1 – Please detail your qualifications for the NPR Board.

 I have for worked for four university licensees. My current station, WFAE in Charlotte , negotiated a divestiture from UNC-Charlotte, which has operated successfully for 15 years.

I am past board chair of the Public Radio Program Directors’ Association. I was president of North Carolina Public Radio Association, as well as Southern Public Radio (now part of EPRM).

For the past two years I have been treasurer of the University-Station Alliance. I served recently on the HD Radio receiver advisory committee at NPR Labs.

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?

At the risk of introducing more jargon, I think the stations and NPR should declare “an intentional, shared future”. From what I see neither the stations nor NPR have a very bright future without the other partner. We need to get over our mutual suspicions. We need to find a CEO who truly wants to build a bridge to stations and who will reinforce that message in NPR’s culture. 

Second, the Digital Revolution gives us creative and public service opportunities we could only dream about in earlier years. However we desperately need an income model for digital. NPR needs to protect the core terrestrial radio service by creating more exceptional content for stations during peak listening periods.  

The third issue is literally more concrete: NPR has a great opportunity for creativity and growth in its new building. I would like to help with that process.

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

I do think the board needs to remind itself--over and over—that the system of public radio (public media) producers and distributors is massive and far-flung. Some projects fit all sizes and types of stations, some don’t.

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?

Our station, a community licensee, has just tackled this issue and has a policy in place that covers board, staff and advisory groups.

The key is disclosure. You can set a dollar level that represents a material transaction. If a transaction reaches that level the project needs prior approval by the governing body. The person who is subject to the conflict should abstain from voting. The decision should be documented in the organization’s official meeting minutes.

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? 

I don’t think the annual business meeting is the key problem. A two-hour meeting in a hotel ballroom isn’t going to make or break our public service to the nation. It has been a long time since a listener asked me what happened at the last NPR annual business meeting.

I think regional organizations’ meetings are very important. They bring station and system colleagues together in financially affordable settings. All speakers can be heard. It is certainly strenuous for NPR staffers to shuttle across the country to various regional meetings, but it has always worked. Local colleagues who can’t or won’t attend a regional meeting most likely won’t attend a national gathering either.

However regional meetings don’t demonstrate the full scope of the national system.

We can fix the meeting and quorum problems if the system does think a national, in-person experience is a top priority. As I read the NPR Bylaws, there is a provision for calling special meetings; board members can do it or station members can. There is also a provision to vote on issues by mail in the event that an in-person quorum cannot be reached.

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? 

Travel costs are high and getting worse (as stated in the previous question on national meetings). I think we can address many of these issues through ad-hoc advisory committees with teleconferences or web conferences. I have had good experiences with ad hoc groups, such as the group on early stage HD radio receivers.  That group met as needed over two years. Members teleconferenced or exchanged email when needed.

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? 

NPR’s legal staff tells me that the policy on closed meetings is aligned with CPB policy. If you look there, the categories of closed meetings are quite standard—personnel matters, legal advising and certain contract negotiations, and so on.

In my opinion, the more meetings that are closed, the harder it is for the institution to present itself as transparent. In NPR’s special case, it is also harder for it to make its case to its station-partners that it is acting in an inclusive, mutually beneficial manner.