pacifica?

[As an aside, an oddity of the above correspondence is that the AG sent this notice twice, not just to the former KPFK/PRA building, at 3729 Cahuenga Blvd West, LA, but also – for the first time – to 2239 Lobelia Ave, Mountain View Park, Upland, CA 91784, due east of Pasadena, & due south of Mount Baldy. Excuse me? Indeed. Where? Here:

[That’s summer. Sep2022. Here it is in winter spring, Apr2018:

[Why would the registered office of Pacifica Foundation, Inc. be here? . . . (pause) . . . Can’t see an antenna – can you? Or blood on the pavement? . . . (further pause) . . . So guess a nice breeze passes thru. Apparently ventilating five bedrooms, three bathrooms. Currently a ~$1m home. Pacifica’s hard-pressed donors must be gratified. This is Mountain View Park, a typical Amerikan fake, a fake gated ‘community’: three ins/outs, with the signs, street furniture & colour scheme that give the strong impression to the inattentive that the streets & playground are private property. Warning off the thugs, the amphibians. Nice. There are also two tennis courts, & a landscaped pool complex. Extra nice. https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2239-Lobelia-Ave-Upland-CA-91784/17513570_zpid/ (>20 pics, interiors as well as the nice green veranda out back)

[Pacifica’s annual tax filing is a Form 990, & the most recent at the IRS’ site is, believe it or not, the 2020 one (using the FY2021 financial data). This display of public duty is from, to repeat, a prps $8-9m a year public charity, a professed ‘voice of the people’ – one that decries corporate Amerika for opaque dealings & acting with impunity. The 2021 & 2022 forms still haven’t been filed . . . the years just passing by, one after t’other, the only change being the latest bod on the LSB to slip away into that nite without end – see https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/ (just enter Pacifica’s EIN, 941347046, its Employer Identification Number); & if you’re bored, peruse, leisurely, the joy at https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-form-990 (8Jan2025), not least pp. 6-7 … UPDATE: ‘The Breeze’ has said a few times they’ll be submitted by 15Feb, but still nothing as of 28Feb, either in a meeting or at a site, be it pacifica.org, irs.gov, or rct.doj.ca.gov – also no notice at kpftx.org for a PNB Audit Cttee meet . . . oh.]

~

(3) She also made her own kind of commencement speech, giving Pacifica’s first public statement that “the 2024 audit doesn’t start until June of this year” (2:08:40). June?!? Well, we’ll see about that. https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/kpft_finance/250226/kpft_finance250226a.mp3]

~

[AND THERE’S MORE: given what ‘The Breeze’ said at the 25Mar PNB Finance Cttee it has to be judged that the FY2022 audit won’t be done by May, making July the placeholder. That’s because she announced that the 2022 Form 990 (the amounts being FY2023) has still not been filled in, let alone filed. Of course no explanation was offered; & no-one asked. It means the preparer of the return (who happens to be the auditor) is still having problems coming up with figures they can attest to in the absence of an audit, figures they are legally responsible for – tricky, tricky. And being tied up with 990 work prevents even the start of comprehensive audit work.

[(Regrettably, the meeting provided further evidence of what any rational person would have already concluded: both PNB Finance Cttee Chair Fred Dodsworth (KPFA listener-delegate) & PNB Chair Susan Young (KPFT listener-delegate) have clinical anti-social personality disorders – AngryExplosiveFredGuy very much so, so worrying that the reasonable person indelibly associates him with the words ‘domestic’ & ‘abuse’. If you can bear it, have a listen, 2:41-13:00 (esp. from 10:23) . . . and to think, these people probably have great-grandchildren . . . thoughts & prayers . . . thoughts & prayers. https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/finance/250325/finance250325a.mp3)

35:44 (for the first time in public, ‘The Breeze’ said the 2021 Form 990 has been filed – although that’s contradicted by the gaping hole on the IRS’ own site, punched thru on its way into both the site of the California Registry of Charitable Trusts & Pacifica’s site, a presence of absence advertising to the world, including interested Republicans & Project 2025 Rottweilers, the inability of Pacifica to do the basics required of a public charity, moreover a multi-million $$$ one, prps taking in $8-9m a year from the oblivious public. Who’s watching, who’s counting, say the sleepwalkers, the 22 directors, the five station treasurers, & the other 97 on the local station boards? (It’s 97 coz two treasurers aren’t delegates: Tom Chase (WPFW) & R Paul Martin (WBAI).) Nevertheless, here are the words floating on the breeze: “our fiscal year ’22 990s [sic] were filed on the 13th of February with the IRS”.]

~

[UPDATE: evidence re the Aug & Nov2025 estimates, incl. quotes from public meets, will follow when g-d allows. For now, details of a devastating matter that could have been addressed last time, but as we’re a month closer to 30June the uncertainty is greatly reduced. A matter that, to be specific, turns on whether the FY2022 auditor’s report (so including the audited FY2022 financial statements) will be filed with the California Attorney General by 30June this year – something less likely than Biden becoming Prez in 2028. This the small matter of CA’s three-year rule, the chainsaw Pacifica is sleepwalking into, a reality not mentioned publicly by anyone in either management or governance:

Pacifica faces, from 1July, automatic suspension of its registration to legally engage in charitable purposes, per the three-year rule.

[This is the relevant clause from the CA Code of Regulations, § 341(a)(2), part of section 341, Automatic Suspension:

“(a) A registration shall be automatically suspended if any of the following occur: […] (2) The registrant fails to file the periodic written reports or pay the fee required by sections 301 to 307 of these regulations for three consecutive years”, &

re these reports, § 301(b) requires the IRS Form 990 to be filed “together with all attachments and schedules” – to repeat, ‘ALL ATTACHMENTS’ – so including not just all that annoying accounting stuff but all that annoying audited accounting stuff, the R & S, the report & statements

links: here the unfiled relevant mandatory annual attachments are the audited annual financial statements & corresponding auditor’s report, namely those for FY2022 (due 30June2023, per a separate citation discussed below), FY2023 (due 30June2024), & FY2024 (due 30June2025) – CA Code of Regulations, Title 11, Division 1, Chapter 4, Article 3, § 341(a)(2), https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Document/I4EA14750ED9011EEBE12AFB4EA5A8A32?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default), & §§ 301-307 per https://govt.westlaw.com/calregs/Browse/Home/California/CaliforniaCodeofRegulations?guid=I0686D530ED8F11EEB407AAEE37DD7B27&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default), the privately-owned website (sic – don’t you just luv Amerika?) used by the state of CA, as per https://oal.ca.gov/publications/ccr/ (Office of Administrative Law; CA Code of Regulations)

[The deadline as per CA law, 9mths after year-end, may have been long-established, but it certainly came to greater public attention with the passing of a very un-Pacifican piece of legislation, the Nonprofit Integrity Act of 2004. This seems to have become effective for all accounting periods ending 1Jan2005 & later. Come 30June this year, this means Pacifica will have been tested 20 times (FY2005 thru FY2024). The scorecard? Met seven times, failed 13 times. And the passage of time is split as if by an axe: as the chart at the top of the page shows, the seven successes were from 7Feb2006 thru 15June2012, with thereafter the 13 failures. And the CA AG has allowed the Pacifica directors sleepwalkers to be recidivist, allowed them to act with impunity. https://oag.ca.gov/charities/laws

[And this, a so-called charity raking in $8-9m a year from the punters. Moreover a charity that has publicly reported absolutely no internal audit function – let alone activity – for at least 20yrs. Twenty. Years. And no Chief Financial Officer for getting on 3yrs, since 22Sep2022 – with not even one director sleepwalker publicly asking ‘when?’, ‘when will Pacifica comply with CA law’s requirement to have a CFO?’. And no timely accurate monthly statements of management accounts that are actionable, so if not within five working days of mth-end then seven, achieved neither now nor even when NETA was the accountant & primary bookkeeper from July2018 to Sep2022. All this leading us to consider, would any reasonable person have no option but to deem Pacifica a charity that’s flying blind, a public charity out of financial control, a public charity out of administrative control? The Pacifica directors sleepwalkers, the legal trustees, have delivered Pacifica’s five stations straight into the hands of the Trump government & Project 2025 Rottweilers. Thank you for your service, says the Fox anchor.

[Contrary to repeated assertions by ‘The Breeze’ in 2023 & 2024, no CA official, be it even the Attorney General or the Secretary of State, has any discretion re the deadline for the CA filing of these financial statements & auditor’s reports. This is as plain as day in the CA AG’s answer to the direct question, posted on their own site: “[t]he statute does not provide for an extension of time” – https://oag.ca.gov/charities/laws#collapseFAQs8. This conforms to the relevant passage in the law, the CA Government Code, where legislators chose the imperative ‘shall’: “[t]he audited financial statements shall be available for inspection by the Attorney General and by members of the public no later than nine months after the close of the fiscal year to which the statements relate” (emphases added; so for Pacifica this is 30June, given its 30Sep year-end) – CA Government Code § 12586(e)(1), https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=12586.&lawCode=GOV; for the whole of article 7 (§§ 12580 – 12599.10), Supervision of Trustees and Fundraisers for Charitable Purposes Act (a very anti-Pacifican idea for repeated sets of Pacifica directors with their cavalier attitude to the law), please see https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&division=3.&title=2.&part=2.&chapter=6.&article=7.

[Meanwhile, according to the public record, the two promised IRS Form 990’s, the 2021 (using the FY2022 financial data) & the 2022 (using FY2023), have yet to be filed: not with the IRS, nor the registry run by the CA Charitable Trusts Section of the AG’s Office – nor posted on Pacifica’s homepage, the hearth of the very peeps funding the whole endeavour. Why is no-one surprised? But with the New Day breakers as pleased as punch, what’s not to like? Problem? What problem?]

• Note on the FY2020 auditor’s report

(The altered figures: for the accounting category “[e]stimated late filing penalties, assessments, and interest” used by Pacifica, the report sent to the lawyer gave $547 695 (p. 24; p. 26 of the PDF), & the report filed with the AG gives a mere $8 000 (p. 25; p. 27 of the PDF), a reduction by $539 695. So other figures had to be restated: “[t]otal accrued pension liabilities” fell, but by a lesser amount of $477 917, from $665 557 to $187 640, smaller because it was found necessary, for undisclosed reason(s), to increase the National Office liability by $61 778, from $6 831 to $68 609 (same pages); & the year-end balance sheet was changed, reducing “[a]ccrued expenses and payroll benefits”, & so total liabilities, by $477 918 (so with a rounding), the latter moving from $5 394 241 (the unfiled report, p. 3; p. 5 of the PDF) to $4 916 323 (the filed report, p. 4; p. 6 of the PDF). https://mega.nz/folder/RU9X0aKL#2UYdQbBOdlNJnzkXf4CBKQ)

So the auditors issued a new report – but Pacifica has no public record that it was seen by either the PNB Audit Cttee or the PNB itself: so, the Cttee didn’t even receive the revised report, let alone accept it, & then pass it on to the PNB. (By contrast, there’s the small matter of the law (remember that?), the California Government Code: “[t]he audit committee shall confer with the auditor to satisfy its members that the financial affairs of the corporation are in order, shall review and determine whether to accept the audit, shall [etc., etc.]” (emphases added), § 12586(e)(2) – https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=12586.)

https://pacificaradiowatch.home.blog/2021/06/30/draft-z-breaking-the-law-to-comply-with-the-law-chair-alex-chooses-not-to-apologise-for-sorry-tale-of-fy2020-audit-pressure-of-threatened-ca-ag-probe-30june-never-about-cpb/, & https://pacificaradiowatch.home.blog/2021/07/06/fy2020-audit-fiasco-intensifies-pacifica-said-things-were-sent-when-they-weren-t-and-auditor-s-report-was-completed-but-it-isn-t-and-claims-due-date-is-16aug-whereas-ag-says-no-the-statute-says-no/.

• Note on the FY2021 auditor’s report

The date, 10Aug2022, warrants a question mark coz although the report indeed bears that date, & was accepted by the Th11Aug PNB, it never seemed to have gone anywhere for a day shy of four weeks – was it altered? did some cash have to be coughed up? Anyway, the delay was never mentioned in an open Pacifica meeting until the W7Sep WBAI Finance Cttee, when being streamed for what may be the first time this century (the wonder of the Pacifica-technology-transparency nexus). Up popped WebPixel Otis, from the cable he’d been nestling in, telling the Cttee, “I’ve just posted it because I was reminded that I hadn’t posted it. Eileen [Rosin, Chair of the PNB Audit Cttee] sent it to me about seven days ago, & I’ve been, you know, ignoring it” (59:43) – https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/wbai_fin/220907/wbai_fin220907a.mp3. And has the doc left PacificaWorld, even though the statutory 30June deadline has been missed? As of Th8Sep there is no record of a filing with the California Registry of Charitable Trusts, the inquirer being greeted with an unambiguous “Awaiting Reporting” – http://rct.doj.ca.gov/Verification/Web/Search.aspx?facility=Y (pump in ‘Pacifica Foundation’). (The links re the two screenshots are time-delimited, & so aren’t live – as dead as . . . a zombie public charity.)

. . . the search page of the CA Registry of Charitable Trusts website – at 8Sep2022, https://rct.doj.ca.gov/Verification/Web/SearchResults.aspx . . .

. . . thru FY2020 the auditor’s reports are there, but not the FY2021 one – at 8Sep2022, https://rct.doj.ca.gov/Verification/Web/Details.aspx?result=bf7a49a1-4242-4bb0-987f-b297143b2c7d . . .

~

Delays – first one, then three

So, early on, there was a delay, lasting from Oct2001 to July2003, affecting the FY2001 & FY2002 audits. But this was remedied. What’s significant for our purposes, trying to explain Pacifica’s current ongoing travails, is the onset of three later delays: from Oct2011 (the FY2011 audit), from Oct2013 (the FY2013 audit), & from Oct2014 (the FY2014 audit). It remains to be established whether these compounded one another, & how.

These three onsets need to be explained. Was there a delay in completing the record of transactions & intra-Pacifica transfers? A delay in committing to corrective journal entries? A delay in preparing the financial statements presented to the auditors? A delay in assembling the documentary evidence supporting those financial statements? Or were the auditors unavailable to start their work? Was it difficult to provide the auditors with documents, explanations, & justifications? If Pacifica produced an annual report, for the edification (a Lawrence word or a DeWayne word?) of members, staff, listeners, donors, grantors, & others, that might have provided an incentive for the executive director to explain, in an easily found place, what the hell was going on.

So financial administration seems to have started to go ape between Oct2011 & Sep2014. What was different within PacificaWorld during this period? What was making the bookkeeping/accounting side of things start to go haywire? Who was the chief financial officer? Who was executive director? Who was PNB chairperson? Was the Board distracted by battling over motions? How did the Board discuss & address the deficiencies? What actions were proposed, & why did they fail?

Note the financial performance & monetary context:

• FY2010, the first (of six) ‘there’s a substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern’;
• Pacifica’s last annual net income was FY2006 (~$1.663m), soon followed by big annual losses: FY2009, ~$2.701m; FY2010, $1.975m (timely auditor’s report, at 26Mar2011); FY2011, $0.564m (slipping, at 15June2012); FY2012, $0.974m (more so, at 6Sep2013); FY2013, $2.824m (gliding, at 18Mar2015); FY2014, $0.771m (dropping into the abyss, at 13Dec2016); & FY2016, $2.031m;
• grants from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting ended, the last received seem to have been in FY2013 (last CPB disclosure in an auditor’s report is the one, dated 15June2012, for FY2011 (pages 19-20; pp. 22-3 of the PDF)); & this is the latest report Pacifica has had that would meet a mid Aug deadline for the CPB’s Radio Community Service Grant Program, the one with the big bucks; &
• later developments: 4Oct2017, WBAI tower rent judgement in favour of Empire State Realty Trust (re a near 15-year contract, effective June2005 (FY2005 auditor’s report, p. 16), the responsibility of the signer, Pacifica’s then interim ED, Ambrose Lane, Sr., PNB Chair & WPFW staff-delegate); Dec2017, bankruptcy proposal; Mar2018, $3.085m ESRT settlement (FY2016 auditor’s report, p. 24; p. 26 of the PDF); paid for by 2Apr2018 three-year loan from the Foundation for the Jewish Community, operating as FJC, $3.7m (reduced to $3.265m per PNB decision, 7June2018 – https://pacifica.org/documents/pnb_exec_180607.pdf).

Is it the case that what occurred Oct2011-Sep2014 lingered, both worsening things over the succeeding years, & making it impossible to take corrective action?

Auditor’s reports at https://mega.nz/folder/RU9X0aKL#2UYdQbBOdlNJnzkXf4CBKQ & https://pacifica.org/finance_reports.php

~

And when are the FY2019 & FY2020 auditor’s reports expected?

All done by 30June2021, apparently. That’s according to Jorge Diaz, the principal auditor, of Rogers & Company, playing the M26Oct2020 PNB Audit Cttee:

[t]he ultimate goal really is, um, I think get the fiscal 19 audit done and-and-um-yer perhaps the fiscal 20 audit done by, um, June 30th 2021 […] getting two audits done in one cycle, urgh, but that’s the ultimate goal […] get, get you all up current

26Oct2020 PNB Audit Cttee, 17:32, https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/audit/201026/audit201026a.mp3, here embedded:

Sounds about right. But what I don’t get is why didn’t Jorge make it the summer solstice? Too New Agey, perhaps? It’s really all that hazy, all that vague. Aspirational. Rainbows, unicorns, pink ponies. One for the fairies. No intermediate deadlines disclosed. No necessary phases identified & timed. Nothing serious. And the committeemen & women just sucked & soaked it all up. What’s new?

~

Intermezzo . . .

. . . really needs to be played given what follows . . .

https://www.cpb.org/sites/default/files/rfp/7af2bbff/Grant%20Guidelines%20Radio%20CSG%20for%20FY%202021%20-%20New%20Applicant%20Guidelines.pdf (p. 2)

[UPDATE: note, when the CPB cites a financial year, it refers to when funds are disbursed. That said, the FY2022 Radio CSG came earlier, using the 2016-18 schedule: it opened Apr2021, with a W19May deadline. https://www.cpb.org/grants/Radio-Community-Service-Grant-Application-Fiscal-Year-2022-New-Applicants.] [UPDATE: the FY2023 Radio CSG had a similar timing, opening Apr2022, closing Tu24May. https://cpb.org/grants/Radio-Community-Service-Grant-Application-Fiscal-Year-2023-New-Applicants] [UPDATE: so the last seven deadlines, 2016-2022, were 16May2016, 12May2017, 11May2018, 24June2019, 13Aug2020, 19May2021, 24May2022 – but remember, the important date is the start date of the application window: as the quote above shows, applications are approved on a first-come, first-served basis.]

https://www.cpb.org/sites/default/files/stations/radio/generalprovisions/FY-2021-Radio-General-Provisions.pdf (Oct2020; this partially describes the FY2021 CSG cycle, per Sections 6(A), 15(A), 15(C), & definition PP, pp. 9, 18, 18 & 28)

It’s worth explaining that contrary to Pacifica delegates’ folklore, calling something a taskforce or working group or whatever, doesn’t put it beyond the law, allowing it to secrete itself away: they’ve been set up to help, to produce information – in a phrase, they’re an “advisory body”. Yes, there are circumstances permitting “closed sessions”, but otherwise if its proceedings touch on anything to do with “public broadcasting”, & they “may influence the opinions of members” (emphases added), then that “makes it a meeting”, even though those “deliberations do not require any formal action or vote” – and the public have to be able to attend those proceedings. No ifs, no buts. Federal law. ‘Report-outs’ are irrelevant; likewise audiofiles or videos. Attending means as-it’s-happening. Bearing witness to events as they happen.

Validating evidence:

“[f]unds may not be distributed pursuant to this subpart to any public broadcast station (other than any station which is owned and operated by a state, a political or special purpose subdivision of a state or a public agency) unless such station establishes a community advisory board. Any such station shall undertake good faith efforts to assure that (i) its advisory board meets at regular intervals; (ii) the members of its advisory board regularly attend the meetings of the advisory board; and (iii) the composition of its advisory board are reasonably representative of the diverse needs and interests of the communities served by such station” (Communications Act of 1934, § 396(k)(8)(A), pp. 217-8) – embedded at https://pacificaradiowatch.home.blog/pacifica-sources/pacifica-documentary-sources/;

“[f]unds may not be distributed […] 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” (same doc, § 396(k)(4), p. 216, emphases added);

“[t]he term ‘meeting’ means the deliberations of at least the number of members of a governing or advisory body, or any committee thereof, required to take action on behalf of such body or committee where such deliberations determine or result in the joint conduct or disposition of the governing or advisory body’s business, or the committee’s business, as the case may be, but only to the extent that such deliberations relate to public broadcasting” (same doc, § 397(5), p. 224);

from the current CPB’s compliance guide, “B. Open Meetings: Meetings that must be open to the public include, but are not limited to [re the “any advisory body” specified in the Comms Act cited above], the following (collectively Open Meetings): 1. board meetings; 2. board committee meetings; and 3. community advisory board (CAB) meetings. C. Prerequisites for a ‘Meeting’: In order for a gathering of board, committee, or CAB members to constitute a meeting under the Act, the following are necessary: 1. the presence of a quorum; and 2. deliberations that determine or result in the joint conduct or disposition of business relating to public broadcasting. Note that deliberations do not require any formal action or vote. Any discussion of public broadcasting issues that may influence the opinions of members makes it a meeting” (CPB, Compliance, June2019, § I(B) & (C), p. 2, emphases added) – https://www.cpb.org/sites/default/files/stations/certification/cpb_certification_req_2019.pdf; &

“[s]tations that certify their compliance but are subsequently found to be non-compliant will be subject to […] a penalty of $5 000 per infraction” (CPB, CSG Non-compliance Policy, Jan2016, p. 1, emphases added) – https://www.cpb.org/files/stations/non-compliance/CPB-CSG-Non-compliance-Policy-Effective-January-1-2016.pdf.

~

Well, to return to Jorge’s prophecy, & the heavy schedule it entails, you’d expect the PNB Audit Cttee to be meeting twice a month, not least to find out what the problems are. But no: since the 14July Cttee’s recommending of the FY2018 report to the PNB, it has met thrice (M26Oct, M9Nov (also had private session – with no public report), & 30Nov), with no cancellations. Inexplicably, the 9Nov meeting had no update on the audit, even though George Walter, NETA Senior Controller, was present – and, in typical PacificaWorld fashion, no-one asked why, & no-one asked George. So no surprise the Cttee didn’t meet in Dec, & no next date has been set. Maybe they’ve stopped meeting. In fact, why not?

Elephant: why has the Cttee ground to a halt? If there’s progress to report to the world, to the members, staff, listeners, & donors/grantors, then have a meeting & spread the news. If the audit is in abeyance, becalmed, then have a meeting, let Chair Eileen ‘it’s Ros-in’ Rosin relate the difficulties, & the assembled can sort out whether they can help, without sticking their oar in, making things worse. But no, Simon & Garfunkel. As another month slips by.

And the latest news, M30Nov?

George Walter, NETA Senior Controller: I’m, urgh – I hope to have a, an updated trial balance, um, that’s gonna be sufficient &, urgh, in good enough shape to, urgh, send to the auditors, um, as a, as – call it a stake in the ground, & that is the trial balance upon which, urgh, we’ll do the audit […]

Chair Eileen: And you’re hoping to have that when, George, when?

George: By the end of the week.

[…]

George: I think, urgh, having members of this Cttee, urgh, go into their stations, um, um, I don’t want to say blindly, but, um, urr, challenging, urgh, for, for all these items, urgh, I would find that less than helpful

[…]

Anita Sims, Pacifica CFO & NETA Executive Vice President, their #2, responding to Adriana ‘point of point, Madam Chair’ Casenave: Let me first, George, if I may. Um, since, since we have been working with Pacifica, & when we first came in that, urgh, Mr Livingson – Livingston asked me if I would consider taking this job on, quite frankly I had no idea – none whatsoever – how far behind the organization was from a financial perspective, urgh, because chances are I might have [suppressed laughter] turned the job down, quite frankly

30Nov2020 PNB Audit Cttee, 9:21, 40:18, & 49:00, https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/audit/201130/audit201130a.mp3, here embedded:

So now we learn that there isn’t even a FY2019 trial balance. Jesu! Yet we were told five weeks earlier, 26Oct, as cited above, that the audit’s underway, all systems go. Now George says it’s going to take the rest of the week for him to generate the trial balance. No wonder there wasn’t a progress report at the 9Nov meeting. This audit has started out as a PR crock. It hardly needs stirring.

And NETA no wan’ militia rumbling with the station business managers, k.

But that’s the least of it, given that Anita sounds at the end of her tether . . . And the Pacifica wars have hardly begun: she’s seen nothing yet.

All in all, as The Lunatic, the Deplorable-in-Chief, puts it (but never as a combo), it is what it is, we’ll see what happens.

~

[As a courtesy, for c&p: ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅕ ⅖ ⅗ ⅘ ⅙ ⅚ ⅐ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ⅑ ⅒]

[ Also, + − – — ÷ ± ≃ ≈ ≠ > < ≥ ≤ ∝ ⇒ ⇔ ∴ ∵ 💗 ♀ ♂ 2h3′39 •∙○⦿⦾◘➊①🅐Ⓐⓐ ➡➼‣ arrowsymbol.com↑↓→←↕↔ ⭡⭣⭢⭠⭥⭤ ⇧⇩⇨⇦ ⟶⟵ ↗↘↙↖ ⮑⮐ ↻↺ ][ • • • • • • • • • • ]

~~~

Note: falsehood: ~x135 (sic), from ~$15k in 21 to ~$2.049m in 22 … 2048558 ÷ 15212 = 134.66 … Pacifica’s 3rd highest loss: $2 824 046, FY2013; $2 701 432, FY2009; with this latest pipping $2 030 693, FY2016 [NOTE: the blank space ↙↘ shouldn’t be there – and even the ‘code editor’ shows no code causing it. Odd.]