. . . the inner circle of directors, capable of organising a new beginning? . . . or a wasted 1½yrs on top of 3yrs? . . .
. . . a coming gloaming? . . . the darkness sweeping in upon the face of the deep? . . .
Report out from the Pacifica National Board (PNB) Executive Session held on March 31, 2021: The PNB met in closed session to approve extension of the FJC loan for 18 months on the positive recommendation of the auditor.
. . . presumably badly written, in the haste: not “met […] to approve”, intent, the intent of some directors, but ‘met […] and approved’ . . .
[UPDATE . . . guess not in haste: this is what PNB Chair Alex Steinberg read out 8mins into the Th1Apr PNB meeting. Oh.]
. . . &, crucially, the statement doesn’t offer an explanation, with grounds, of why the directors think the business falls within the remit of the closed session provision of the Communications Act of 1934, § 396(k)(4), & its interpretation by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting . . . so hopefully an explanation to the members, & the world (not least the CPB), will be issued within the requisite 10 days . . .
[an update will be given]
On the loan, will the PNB be transparent, describing in full the terms of the extension, the commitments they have placed upon the members & the members’ organisation – even better, will the directors publish the agreement, the agreement they are so proud of?
. . . 18mths interest charge = $3.265m x 6¼% x 1½yrs = $306 093.75 . . .
. . . the last time Pacifica made an annual net income was FY2006 . . .
The meeting had been noticed W24Mar, at a surprisingly late hour, 10.20pm EDT. Obviously, as the webpage says, an “[e]mergency meeting”. Then cancelled. With 5hrs14mins to go. Oh.
No new PNB meeting has been noticed, private or public.
The next one is the regular one, on Thursday, by happenstance falling on Pacifica Day, at the usual 8.30pm EDT time. This had been noticed 4Jan2021, in a batch, for the first Thursday of Feb thru June2021.
No private PNB meeting is currently noticed. Oh . . .
. . . although, by the presence of absence in the Communications Act of 1934, there is no requirement to notice a private deliberative meeting, only to issue a public written statement of why it occurred:
[i]f 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
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, CPB, has offered an interpretation of the “within a reasonable period of time”: “CPB also requires that the written statement be made available for inspection, either at the CSG recipient’s central office or posted on its station website, within 10 days after each closed meeting” (emphases added; CSG is Community Service Grant, the big bucks programme).
Pacifica consistently fails to do this – even though directors continually happy-talk the ease with which CPB money will come to Pacifica’s rescue, a rescue avoiding the need for the directors to recognise the organisation’s absolute decline, to carry out their responsibilities, to have vision, to make difficult decisions, and to devise & implement a plan resulting in fundamental change. (That’s why the breakers remain unchallenged in marking out a future for Pacifica. Anti politics only takes you so far; & it increasingly loses its efficacy each & every time it’s used to mobilise, such as trying to motivate peeps to vote defensively, negatively, in a referendum they didn’t initiate.)
Re providing written explanations, just to take this calendar year, with not even one quarter completed, Pacifica has had tens of private meetings covered – & not covered – by the Act & the CPB requirement. And how many written statements has Pacifica published? One. And that even came from a local station board, when KPFK’s slapped ‘Bellicose’ Bella on the whatever for a moment of hyperbole.
And in making this elementary assessment we won’t go into directors & delegates consistently hiding under their security blanket, their default secrecy mode by, (a), in an ad hoc way, applying a very broad interpretation of “proprietary information”, obstructing transparency &, as an effect, blocking the opportunity to hold individuals to account, &, (b), failing to obey federal law – notably, the perennial cry of ‘can’t discuss personnel matters’ whereas the Act (& the CPB) says closed meetings are “to consider matters relating to individual employees” (the sub-section of the Act already cited, emphases added). (Even so, the relevant Pacifica by-law contradicts the Act: it says “personnel” – https://pacifica.org/indexed_bylaws/art6sec7.html.)
Note that the cited fed requirement is for those getting fed money: “[f]unds may not be distributed pursuant to this subsection 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” (§ 396(k)(4), p. 216, emphases added); with funds being “the Public Broadcasting Fund” (§ 396(k)(1)(A), p. 212), administered by the CPB.
These days Pacifica receives none, so by the law it doesn’t have to hold public meetings – but they’re required by a by-law: “[a]ll meetings of the Board of Directors and its committees shall be open to the Members and to the public, with the exception of [blah, blah]” (the linked Article 6, Section 7).
And in any case, Pacifica wants that money, but the CPB has laid down its law: “[t]o be considered for re-entry to the CSG program, the Radio CSG program must be open to new applicants, Licensee and Stations must demonstrate full compliance with the General Provisions at the time of application, and Licensee and Stations must fulfill all requirements outlined in the March 28, 2013 letter” (Kathy Merritt (CPB Senior Vice President, Journalism & Radio) to ED Lydia Brazon & PNB Chair Alex Steinberg, 22May2020, p. 1, emphases added). So Otis ‘Groundskeeper Willie’ Maclay, who the ED says is the CPB compliance officer (has she told him?), better up his game.
When did Pacifica stop receiving CPB money? The last auditor’s report to disclose such income was Ross Wisdom’s final report, FY2011 (it gives $1 153 528 – Note 15, pp. 19-20; pp. 22-3 of the PDF). Perhaps without noticing, the PNB Audit Cttee & the PNB accepted the reports from auditors Armanino that only disclosed total grant income. One can infer that Pacifica last received CPB monies in FY2013 – the usual 70% of the annual grant (in Oct2012), with the remainder withheld because Pacifica became ineligible (it would have arrived Mar2013); inference made by inspection & using as a proxy the stations’ average annual unrestricted grant income FY2009-FY2012.
[UPDATE: the Pacifica-FJC negotiation has moved on, so at 4.56pm EDT, Tu30Mar a private PNB meeting was noticed for 9.30pm EDT, W31Mar: “Emergency Session: Action on loan required prior to maturity [you don’t say . . .] Purpose: Action required on loan” – https://kpftx.org/pacalendar/cal_show1.php?eventdate=20210331. Question is, will the directors deign to provide the great unwashed with even a summary of this crucial discussion, let alone identifying who asserted/argued what, invoking what evidence/ignorance, & importantly identifying how each director voted – giving the members a transparency of proceedings allowing them to hold accountable elected decision-makers for their views & actions/inactions? Each director should be proud of their thoughtful behaviour. Not happy to hide.]
Again, denying the FJC reality in clear sight – M29Mar PNB Audit Cttee
This meeting mentioned quite a few times that the FY2019 auditor’s report has to be ‘ready’ by F30Apr, has to “meet the deadline of April 30th” (23:41), set by “the vendor” (27:41), “a large vendor” (28:42), “our creditor” (26:53). Unnamed, of course. FJC, of course.
The ‘a’ & ‘b’ audiofiles, as per the URL’s:
How the powers that be are able to make themselves look ridiculous is beyond absurd. It reminds me of an episode, learnt in the family, a prisoner swap in 1976. The head Stalinist of the Chilean Communist Party, Luis Corvalán Lepe, & a prominent Soviet dissident, Vladimir Bukovsky. East German media only reported the release of Corvalán. So that’s what East German TV showed. Even though everyone knew that in Berlin everyone also watched West Berlin TV. The Pacifica info gatekeepers stand proudly, in illustrious company (a pun to come, to be completed, if you know the great work of Francesco Rosi).
Meanwhile, concerning reality, readers of this blog already know that the loan agreement with the Foundation for the Jewish Community requires this of Pacifica by 28Jan each year:
120 days after 30Sep is 28Jan. Each & every year. That’s RealWorld, the world of contracts, of promises, of carrying out one’s responsibilities. To put things in perspective, the reality of PacificaWorld, in the last 25 fiscal years of auditor’s reports, since FY1994, only twice has Pacifica managed this: FY2006, 19Jan2007; & FY2007, 14Jan2008.
By the FJC standard, that’s a 92% failure rate. But importantly, re Pacifica’s contractual promise to FJC, it’s a 100% fail. Even worse, Pacifica has yet to present, as per contract, “audited financial statements” to FJC. The FY2019 & FY2020 audits haven’t been done. And the FY2018 audit was something else: to say, less importantly, the auditor’s report was available for issue not on 28Jan2019 but 16July2020, so 17½mths late; &, more importantly, no audited statements were produced: Rogers & Co declared, “we do not express an opinion on these financial statements” (p. 2; p. 4 of the PDF). This was because “we have not been able to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion” (same passage). So, a shedload of money for an auditor’s report without audited financial statements. So it goes.
FJC negotiation: fear of a third disclaimer of opinion? the ‘pensions hole’?
It’s obvious that FJC are forcing some conditions upon Pacifica. Not that Pacifica has much to give. And choosing to approach FJC at the last minute, late Feb, four weeks before a compulsory fire sale of Pacifica’s land & buildings, shows the incompetence of the inner circle of directors – & the passive, dreamlike existence, of the others. Given the group-think/lack-of-thought, it was noticeable that PNB Finance Cttee Chair James Sagurton (WBAI listener-delegate) managed to speak up last month, warning that it won’t be all plain sailing. But as this blog has consistently explained, the FJC Agency Loan Fund has been struggling to get borrowers since at least 2018, so the donor-advised accountholders are happy to ‘earn’ the extra interest from p+3, prime plus 3 percentage points, rather than from private stock & public bonds. At the current 6¼%, if there’s a one-year extension, Pacifica members have to cough up $204 062.50.
And remember what the FY2019 (& FY2020) audit turns on: will there be a third-in-a-row ‘disclaimer of opinion’? – &, crucially, with FJC insisting on the FY2019 auditor’s report by 30Apr, that probability increases because there’s less time for NETA to cobble together what’s needed to satisfy the auditor. Is everything going to end in tears, with Rogers & Co deciding it can’t declare the financial statements offered by NETA to be “fair”, that is, materially accurate?
That’s the Hamlet.
In other words, will Rogers & Co be “able to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion”, not least in accepting NETA’s estimate of the pensions liability, an estimate having to be made given the lack of recent annual audits for the two pension funds? (The last public talk was one FY2016 audit, not both, being underway (sic).) There has never been a satisfactory public explanation to staff, ex-staff, members, & listeners, of why the ‘pensions hole’ has proven intractable. Why the payroll & pensions records have proven so difficult to reconstruct. When will even one member of the PNB Audit Cttee, & indeed the PNB, insist on transparency & accountability?
As emphasised in the draft history being made of Pacifica’s auditing, linked below, in the current ruling ideology of accounting & auditing a principal norm is that an audit cttee is fiercely independent – independent of management. And that means NETA. Not relying on it like a crutch. For example,
a healthy organisation has an audit cttee that works throughout the year, acting as the principal means for the directors to discharge their duty of monitoring the management of the accounting & finance function, to ensure that it’s performing adequately. A primary task for the audit cttee is ensuring that the auditor’s annual management letter, in part detailing the deficiencies of the A&F function (including its management), is immediately, & comprehensively, acted upon. In a healthy organisation it’s never left up to A&F senior management alone to decide the programme of remedial action, & to monitor implementation. And that requires an audit cttee with the necessary competence (knowledge, experience, & skills), time, & access. The audit cttee needs these qualities in order to be independent of management, & therefore have the capacity to assist the directors in discharging their duties, some being specified in law. New PNB Audit Cttee members need training before they stand for election to the Cttee; & the Cttee needs a public depository of resources, so all members, staff, & listeners can have the opportunity to learn about this crucial activity of the Foundation
This has been the spirit, expectation, & practice urged upon Pacifica by only one auditor since FY1994: Tony Pohl, co-owner of PMB Helin Donovan, who also happened to be a Pacifica donor. He tried, conscientiously, between Dec2008 & July2010. Before being escorted from the building by CFO LaVarn Williams & ED Arlene Engelhardt in Oct2010. Yes, another Pacifica coup. Yes, another disappearance. (Yes, Chile & Pacifica are twined.) Sense the attempt at culture change by listening to the audiofiles re the FY2008 & FY2009 audits, plus those re the series of four post-FY2009 audit meetings he spoke at (yes: those were the days!). His ousting robbed Pacifica of a golden opportunity. So it goes.
. . . not my aesthetic, but in PacificaWorld one takes what one can . . .
And 40:44 into the Audit meeting, Chair Eileen ‘it’s Ros-in’ Rosin exclaimed to the world that she had no idea that KPFK’s station manager, Anyel Fields, had resigned – resigned about 10 days before. Jesu. Bless us & save us. Can always rely on Eileen having her finger on the corpse.
*Sent:* Thursday, October 15, 2020, 11:47:24 AM PDT
*Subject:* One year extension of FJC loan — offer
CC: Pacifica Interim ED Lydia Brazon; Local Station Boards; CFO: Anita Sims; Counsel: Arthur Schwartz
As a result of the financial position in which we, Pacifica, find ourselves, i.e. the inability to repay the FJC loan when it comes due in April, I considered what course I, as a fiduciary, could follow to help Pacifica in our current situation. I contacted FJC and spoke to the President of the Board and the Chief Legal Officer. I clarified that I was calling as a Board Member, and not as a representative of the Board. The purpose of my call, I explained was to explore whether there might be a possibility of extending the loan directly, between FJC and Pacifica.
They told me about FJC and its role and mission. They also made it clear that they were familiar with Pacifica, its background and especially, the Empire State Building situation.They expressed their concerns about Pacifica, its finances, changing leadership and governance, and that they were happy that FJC has been able to help us survive. They also told me that all the loans which they provide under the program we are involved with carry the same interest rate: 3% over prime.
I also brought them up to date a bit about Pacifica, and a tad about myself, including the fact that I have been involved in numerous political and Non-Profit organizations, including Pacifica Governance for about 16 years and that in my “off hours” I’m a lawyer who has been involved in helping structure numerous business deals, including the “Pacifica Bridge Loan” in 2018, etc.
During the course of that conversation I explained the progress that Pacifica had made in getting its Audits more current, the fact that there was a Bylaw amendment process underway which had the potential of changing the governance structure of Pacifica, but made it clear that the PNB was divided on the subject. I also explained that Pacifica was not currently in a position to pay back the loan on its current maturity date, and that we were pursuing various financial options. I also answered whatever questions they asked, to the best of my ability. As a result of that conversation, Pacifica’s progress towards getting its audits current, and the fact that there is serious discussion and potential Bylaw Amendments relating to reducing the Board size and structure to enable Pacifica to become more stable and more able to face the financial and other challenges that it faces, they were encouraged enough that FJC is willing to tentatively offer to extend the loan to Pacifica for another year, with the same terms, without interruption and without additional financing costs.
I asked them about whether this tentative offer needed to be kept confidential, and they told me that that was not necessary. They are pleased to let people know about the services that they have provided to Pacifica and that they offer others.
Hopefully the Pacifica National Board will take this opportunity to extend the loan quickly so that we can concentrate on helping Pacifica move forward. Of course I will be happy to help facilitate this. Being of service to Pacifica so that it can flourish has always been my goal. I hope that this is another step in that direction.
Respectfully and with great hope for the future,
Pacifica National Director, KPFK
Well, that’s a turn-up for the books.
Three sets of points:
what this means, including the obvious effects;
why is the Foundation for the Jewish Community, operating as FJC, making this alleged offer?; &
as mentioned 2Oct, has the $3.265m loan already been extended from 1Apr2021 to some date in Sep2021?
What this means, & the obvious effects
A director approaching FJC without knowing whether ED ‘Fabiana’, for example, was already in dialogue with them, thereby making Pacifica look uncoordinated, making it look ‘unprofessional’, making it look a lil silly;
after the approach, Prez Lorin Silverman & Chief Legal Officer Mark Cohen were happy to negotiate with JannyG, rather than give her a ‘well, thx 4 the heads-up, now we’ll ask the Pacifica ED what Pacifica wants’;
FJC showed where they stand on the breakers v. solidarians divide, choosing to collude with the breakers, giving credence to their credibility as ‘agents able to get things done’, as ‘respected by the monied & the powerful’, as ‘people that those in RealWorld can understand & get on with’;
JannyG dropped a boulder on the PNB Loan Repayment Cttee, obliterating it before it could even have its first roll-call (it had been set-up Th1Oct with DeWayne Lark’s PNB motion, https://kpftx.org/archives/pnb/pnb201001/pnb201001_6467_agenda.pdf – page 2; “very unfair”, the measured DeWayne told a reporter, in his understated way);
this lone wolf ops will be plastered all over the breakers’ propaganda if the petition leads to referenda: ‘we’re Pacifica’s saviours, only we can get things done! . . . you may have doubted us last time, but see, only we can Nike!’;
the by-passing of both ED ‘Fabiana’ & the PNB can only sow discord, antagonise interpersonal relationships amongst all concerned;
the episode is further evidence that the ED & PNB majority are paralysed, unable to take the initiative; &
it’s another example of the breakers, rather than the Pacifica solidarians, seizing the initiative in the non-contest that would otherwise be a war of manoeuvre, for only one side knows how to fight; this, additional to the breakers reigning supreme in the non-contest that would otherwise be a war of position, the preparing of the ground prior to contact with the enemy, for only one side comes up with plans. This isn’t even men against boyz: it’s a slaughter.
Politically, what’s happened shows that (1) ED ‘Fabiana’ & the PNB majority have displayed a paralysis that simply wasn’t warranted by the extant conditions, & (2) the breakers, once again, have the energy & ideas to take the initiative.
The leading question, sadly, remains all forlorn, orphaned: when will the majority of elected Pacifica officials act on their own terms, rather than being reduced to acting as a reaction? When will activity supplant passivity?
Why has FJC made this alleged offer? Market conditions, & the borrower under-subscribed ALF
Back in summer 2019, this blog explained the falseness of a story repeatedly peddled by the likes of Nancy Sorden (PNB Chair when the FJC loan contract was signed, & WPFW listener-delegate), Chris Cory (the 2019 PNB Finance Cttee Chair, & KPFA listener-delegate), Eileen ‘it’s Ros-in’ Rosin (then & still PNB Audit Cttee Chair, & WPFW listener-delegate), as well as regular suspects, Goodman & Aaron:
[t]he Pacifica advocates of the loan from the Foundation for the Jewish Community, FJC, have presented it as a good Samaritan, doing it out of the kindness of its heart. In fact, FJC is in a competitive market as a manager of donor-advised funds, a sector of the charity industry. One of its money-making operations is running a fund that lends at prime-plus, the Agency Loan Fund, ALF. Donors to FJC can lodge money with ALF, as can outsiders, all hungry for those extra percentage points of interest earnt.
FJC had been having problems finding borrowers for these prime-plus loans: only 46% of ALF had been converted into loans at 31Mar2018, the very time of the 2Apr Pacifica loan (FJC’s latest auditor’s report, year-end 31Mar2018, page 20; page 22 of the PDF). So, of course, Pacifica, made to use its three buildings as collateral to satisfy the 3:1 assets-to-principal ratio, assets here being “the appraised value of the mortgaged properties under the Deeds of Trust” (Section 1.1(7), p. 2 of the loan agreement – link below), was welcomed with open arms. Sentiment this was not. http://fjc.org/uploads/user-uploads/image/FJC%203-31-18%20FINAL.pdf [loan agreement: https://mega.nz/#F!PloCiSqJ!9rLejSkttE7gCVCCq3q86g?b0IBlaiR]
The conversion into loans has now improved: from the 46% at 31Mar2018, the next year it was 45% (with the fund growing a lil, from $57.1m to $58.4m), rising to 54% at 31Mar2020 (with a 11% spurt to $64.7m; FJC auditor’s reports, pp. 21 & 24 respectively). As the Georgian infamously said, dizzy with success. The reports, since FY2006 (bar FY2007), are here: https://mega.nz/folder/4Al2TDCD#7brl9C0CSfpESGgby6ZTrQ.
For whatever reason, FJC has found it difficult to attract borrowers with assets that can be collateralised. ALF lends at p+3, prime plus 3 percentage points, so currently, & since 16Mar2020, lends at 6.25%, which is 92% over prime (3 ÷ 3¼). ‘Earning’ a safe 6.25% is probably better than bonds & shares – so keep Pacifica in ‘the FJC family’. After all, thru to 1Apr2021, it will have paid ~$750k for the privilege of collateralising all its property to FJC (that’s an average $250k a year, $62.5k a quarter, assuming that the current interest rate doesn’t change). Extending a year, Pacifica listeners hand over an extra ~$200k (@6.25% = $204 062.50). Makes a four-year total of ~$950k. 😋 👍 😋 for those donor-advised accountholders.
Money aside, FJC’s leader, Prez Lorin Silverman, by undermining ED ‘Fabiana’ & the Board as a whole, has made plain the sort of Pacifica he prefers: a ‘normal’ broadcaster, ‘vanilla’, predictable. In a word, Amerikan.
(Non-trivial note, a possible $287 223.92 note, in fact: the loan agreement actually speaks of percent, not percentage points . . . (let that sink in for a moment) . . . : “the Prime Rate […] plus 3%” (Sec. 2.2, p. 5; p. 6 of the PDF) . . . (pause again) . . . making the current interest rate not 6.25% but (3.25 x 1.03)% = 3.3475%. Quite the difference . . . ~$95k a year, in fact. Will Pacifica challenge FJC on this?. . . [A post this week, including an open letter to ED Brazon & legal counsel Arthur Schwartz, will give the workings for the three years, $287 223.92 = 748 815.26 − 461 591.34.])
Has the $3.265m loan already been extended from 1Apr2021 to some date in Sep2021?
On 2Oct I said there’d be a post on this, so . . .
The question arises because of a mention in Pacifica’s FY2018 auditor’s report. Dated 16July2020, it was accepted by the 16July PNB meeting but first published Sa15Aug (sic), without either explanation or apology, on its homepage & https://pacifica.org/finance_reports.php. It said the $3.265m loan would mature in “September 2021” (p. 14; p. 16 of the PDF). This was news, the first time such a thing had been stated.
So what was the prior evidence? (All emphases are added; links at the end.)
“This Loan Agreement (this ‘Agreement’) is entered into as of April 2nd, 2018” (2Apr2018 Pacifica-FJC loan agreement, p. 1; p. 2 of the PDF);
& “the loan matures after three years” (6Apr2018 Pacifica press release);
but, & this is the killer, “[t]he terms of the note call for interest-only payments due quarterly, with a final lump-sum payment of all unpaid interest and principal due in September 2021” (Pacifica’s FY2018 auditor’s report, 16July2020, p. 14);
& yet FJC’s auditors declared on 27Aug2019 & 16Sep2020, using the same wording, that no loan runs into 2021: “[l]oans receivable consist of interest-bearing loans to charitable organizations […] with varying maturities through December 2020” (Note 4: FY2019 report, p. 17 (p. 19 of the PDF), & the FY2020, p. 19; FJC’s year-end is 31Mar);
& those two reports, so starting the day before the Pacifica loan began, state in Note 4 the sale of FJC loans, but none is of the size of Pacifica’s $3.265m (remember, the auditors have to disclose material events occurring after the year-end);
. . . so, (1) who’s right: Pacifica’s auditor saying Sep2021 or FJC’s auditor saying Dec2020 at the latest? . . . or are they both wrong, & the early statements are correct, with the loan maturing 1Apr2021?;
& (2) if the loan matures 1Apr2021, & FJC’s expensive auditor’s report is accurate on the maturities date (but inaccurate on loan sales), who now owns the Pacifica loan?
The contradiction wasn’t noticed by anyone at either the Tu14July PNB Audit Cttee or the Th16July PNB. The claim for Sep2021 was so anomalous that I said nothing at the time, assuming it to be an error by Pacifica’s auditors, Rogers & Company. Their FY2017 report had factual errors, as noted in this blog, so my surprise soon passed. But what do I know?
Maybe one day a Pacifica director or a lowly LSB delegate will find out, & tell us.
. . . Vladimir & Estragon, sitting silently, gazing out across the ocean . . .
Two associated posts will soon follow:
• given the evidence of FJC auditor’s reports for FY2019 & 2020, has FJC sold the $3.265m loan?; &
• given evidence from FJC, Pacifica, & its FY2018 auditor’s report, has the loan been extended from 2Apr2021 to some day in Sep2021?
There will also be a post explaining why the current application for an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) is likely to fail given:
• the lending criteria of the SBA, the Small Business Administration;
• recent reports by its Inspector Generalon SBA lending decisions; &
• Pacifica’s financial performance – not since the recent past, 30Sep2016, the last date of audited financial statements, but since the deep past, 30Sep2006, a full 10 years earlier.
IT IS FORBIDDEN TO READ THIS POST WITHOUT BEING ACCOMPANIED BY THE ANTHEM OF PACIFICAWORLD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR FORBEARANCE. YOU MAY NOW CONTINUE.
F2Apr next year is a big, big day for Pacifica. That’s the latest day it’s contracted to hand over $3.265m to the Foundation for the Jewish Community, operating as FJC.
Pacifica, in the 2½ years since the loan was taken out, has never made a public statement as to how it’s going to do this.
But that’s not the worst of it: the public behaviour since Apr2018 of the Pacifica National Board & six executive directors (Livingston, Jackson, Aaron, Vernile, Reyes, Brazon – LJAVRB) has consistently neglected the matter in hand. Moreover, there’s been no push from the local station boards – occasional grumblings, but never enough to even meld into a motion. Not only has there never been a vote on a relevant motion during a public session of any Pacifica board or cttee, there’s never been a public Pacifica discussion of what options are available – even worse, there’s never been an exploration of what they could be. And never a mention in a public report from the private Pacifica sessions.
So no director has ever brought a motion, either to their local station board or the PNB. And each director, by law, has, in the jargon, a fiduciary duty, a duty to act in the best interest of the organisation. A director, by law, can’t be an ostrich.
Yet this is so.
Enter, stage left, as many DeWaynes as one can stomach, discursive DeWaynes, bombastic, hyperbolic, hyper-hectoring, the PacificaWorld incarnation of those irritating, pompous-sounding but sadly true epithets, all entering to stride the stage: egregious . . . negligent . . . dereliction . . . in a phrase, the refusal by each & every director to discharge their fiduciary duty.
🦗 🌊 🦗 💦 🦗 🌊 🦗
Only some of the directors are fresh to the fire. Others constitute the inner circle, & it’s not known publicly why these specimens have continually failed to discuss in public how this $3.265m could be raised. (An alternative is persuading FJC to extend the loan, changing the maturity date of the contract.) In the two-year period thru to 2Apr this year, one can assume the failure was Being Homer: cognitive myopia, an inability to think that far ahead. But silence during the last six months? That’s a lil more difficult to explain. Having seen off the breakers in the March referenda, wasn’t that the time to seize the initiative, start afresh, set a new tone? OK, the US COVID-19 epidemic had just grabbed the attention, soon followed by a collapse in Pacifica income, but surely this made it even more urgent to sort out where the $3.265m is coming from? But no. In PacificaWorld, failure is utter.
But the prime responsibility lies with ED Lydia Brazon, in post since 5Dec2019. Her job is to deal not just with the present, the firefighting, but with the future, especially with known problems like finding a multi-million sum by a known date: The Mi$$ion. So, existentially, the Pacifica mission reduces to The Mi$$ion. Why hasn’t she hired someone both to list the kinds of options & to identify concrete options, the possible courses of action? Scenarios that she can then present to the Board for decision?
. . . the cttee members decide not to decide on the preliminaries of how to discuss the discussing of a Pacifica strategic plan (not least the need to pay $3.265m within the next six months to the Foundation for the Jewish Community, FJC); instead they decide to decide to defer the deciding to the next meeting . . .
It was even on the agenda – it’s just that in 1½hrs they never got to it coz they had agreed (without objection) to place it as the penultimate substantive matter, & having spent almost all their time on whether to run a pilot on advertising (underwriting), the grains of time had passed thru the egg-timer. Ah well, there’s always another one in two weeks’ time. (The meeting next Monday, called on 6Sep, was cancelled on 15Sep, without explanation or subsequent comment – but then it was denoted as “Purpose: Discuss Strategic Planning”. https://kpftx.org/pacalendar/cal_show1.php?eventdate=20200928)
[Highlight, from Our Grace, hallow’d be Thy name. Priceless:
I’ve been hearing, um, complaints & criticisms from a number of sources that Pacifica doesn’t have a strategic plan, & I would like to suggest that we, argh, at least start talking about it & – urgh – that we – I’d like to extend this meeting for 30 minutes to start a discussion about a strategic plan.
(1:07:19) The effort to extend just withered. And died. Never put to the vote. There’s always next time.]
Apologies to the three- & four-year-olds of Tourcoing, France, on the Belgian border, 12May2020; photographer, Lionel Top.
Also recognition to the teacher, a profession much maligned by the barbarians. But much more meaningful, & solidarian, than verbal support is significant material support: here, the widespread use of daily rapid testing for SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing COVID-19. As Michael Mina (Harvard public health) et al. argued even in late June, feasible on a universal basis is a $1 test giving a result within 15mins. It’s akin to a pregnancy test: it’s non-laboratory, just saliva on a paper strip impregnated with antigen (that’s a protein from the virus – non-infectious, please note! – that triggers a detectable immune response).
. . . so much for focusing on massive vaccine development funding, moreover, providing competing pharma with the guarantee that if they fail then the taxpayer pays for their failure, & if they come up with a winner then the shareholders take the profits. Brilliant. Not the Amerikan way but the capitalist way, when capitalist interests run the state . . .
the leak –now mirrored across the net (only some of the 19 files are shown)
Most people, most of the time, don’t give a monkey’s about what goes on at Pacifica. And that includes the members. In the referenda brought by the breakers earlier this year, a massive 77% didn’t vote. (33k didn’t, 10k did.)
The anti-breakers shout about their ⅔rds support, but this misses the point. There’s aggregation – and there’s organisation. It’s the contrast between sharing attributes (typology) & being organised in & thru relatively enduring relations (structure). The contrast being statics & dynamics: one, a snapshot in the present; the other, a force projecting into the future. To be effective, atoms need to be organised – then mobilised. And things are so bad in PacificaWorld that even the anti-breaker higher-ups lack organisation: after three months they can’t get the PNB Strategic Planning Cttee to work. (Met twice, three cancelled, since it was ‘re-populated’ in April.)
RealWorld, in the latest form taken by its developed capitalist societies, has found a rhetoric to encourage both acceptance of an institution & participation within a ‘community’: be transparent, be open. Transparency of proceedings; transparency of facts. So, a threefold transparency: of process, of the world as it starts from, & of the world it creates. Well, the obdurate Pacifica secrecy culture is impervious to all this.
Three activities are essential to the species: working, reproducing, communicating. Pacifica’s pseudo-leaders may be able to work & reproduce, but they don’t know how to communicate, which is why transparency is an unwelcome complication. They’re always afraid they’ll be misunderstood – hence the sad performances of the hapless Mansoor ‘Uriah Heep’ Sabbagh & the hypocritical Chris ‘R Paul, my heart bleeds for WBAI’ Cory, continually fretting that the ignorant great unwashed won’t understand provisional financial data, data good enough for them, but not for others. Well, the hermeneutic failure is all theirs.
This contrasts with 26June2019: an exercise in transparency, communication, hermeneutic success.
On 2Apr2018, Executive Director Tom Livingston committed Pacifica to the biggest debt in its history, signing the $3.7m loan from the Foundation for the Jewish Community, known in the wider world as FJC.
So proud, the statement to the world included this from the then PNB Chair, Nancy Sorden (who’s still a director & WPFW listener-delegate):
I’d like to first thank the Pacifica National Board, for deciding on this approach and the enormous amount of work they put into it to get us to this point. Second, to FJC for providing this loan at a very difficult time for Pacifica, and third to the team of professionals that helped negotiate the settlement, secure the funding, identify and secure an agreement for our new transmitter location.
But the recognition of FJC didn’t stop there. A whole paragraph followed, detailing this ‘n’ that, as Mansoor would say, &, in referring to its Agency Loan Fund (ALF), Pacifica implied that this was the vehicle used to access money lodged at FJC. I carefully say ‘implied’ because no Pacifica employee or officer has ever disclosed the source of the loan: be it via ALF; one or more FJC donor-advised accounts; or some other FJC arrangement.
So given all these heart-felt thanks it was surprising that pretty soon, & with no explanation, the word ‘FJC’ became taboo, with the great & the good becoming boys in blue whenever someone mentioned the acronym. The policing became so extreme that Chair Nancy summarily ended the 20Dec2018 PNB meeting, cutting the stream, after ‘Jehovah’ ‘FJC’, that obscenity, had been uttered once too often by a blasphemer. PacificaWorld had collapsed into The Life of Brian.
(Digression . . . this portion of the meeting is an excellent example of how that breaker Rottweiler, Carole Travis, operates. A masterful performance. Not least for trying to get on the stack before the agenda item had even been reached. Superb. Chomping at the bit before the meat was even on the table. Kinetic. Carole, sadly, is now retired from the PNB & the KPFA Local Station Board, but hangs around, lurking, in the KPFA Community Advisory Board & as a trustee of one of the pension funds – along with former ED Tom Livingston. Yes, the ties that bind. https://kpftx.org/pacalendar/cal_show1.php?eventdate=20200222 (click ‘Committee Members’))
Giving credit where credit’s due, Chair Nancy, condemning mention of a press statement mentioning her very own words, richly earnt her PacificaWorld moniker, Chair ‘wooden as a chair’ Nancy. Nancy, we salute you, &, as they say interminably on Fox News, thank you for your service.
The self-appointed protectors of PacificaWorld created an aura of secrecy, one with its own lexicon: ‘the big loan’, to distinguish it from the Tom & Jerry loan, the Ben & Jerry loan – no, ‘the small loan’, the $0.5m loan collateralised by the Nakapon/National Office building (1921-1925 MLK Jr Way), the one ‘linked’ to director Jan Goodman, the Jan & Jerry loan, the Jan & fiends loan – no, the Jan & friends loan. In the leaked docs, ‘the small loan’ is called ‘the friendly loan’ & ‘the Pacifica supporters loan’ (sic). Inventive, & psychically revealing.
And yet the information gatekeepers, in doing their work, just couldn’t help themselves, antagonising fellow directors, by refusing to give everyone a copy of the loan documents. Directors Adriana Casenave & DeWayne Lark (both KPFT listener-delegates), not surprisingly, proved to protesteth the mosteth.
The notices for the PNB closed sessions say, “[o]n March 22, 2018 the PNB met in executive session and approved in principle a number of agreements that will immediately address our financial difficulties.” So, “in principle”: not the draft documents. The contracts were signed from the very next day: those with FJC signed 23Mar & before 3Apr by ED Livingston; the advertising contract with F.Y. Eye, Inc., signed 23Mar by ED Livingston (the euphemistic ‘underwriting’); & ‘the small loan’, the $0.5m, signed by director Grace Aaron perhaps 28Mar, & was due to be signed by director Mansoor Sabbagh. These docs weren’t distributed to all directors, either then or since. https://pacifica.org/documents/pnb_exec_180322.pdf
It should be added that the PNB Finance Cttee repeatedly complained about only some of its members having the FJC loan docs, even asking for them from the PNB. Fat chance. It was sorrowful to witness the repeated requests in Cttee of the forlorn Nick Arena, WPFW treasurer, a man who only happens to administer bank loan contracts in his day job. What could he contribute to Pacifica? Just as well he’s kept out of the loop.
(Elaboration . . . the lender of ‘the small loan’ was Pacifica Supporters Loan, LLC, & signing the contracts were two denoted “managers”, King Reilly & Jerry Manpearl. (Mr Manpearl just so happens to be hubby of a Ms Goodman: Jan, the Pacifica director.) The PNB agreed that Pacifica donors pay Mr Reilly $10k “as a brokers’ fee for arranging this loan”, & pay the lender $28k as “legal fees and expenses” – page 2 of doc #1. In contrast, it takes a worker on $15 an hour all of 4 months to earn $10k. Progressive values in action, the Reilly/Manpearl way. From 1921-1925 MLK Jr Way to the Reilly/Manpearl way. The Pacifica journey. All funded by the members & listeners. #ThisIsWhatWinningLooksLike. https://mega.nz/folder/EdtSkCDZ#oJZi7rkbk2KcI6DtzIudXw
— The ledger shows that ‘the small loan’, $0.5m, was the residue of a liquidated $2.075m loan, also at 7.5% a year, that had lasted one month. This loan had 13 lenders, of between $25k & $875k (Manpearl $400k, Reilly $875k). Curiously, a $50k lender ‘earnt’ no interest, so perhaps the sum either was only committed or was withdrawn the day it was deposited (if the interest were foregone as a donation to Pacifica then this would have been further recorded). The existence of this $2.075m (or $2.025m) loan has never been publicly acknowledged by Pacifica, neither by employees nor officers.)
The publication of the FJC loan docs on 26June2019 was a giant step forward in making Pacifica transparent. The fact that no director claimed responsibility speaks volumes. Instead, respect goes to those who work to inform the members & listeners. Respect.
In a separate post i’ll comment more narrowly on the KPFKD crisis thru consideration of two Pacifica meetings & a commentary: the Tu9June PNB Finance Cttee, & the W10June KPFKD Finance Cttee, & the W10June report by R Paul Martin to that evening’s WBAI Local Station Board (https://glib.com/treasurers_report_2020-06-10.pdf – 5pp. plus 3pp. appendices).
Strictly speaking, & this is the practical reality, KPFKD’s fate is Pacifica’s, not the station’s. A station owns nothing, not even the paper-clip being flipped across the station manager’s desk while he stares at the spreadsheet. Yes, the listeners think of the station as their own, they’re attached (Bowlby), & the station activists have not just a cognitive but an emotional involvement in the station, but in the famed last analysis, each station (1) is a custodian of Pacifica assets, administering them, (2) owns no debt, & (3) is an accounting unit.
This means that a revenue collapse at a station is Pacifica’s problem.
And this can cause a problem in a signal area when the self-understanding of what it is to support ‘my’ station, to love ‘my’ station, to be involved in Pacifica, is based on a falsehood, when, in the strictest sense (& so not to be thought unkind), the self-understanding isn’t up to the task, it’s practically inadequate.
As i’ve said elsewhere, all station accounting data, either as an aid for management decision-making or to inform the members & listeners, should allow a fair comparison between station performances, so of like with like. This requires the stripping out of the effects of historical accidents, which started in the Garden of Eden, when Pacifica & KPFA constituted an identity, the one & the same. The most glaring effect is that some stations are privileged, enjoying Pacifica buildings, land, & transmitters on a rent-free basis, thus being subsidisedby the other stations, which also have the extra burden of paying non-Pacificans simply to function. A double burden is a double shift (Arlie Hochschild).
And the political effect of this persisting deficiency in how some Pacificans self-conceptualise & live affectively? Station chauvinism; separatism; provincialism. Station chauvinism: breeding poison, fuelling resentment. Separatism: break up Pacifica, destroy the network. Provincialism: springing from an exclusory proprietary attitude, it’s simultaneously inward-looking & antagonistic to others, causing the living of an in-group/out-group perceived reality, friend versus foe (Carl Schmitt). All this, antithetical to the nature that is Pacifica.
In terms of getting out of Pacifica’s endemic crisis, this blog (& in prior comments at Chris Albertson’s http://wbai-nowthen.blogspot.com/) has consistently noted the obvious: the only plausible way to, in the current idiom, let Pacifica breathe, is to negotiate a signal-swap (two isn’t needed), thereby using cash both to settle debts & to pay for the implementation of a network development plan. Only this can give Pacifica a future.
The Gorgon Grace approach has always been intrinsically myopic. Preserving the $3.265m loan principal, thru either extending the loan term or finding a new lender, has never addressed Pacifica’s future. It has only condemned Pacifica to a perpetual present, a Sisyphean existence, perpetual firefighting mode, the living of a diminishing, & so debilitating, present. The Grace approach, accepted by the PNB by default, the typical Pacifica action of inaction, an act of omission, has choked Pacifica, presenting it with the living of a shrinking horizon.
Only by eliminating the constant firefighting is it possible, but not guaranteed, to (1) pay bills timely, (2) give management, staff, the PNB, & the local station boards the time to focus on the future, rather than the present, & (3) improve the appalling interpersonal interactions at four of the stations (WBAI is relatively pacific).
In terms of the politics (not morality) of practice, Pacificans need to grasp that money isn’t necessarily sinful, but instead can simply make life a lot easier & less stressful. (Ask the hundreds of millions of Chinese no longer in dire poverty.) Most so-called leftists fail to recognise the liberatory potential of money (& of marketing) in our current kind of society, one that’s necessarily mediated by money: there’s no way to avoid this, other than suffering the consequences even more. Regrettable, yes, but true. It means money is needed to allow Pacifica to regain health, & to not just grow (augment existing capacities) but to develop (acquire new qualities).
It’s time to flourish, not suffer.
But how to do that?
Money. And the only feasible source, other than Danny Glover, is a signal-swap. But that can be a two-year process, so in the meantime Pacifica needs to find a way to survive, & the depth of its cashflow crisis may require a two-stage response.
First, the only way to chop enough costs rapidly is to chop the staff at both KPFA & KPFKD, changing their character, making Pacifica as a whole volunteer-based. Second, its cashflow crisis may require the sale of a building, even two. (Note that as they’re collateralised to the Foundation for the Jewish Community, FJC, at a 3:1 asset-to-principal ratio, it means FJC gets a third of the valuation sum constitutive of the contract.)
Pacifica is in its current Laurel & Hardy mess because the PNB has been in denial since 1Apr2018. It had taken out the $3.7m loan from FJC but didn’t take responsibility for the future, grasping the monetary nettle by starting the process of doing a signal-swap.
In any case, a radio signal isn’t what it used to be. Digitisation has caused broadcasting to be transcended by providing. The broadcast schedule, transcended by the download list. The position on the dial, transcended by reputation, sustained by social media, enhanced by branding. The radio, transcended by mobile digital devices. Radio is 20th century, it’s passé. It’s one reason why the BBC since 2018 no longer speaks of radio but of “sounds”: not a device, but an output.
Yes, Pacifica’s listeners are, literally, a dying breed. If Pacifica is to avoid extinction it needs to grasp the future, it needs leadership, it needs a group to initiate a transformation. But do they exist? The breakers do. We know that. But can the Pacifica partisans rise to the occasion? As Primo said, thru his alter ego in the Belarusian forest, se non ora, quando?, if not now, when?
. . . one reason why the PNB only has teleconferences – without cams . . .
At least the protesters in the streets today have some vitality. Back in PacificaWorld the directors just keep on keeping on, shuffling along as zombies, towards the abyss they refuse to see.
Besides the obvious – money & more appealing programmes – Pacifica needs one thing: Karen.
Yes, the directors vary in their abilities, but why the continuing collective failure? Just like the street, there has never been a more opportune moment to say, no more. Cometh the moment, cometh the Karen. Karen needs to step up to the counter.
The anti-breaker coalition hasn’t endured: Steinberg & Aaron have pushed Reyes aside, trying to close down discussion, stitching things up beforehand over Skype calls. The revived PNB Strategic Planning Cttee has been stymied. It’s as if when the moment suits them they’ll sort something out with Brazon, getting Marc Hand or whoever to try to find a new lender. What isn’t happening is transparency of proceedings, giving Pacifica members the opportunity to then hold directors & delegates accountable for their views/silence, for their action/inaction. All this has been made worse by the ugly tone that has descended upon the PNB, under the chairmanship of Alex Steinberg.
The differences between the street process & the PNB process can be pursued further.
The political problem facing the protesters, albeit unacknowledged, is the politics of the institutionalisation of enthusiasm, that is, how to meliorate oppression (glossed as achieving justice) through new or reformed institutional arrangements. So what institutional demands will the protest coalesce around? Or will it just peter out, like Occupy, without even an organisational legacy, just a fond memory?
So it’s the unknown that’s being lived in the street, & this makes the behaviour of the Pacifica directors even more inexcusable: they know what has to be done; they simply refuse to take responsibility, they simply refuse to carry out their duty. Instead, the last two months of proceedings have been largely devoted to tertiary & quaternary matters.
the Pacifica directors know what has to be done
they simply refuse to take responsibility
they simply refuse to carry out their duty
The reality is in plain sight: Pacifica is contracted to pay the Foundation for the Jewish Community, FJC, the $3.265m principal by 31Mar2021. What payment options have the directors contractually committed Pacifica to?
a swap or sale of one or more radio station licenses or a sale of other Pacifica owned assets of sufficient value to repay this Loan (as defined below), or such other sources that will become available
Just over two months ago, on 31Mar, when many were basking in the glow of the referenda results, I drew attention to the enduring problem, the elephant, the fact that Pacifica not only didn’t have a plan for what to do but hadn’t even identified the practical options it has. As I said,
So what’s it going to be: signal swap? buildings sales? extend the loan? find new lender? maybe the Jesse James approach, improving on the Symbionese Liberation Army?
With not an ounce of expectation, I asked the question whether at the Th2Apr PNB meeting a director would take the initiative & do the obvious.
No doubt counter-intuitive, but what Pacifica needs at this moment is a Karen: a director, of any pronoun, who demands to speak to the manager. Tonite, will anyone move a motion to instruct ED Brazon to identify the practical options Pacifica has for paying $3.265m to FJC by 31Mar2021?
Not to be thought reductive, but no Karen equals no Pacifica: Karen = Pacifica.
~💗~ code 666, Karen at the counter ~💗~
How many are in the streets?
It seems to be roughly ½% of those older than 14. ½%. Not even the fabled 1%.
Politically it’s always crucial to have a sense of scale, not to be fooled when seeing lots of people around you: it’s easy in the enthusiasm of the moment to be deluded, & misled in your judgment.
Do a ballpark exercise. The crowds are say 15k, & there are only 50 states, plus DC, & the other colonies. OK, even double the crowd: 30k x 50 = 1.5m.
US population is ~330m, & those aged 0-14 are 18.46%, which leaves ~268.9m. And ½% is ~1.345m.
How may the fallout of the protests affect electoral politics? Trump lost the 2016 popular vote by ~2.9m (65 853 514 − 62 984 828 = 2 868 686). This time he could lose it by 5m – and still win the electoral college. Remember, a US voter casts their ballot not for a presidential candidate but for a party’s state list of candidate Electors.
Meanwhile, the most excited of all by far, the most expectant, is Viro the Virus, the billions & billions & billions of SARS-CoV-2 virions.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html(0-14: 18.46%; this source is used because the latest age structure at the Census Bureau website is 2015;note, the CIA uses a different total population figure; re the age stratum, it’s ♀ 30 034 371 + ♂ 31 374 555 = 61 408 926; incidently, the total is ~20m for each of the 5-year age groups from 0-4 thru to 60-64)
. . . “these amazing heroes”: FJC proudly advertising during the 2014 Gaza Massacre that it acts as a conduit for boosting the morale of enforcers of the colonial military dictatorship over Palestinians; ad in the NYC-area Jewish News, late July/early Aug 2014 . . . when it comes to the crunch, liberalism always breaks down, here with religio-ethnic supremacism trumping individual equality, the equal worth of human groups, & even the imperative of property rights . . .
If you must sing ‘Happy birthday, FJC! / happy birthday, FJC!’, at least repeat for more than 20secs whilst washing your hands in the proper manner, as modelled by Dr Tedros, the world’s fave Ethiopian (his day job is Director-General of one of those globalist elite organisations, the World Health Organization):
Please send celebratory greetings to Lorin Silverman, President & Treasurer of the Foundation for the Jewish Community (FJC), President & Treasurer of the Marty & Dorothy Silverman Foundation (MDSF), founder & President of F. Y. Eye, Inc., & President of National Enterprises Corp.:
firstname.lastname@example.org & 520 8th Ave, Floor 20, NYC 10018
MDSF: 130 East 59th St, Suite 1102, NYC 10022
email@example.com & 130 East 59th St, Suite 1102, NYC 10022
National Enterprises Corp.: 130 East 59th St, Floor 11, NYC 10022
FJC don’t let borrowers default: they sell “potentially impaired” loans, without discount, to MDSF. The advertising broker, F. Y. Eye, Inc., has a $37 000 advertising contract with Pacifica, as part of the $3.7m loan. All this is explained in this link, which also has all the loan documents:
FJC, in their latest auditor’s report, year-ending 31Mar2019, had net assets of ~$262m, investment income of $10m ($2.6m via the Agency Loan Fund from Pacifica, other borrowers, & sundry investments; possibly income from other loans; income from stocks & bonds), donors’ contributions of $33m, & disbursed $38m. (ALF generated $3m income but some, ≥ $0.4m, went to outside investors – p. 22 cf. p. 4; pp. 24 & 6 of the PDF.)
MDSF, in their latest 990-PF public filing, year-ending 31July2018, had net assets of ~$447m (fair market value ~$588m), investment income of $15m, interest ‘earnt’ from loans (such as those bought from FJC) of $2.4m, & disbursed $11m (including $10 000 to Forward, $42 366 to Mother Jones, & $76 800 to New Israel Fund).
[UPDATE: I seem to have got FJC’s birthday wrong. Not that Lorin rang me, but I’ve just come across an old note taken from Bloomberg’s: “[a]bout FJC […] FOUNDED 09/15/1995”. So, correct fiscal year, incorrect date. Not 1Apr1995. Apologies. https://www.bloomberg.com/profile/person/19329177 (undated webpage; on Mark Cohen, said to be FJC Chief Legal Officer & Assistant Secretary)]