1 – Please detail your qualifications for the NPR Board.

I have worked in Public Radio for 20 years. I have established and managed stations in small and large markets; and I currently lead a regional network. I spent the first half of my career at KCRB in Bemidji and at KSJR in Collegeville, Minnesota. I left Minnesota Public Radio for a few years to lead strategic planning, fundraising and business development for a nonprofit hospital group, and was Executive Director of a hospital foundation in Pennsylvania. I also served as Vice President for Advancement and University Relations for a liberal arts university in southern California. Since returning to MPR in 1996, I’ve held a series of leadership positions and I’ve been Chief Operating Officer of MPR and the American Public Media Group for the past five years. I have extensive strategic planning, fundraising, board development, programming, and executive leadership experience and will bring these perspectives to the NPR Board.

2 - If elected to the NPR Board, on what Board Committee – or in connection with what issue – do you believe you have the most to offer NPR?

I will serve wherever the Board can best benefit by my expertise and experiences. There are at least three committees that appear to be good matches:

• The Finance & Administration Committee appears to be a good fit. I have an advanced degree in public administration and years of experience in the financial and legal intricacies of running complex, for-profit and nonprofit organizations.
• Distribution & Interconnection provides the backbone delivery technologies for stations and networks. The strength of the entire public radio system requires that we stay abreast of new technologies and prudently adopt those that will allow us to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing media landscape.
• The Membership Committee is also of particular interest to me. As a system, we must reinforce the relationship between Member Stations and NPR so as to ensure the health of our vital public service mandate — both locally and nationally.

3 - What is your overall assessment of the NPR board? Is it responsive to stations? Is it sufficiently high profile?

The Board is dedicated, thoughtful, and cares deeply about the mission. Historically, there have been times when it seemed that the composition of the Board was more representative of the diversity of stations than in recent years. The Board’s central challenge now is the struggle to optimize its two mandates: working to strengthen NPR as a significant national media institution, and supporting Member Stations in becoming significant local or regional institutions. These two imperatives have not always received equal priority, and more attention must be invested in the strength of Member Stations.

I understand that being on the Board requires a tremendous amount of time and energy — and I applaud everyone who has volunteered to serve. Every day MPR’s listeners benefit from the fine work and the quality programs from NPR. If elected, I will be dedicated to strengthening NPR News for the benefit of our audiences and Member Stations.

4 - NPR does not currently have a conflict of interest policy and procedure for Board members. What sort of policy should be established in order to handle conflict of interest situations when a board member has a primary duty as an employee or officer of a competing station, network or distributor?

In a membership organization, I think it is almost certain that a Board Member will have some kind of conflict of interest during their term. It is the mark of mature and effective boards (nonprofit and for-profit) to have explicit, written conflict of interest policies and procedures. The NPR Board should adopt such a policy.

Conflicts and tensions on a board are not inherently bad—they can lead to insight and understanding. But conflicts need to be fully disclosed for boards to govern effectively. It has been my experience, working for and on many boards, that the disclosure of conflicts is a matter of personal and professional integrity. Any board member sensing a conflict has the duty to disclose it. All MPR officers and board members formally disclose their potential conflicts, annually. For me, a written conflict of interest policy is simply best practice for effective and transparent governance.

5 - Since the institution of the A-Reps meeting format, NPR has not achieved a quorum for its Annual Meeting. Do you view this as a problem? Do you have any recommendations for engaging more stations in the citizenship of the annual meeting? 

It’s been said “the world is run by those who show up,” and self-interest should be a sure way to motivate people to actively participate. Even so, I think we need to consider options to engage more members and not merely focus on generating attendance at the A-Reps meeting. These options could include:

• Scheduling the A-Reps meeting adjacent to another large conference like the PRPD or PRDMC;
• Creating opportunities to engage peers to talk about substantive issues facing their stations – we need to listen to each other to understand how success was achieved and learn what we can from failures;
• Considering simple alternatives to establishing a quorum, such as permitting proxies to achieve a quorum, allowing the regional organizations to carry an entire block of votes, and reducing the threshold to establish a quorum; and,
• Using tele/video conferencing technologies for members to participate in A-Reps meetings.

6 - What suggestions might you have to add diverse experience and opinions to the board and management deliberative process? Would the reimplementation of working advisory committees with station staff members and others for specific topics and issues serve as a way to expand knowledge and increase awareness of station’s needs, feelings and reactions? 

Adding non-board members to board committees is a great way to expand input and include the insights of those with unique expertise and perspective. There would be additional benefits, including:

• Engaging a wider circle of station managers. This would go a long way toward improving understanding and creating shared positions on key issues;
• Developing leadership and board member skills, and identifying prospective board members that anticipate the future board needs;
• Generating opportunities for other station-based and network staff to be involved in discussions. These professionals could add their input, and then bring informed perspectives and strategies back to their stations and work units;
• Developing deeper connections to people in other industries and in other public service sectors; and,
• Cultivating prospective station and network employees and donors/funders.

7 - As an NPR Board member, how would you distinguish between the types of business you believe the Board should conduct in Executive Session versus the business that should be conducted in Open Session? 

Transparency is the hallmark of good governance and I am committed to open discussion at all levels. While executive sessions are needed for certain matters, it should be a short list that includes personnel decisions, legal matters which bind the organization to confidentiality, and strategic issues and opportunities involving third parties. My default position is that the deliberative process of the board should be open and in public sessions.

If elected, I will work hard to promote transparent governance by the NPR Board.