[grc] ATTN: Previous GRC Host Stations: Nominate your GRC Steering Committee Reps TODAY!

[Betty J. McArdle]

Hi All,

I have read Sharon's call for station's to nominate a representative for their station to participate in the "Steering Committee", or whatever name we all agree on, and find that there is not language saying that the representative must be a staff member of the previous host station.  I have requested that KBOO nominate me to represent the station.  I was co-chair of the committee that put on the 2018 GRC in Portland.  I am a member and volunteer at KBOO but not on staff.  I believe that with my experience from that GRC I have a lot to contribute to 1) selecting a station/city for future GRCs and 2) am able and willing to help future host stations.

There have been many things said by various people regarding this issue.  I welcome the discussion.  It should help to keep the GRC strong.

Thank you all,

Betty McArdle
Community Media Assistance Project (CMAP)

-----Original Message-----
From: grc <grc-bounces at maillist.peak.org> On Behalf Of Michelle Bradley via grc
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 3:52 PM
To: grc at maillist.peak.org
Subject: Re: [grc] ATTN: Previous GRC Host Stations: Nominate your GRC Steering Committee Reps TODAY!

I agree in part with Al on this, we do not need a "steering committee" 
as suggested in the past.  This roller coaster over GRC governance continues to teeter totter because of the massive clash between "traditionalists" and "progressives" where it comes to the question of the GRC. (footnote: "progressives" as in those who want to see progress at the GRC, which allows for updating and creating new traditions)..

I do feel that the Sharon Scott vision for a "steering committee" is a slightly misguided and is extremely exclusionary.  While those who have hosted GRCs in the past are a great resource for information in order to avoid some of the "lessons learned" that have happened at past conferences, it does exclude out many other subject matter experts in the fields of event planning and knowledge of the current broadcasting landscape.  This turns the GRC into an exclusive club with a secret handshake while excluding out other grassroots radio stakeholders.

I do agree that we need to move away from the term "steering committee" 
as that leaves a bad taste in the mouths of those who are more traditionalist and rightfully so. I have witnessed the power struggles and politics where it comes to organizing this thing and what results is a hastily planned event.  However, sometimes, even when hastily planned, we do get a winner... Charleston.  I would suggest that we have instead, a "site selection committee", which is limited solely to the discussion of site selection based on the potential hosts who bid.  Such a committee has no ability to "steer" the GRC in any way other than to which city the event will be held at.  Such a "site selection committee" 
should not be discriminatory nor exclusive to only the club members who have been initiated with the secret handshake.

It's important to realize that for some in our community, some places are off limits.  Places like Florida and Texas are good examples as a result of the tyrant governments there that oppress women, minorities and the LGBT.  There are places in the south that will detain and arrest you for using the wrong bathroom. There are places where you will be more likely to be detained or profile because of the color of your skin or your accent.  Those economies do not deserve our support until they get their acts together.  A more well rounded selection committee with a public outreach can best work out those concerns.

Honestly, right now, we should be planning the site for the 2025 GRC, not the 2024.  While I do not feel that Charleston is the best site from some perspectives, such as travel access and accessibility for participants with disabilities, the people there have fresh experience and a willingness to do this again.  I will support a redux in Charleston as an "extension" of the 2023 show, but overall, we need to be looking for a 2025 site, right now.  We should be able to announce the 2025 site on the last day of the 2024 conference.

One thing we need to do is review the data to determine the locations of the 2023 Window LPFM stations that would be more likely to attend a GRC (those in REC's segment 300 series [new secular organizations] and 400 series [existing secular cause-based organizations]).  I think that somewhere like West Virginia, while it does have some issues, do not have discriminatory laws like the southern states do, but I think it is within roadtrip distance to many stations and with airline access via ORD, CLT, DCA and ATL, most of the country is a single connection airline flight away.

We need to attract new people to the GRC, but in order to do that, we need to adapt to changing times.  We need to be progressive while respecting traditions that have not been made obsolete by technology, the marketplace or political climate.  These conferences need to be welcoming, informative, affordable, accessible, inclusive and worth someone's time to take out of their schedule to travel.  Nobody wants GRC to turn into NFCB Jr., but at the same time, people's expectations are changing as our society evolves (especially those who are coming into community radio that have no experience with the 1990s community radio model).  We need to be open to progress, but we need to progress slowly where we are not selling out to corporate.

Sharon has stepped up at a time when no one else has. That must be recognized and commended.  But at the same time, Sharon and WXOX do not own the GRC.. neither does REC, Prometheus, Common Frequency, Pacifica nor NFCB..  Instead, it is a cooperative movement that everyone who is willing to step up needs to have that opportunity to be heard and be involved, not just the secret handshake singing koom-ba-yah by the campfire.

I respect Sharon's leadership in trying to salvage the GRC in 2023 and I will support her playing a significant role in the 2024 and 2025 planning.. but it can't be Sharon calling all of the shots, like the impression that some folks (including myself) have seen here.  I respect Sharon for planting the seed to keep this topic fresh but it is up to all of us to collectively make these decisions, not just the private club.

We are all in this together.

--
*Michelle Bradley, CBT, KU3N*
/Founder: REC Networks/
+1 202 621-2355
https://recnet.com
facebook.com/recnet - Twitter: @michichan

On 2/19/2024 5:40 PM, al davis via grc wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 11:47:44 -0500
> Sharon Scott via grc<grc at maillist.peak.org>  wrote:
>> CALLING ALL GRC HOST STATIONS!!!! SEEKING GRC STEERING COMMITTEE 
>> NOMINEES
>>
>> At the GRC11 in Madison, Wisconsin, conference attendees decided to 
>> "create a steering committee to help coordinate discussions, assist 
>> in
>
> Then at every GRC after that, it was "decided" again to NOT do any 
> formal organization, essentially repealing the so-called "vote" to 
> formalize at Madison, which nobody remembers anyway.
>
> A formal steering committee is an incredibly bad idea.
> _______________________________________________
> grc mailing list
> grc at maillist.peak.org
> http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc
_______________________________________________
grc mailing list
grc at maillist.peak.org
http://maillist.peak.org/mailman/listinfo/grc