Bay Citizen, NYT Partner in SF,
Evasive on $17M Fiscal Transparency

As a news junkie, I have followed the creation of the Bay Citizen, a regional online news service that twice-weekly provides content to the New York Times' print and online Bay Area section. There is serious money underwriting this effort, but scant financial transparency from its leaders.

The Bay Citizen's site explains their start:

Concerned about the negative impact of this decline on the community, in early 2009 local philanthropist Warren Hellman convened an advisory committee to examine the issue and offer possible solutions. In January 2010, after many months of research and planning, and with a generous $5 million contribution from the Hellman Family Foundation, The Bay Citizen (first known as the Bay Area News Project) was founded.

That figure is lower than what the FAQ page states:

We launched with $9 million in start-up funding from foundations, philanthropists, corporations, and individual members.

Did they launch with $5 or $9 million in the bank? Would be good of the Bay Citizen to clarify how much they started with, to help watchdogs track their funding.

In January 2011 the project touted raising even more money, shared some detailed about where it came from and what a few big donors had given:

The $10 million was contributed by a broad array of philanthropists, foundations, members and corporations, including $1 million gifts from the Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund; the Mimi and Peter Haas Fund; the Fisher Family Fund; the Elizabeth and William Patterson Foundation; Jeff and Laurie Ubben; and Diane B. Wilsey. Other contributors include the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation; John S. and James L. Knight Foundation; Lisa and John Pritzker Family Fund; Arthur Rock; and Tom Steyer and Kat Taylor. The Bay Citizen also welcomed First Republic Bank and Wells Fargo as major corporate sponsors. (A full list of contributors is available at www.baycitizen.org/about/founding-members/).

It's safe to say this news outlet has taken in at least $17 million since Warren Hellman began the project in 2009, more than two-years ago. That's a lot of money, and certainly raised my curiosity about the Bay Citizen's fiscal transparency, along with their oft-stated mission to not only deliver the news but also "foster civic engagement".

This is the background that led me this week to follow-up on a phone chat I had in June with the project's director of marketing, Rose Roll, who is listed at GuideStar as the person to contact for info regarding their IRS 990.

Here are many of the questions sent to Roll and several colleagues.

When do you expect the first IRS 990 filing from your accounting firm to be delivered to your CEO, Linda Frazier? Any idea when she will accept and sign off on the filing, thus becoming on that date, the filing available for public inspection?

There is no annual report on your web site. My recollection from our phone conversation is that you hope to have the report ready sometime in July. Do you have a date for when this fiscal document will be posted?

I am a longtime sunshine and non-profit accountability advocate, and find it deplorable that the Bay Citizen with $9 million in startup funds currently shares not even a single page of data about that kitty. How about immediately posting a breakdown of how much came from which source and expenses?

Other pushy questions asked about town hall meetings as part of their non-profit agenda, if their board meetings were open or closed to the public, and would they share board minutes on their site.

Additionally, I wanted to know how much their media partners - the New York Times, UC Berkeley School of Journalism, KGO Radio - contribute to the project's budget.

Rolls sent a terse, and very disappointing, reply:

We are currently working on these documents for 2010, which was our first year of operation. The documents will be available on our website in due course. Thank you for your interest.

My response asked the Bay Citizen's top leaders to reconsider giving me decent answers. This reply hit my in-box today, from Jonathan Weber who is editor in chief:

[A]s Rose said, we will have 2010 financial info posted in due course. We were founded in 2010 and our reporting of financial data is in line with normal practices as to timing. We have around 30 employees and that pretty much explains how we are spending money. The tone of your questions indicates that you think we have something to hide, which most certainly is not the case. We're just not in a position to answer detailed questionnaires of this sort in advance of posting the information on our site.

A very evasive reply that would please Rupert Murdoch, in boldly attempting to swat away basic fiscal and accountability concerns. Wish I knew why Rolls and Weber only tersely address the IRS 990 and annual report questions, totally ignoring my other questions. Wonder what they would tell their reporters to do if they had made similar queries of a $17 million non-profit, and were stonewalled.

Rather humorously, Weber thinks I should simply accept his word that his employee costs "pretty much" should satisfy my curiosity about his budget and revenue sources.

Reminds me of the days before we had GuideStar and everyone had to ask AIDS Inc nonprofits for their IRS 990s, and the charities wanted to know why the tax filings were being requested, how they would be used by the requester, etc. AIDS groups also once dismissed their critics, saying the tone of their requests and statements that high salaries were at the expense of direct services to people with AIDS were offensive. Life is unfair.

With $17 million, a deep back bench of private foundations, wealthy individuals and myriad corporate donors, extended partnerships with the New York Times, UC Berkeley and ABC/Disney's local AM radio outlet and a host of local online news sites, there should be more much more fiscal transparency from the Bay Citizen.

Silent Film Festival
Returns to the Castro Theater

During the summer, when Hollywood dumps its latest and loudest slate of ear-pounding popcorn movies at the multiplexes, I go out of my way to find alternative cinematic pleasures. Luckily, here in San Francisco the fantastic annual Silent Film Festival unspools at this time of year at the Castro theater.

This year's edition is full of the diverse array of silents we come to expect - from cartoons to classics - and educational discussions with preservationists. As in years past, I expect full houses for many of the evening screenings and enthusiastic movie-lovers at every show.

Of keen interest are two works by directors from abroad.

The first is Yasujiro Ozu's "I Was Born, But... ", which New York Times film critic A.O. Scott described as "a small masterpiece, perfect in design and execution" when it recently enjoyed an extended run at Manhattan's Film Forum.

The plot is thin. Two young brothers join a fun-seeking gang of kids, discover their father makes a fool of himself for his boss, and the boys want him to become the leader of the company where he works. While I've seen many of Ozu's later sound classics, I've never had the pleasure of seeing any of his silents. That will soon change.

This Ozu film screens on Friday, at 4:15 PM, with musical accompaniment by Stephen Horne.

The second work I'll be sure to watch is "The Nail in the Boot", directed by Mikhail Kalatozov and which was made in Soviet Georgia. Kalatozov went on to make the Russian sound masterpieces "The Cranes are Flying" and "I Am Cuba". The festival program describes the plot:

The first part of the film takes place on a battlefield. A soldier is dispatched to notify divisional headquarters that the armored train is faced with destruction and urgently needs aid. On the way, his foot is injured by a nail sticking out of the sole of his boot, and he fails to reach headquarters in time. The train is lost. The second part of the film is a courtroom enquiry into the action of the protagonist, at which different aspects of the story emerge. ...

The program says the narrative can be confusing, but it surely won't matter much because of Kalatozov's strong sense of visual composition, expressionistic lighting and inventive camerawork. This film plays on Sunday at 4:15 PM, also with musical accompaniment by Stephen Horne.

What more could we ask for from the Silent Film Festival? Great movies, fabulously restored prints, live music highlighting the action on the silver screen, and it all happens at the great Castro theater motion picture palace.

Ocamb Criticizes EQCA's Laziness
Over Gay Education Bill Alerts

For many years, I have kicked Equality California's butt for being too concerned with rubber chicken galas, pleasing corporate sponsors, hosting cocktail receptions at the estates of A-gays, and failing to regularly engage the grassroots community. I've also urged longtime LA-based reporter Karen Ocamb to stop serving as a mouthpiece for EQCA.

Back in April, I lodged several complaints about how she allowed her "independent" blog to be co-opted by EQCA, as she published only the most gushing pieces about the group and its former inept executive director. My post noted that EQCA had done nothing to mobilize the community over SB 48, the gay education bill, as it moved through a state senate committee and our adversaries were attending committee hearings, writing letters, making phone calls, etc.

We gays were kept in the dark about every step in the legislative process for SB 48, until after hearings or votes had been taken. EQCA couldn't even be bothered to tell us how to watch the hearings and legislative chambers' proceedings. And none of this bothered Karen - until last week.

She finally noticed the laziness of EQCA and expressed serious concerns regarding their outrageous lack of community engagement. After noting that our opponents were lobbying Gov. Jerry Brown to veto the bill, Karen pointed out he's long been a friend of farm workers, yet he recently vetoed a card-check bill they were behind. Last Friday, she wrote this on her LGBT POV blog:

Therefore it is disconcerting that Equality California, the co-sponsor of SB 48 with the Gay-Straight Alliance, failed to automatically include an action alert at the end of their press release announcing the bill’s passage TWO DAYS ago. The EQCA action alert from Roland Palencia, the new executive director, was finally sent out late Thursday after questions from a reporter on Wednesday.  And it still fails to convey a sense of urgency ...

If EQCA doesn’t convey a sense of urgency in getting this bill signed, will the LGBT community simply shrug if Gov. Brown vetoes it? And while they anticipate a backlash from some Religious Right groups, is EQCA even thinking about the possibility of an initiative to overturn the FAIR Act if Brown signs it? Palencia told reporters that he hoped to hit the ground running when he assumed his new job. This is his first sprint.

It's great to have Karen _finally_ getting her lips off EQCA's butt and kicking it ever-so-gently, and I believe her criticism played a direct role in forcing EQCA to exercise its community engagement muscle.

We need more watchdogging and pushing from Karen and other bloggers, nudging EQCA to shed its blind allegiance to Democratic Party leaders, corporate donors and an unhealthy focus on meeting the partying needs of A-gays.

Let's hope Karen urges EQCA to regularly update the community on all gay-related bill and issues they're working on in Sacramento, inform us of when hearings are happening, encourage gays to attend or watch the hearings, and that this statewide gay group begin regular town hall meetings.

NY Times Slaps GLAAD

Following on the heels of a similar editorial in the Boston Globe, albeit one that excellently zeroed in only on the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, Saturday's New York Times cast a jaundiced eye at AT&T's proposed merger with T-Mobile and the phone giant using nonprofits to push its agenda before the FCC.

The editorial, coming weeks after these matters captured the attention of many bloggers, gay and mainstream online and print media, and net neutrality advocates, is certainly welcome but I do wonder why it's appearing this late in the narrative. There's also the curious fact that the Times has not written about the donations-and-merger controversy in the national or business news sections.

A few comments related to the piece. The Gray Lady in recent years has become so enamored of Gay Inc groups and the people who run them, with nary a negative word or hint of criticism included, that the paper is seen by some as the Gay Lady. Not a healthy situation.

See Sheryl Gay Stolberg's piece on the Gay & Lesbian Victor Fund or Bob Morris' story on the Trevor Project's recent fundraiser for examples of mouthpiece journalism at the Times.

Excerpts from Saturday's editorial:

It seems surprising that organizations dedicated to advocating for gays and lesbians, African-Americans or teachers could take such a burning interest in telecoms that they would endorse AT&T’s $39 billion plan to buy T-Mobile, which is under review by the Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department.

Yet since it announced the deal in March, AT&T’s proposed megamerger has garnered the support of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation and the National Education Association, among others.

... Glaad said AT&T had a good track record on issues that matter to gays and lesbians. All three noted that AT&T was a union shop and T-Mobile was not. These are all positive things, for sure, but what have they to do with the cellphone market?And the money is causing discomfort within some of the organizations.

... The president of Glaad, Jarrett Barrios, resigned last month as controversy grew over the organization’s support of the merger after it received $50,000 from AT&T. Mr. Barrios also disavowed a letter sent from his office to the F.C.C. last year supporting AT&T’s opposition to the agency’s proposed net neutrality rules, which would bar telecom companies like AT&T from blocking or discriminating against rivals’ data flowing through their wires. ...

AT&T has the right — as a huge corporation, indeed, the duty — to make philanthropic donations. They are just not a good basis to decide the future of the nation’s telecommunications. 

Yes, and allowing AT&T to set a corrupt gay group's agenda, one that was decided behind closed doors without any transparency, raises additional questions about the relevancy of GLAAD.

Illegally Parked Traffic Cop Cart
at Valencia and 17th Streets

Normally, I would not care about an illegally parked traffic cop cart in the Mission, but on Saturday afternoon when a cart impeded me from accessing a bike rack from the street because it was sitting idle at a red no-parking zone, my attitude changed.

These photos were taken around 1:45 PM on Saturday, at Valencia and 17th Streets, opposite the Mission police station. I don't know how long it was parked there.

Sheesh, not only was it parked in a red zone, the cart's rear end was sticking out.

Not smart to leave the cart where it hinders access to a fire department water hydrant.

If you ask this bicyclist, I'd say the SF Municipal Transportation Authority needs to track down which meter/parking enforcement agent drove their cart with the license plate ID number 1028662.

Just like the SF MTA uses footage and stills from surveillance cameras at intersections with traffic lights to ticket red-light runners, it should use my pix and the license plate info to issue a ticket to their agent who violated city parking laws.

ACT UP Doc 'United in Anger'
Preview at LA Hammer Museum on 7-12

Writer and activist of many worthy causes, Sarah Schulman, who is also friend, told me last week that an excerpt from the documentary about the AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power and the people who were part of it is playing on July 12 at 7:00 PM at the Hammer Museum in Los Angeles.

Sarah and Jim Hubbard are co-directors of the ACT UP Oral History Project, and together they've been collaborating with surviving members of the activist group to create a feature lengthy documentary called "United in Anger". I'm proud to say I was part of the ACT UP movement, and that I was asked to share some of my history to this collective effort.

"United in Anger" has been submitted to several of the big mainstream film festivals, and let's keep our fingers crossed that the world premiere of the documentary is accepted at one or two festivals.

Maybe three-years ago, Jim showed a rough cut of a few of the interviews at the Frameline gay film festival here in San Francisco at the Roxie theater and I caught of most it. If the finished movie is half as excellent as what we saw at Frameline, the major festivals will be fighting over who gets to screen it first.

If you're down in LA tomorrow night, do yourself a favor and attend the screening and discussion with Sarah at the Hammer Museum. The event is free.

Note to Sarah: Please send me a pic or two and a report from the event.

(Image: ACT UP's evening rush hour protest at New York's Grand Central Station. Ah, remember the days when queer grassroots activists wanted to cut the Pentagon budget and stop wars, and weren't solely focused on getting gay soldiers into the military? Courtesy photo.)

Market Street's Three Gaping Holes

Our city's main artery from just after 5th Street heading up toward the Castro has long been in decline, and in desperate need of retail shops, art galleries and performance spaces, not to mention more people patronizing the area.

I recently snapped pix of three gaping holes along Market Street, because they're impossible to miss. All of them are prime real estate locations and over the years, I've heard various business deals were either fully-approved or near-ready for construction, and before the economy slid into a recession, too. Still, the lots remain empty and a blight on the urban landscape.

Label me one San Francisco resident who would love to see the full-length of the Market Street corridor alive with diverse businesses and arts venues, affordable housing complexes and assorted populations enjoy the street. Maybe a few of the mayoral candidates can address concerns about Market Street, as they campaign for votes.

When the dozen or so two- and three-story buildings at Market and 10th Streets were bulldozed about five-years ago, there was talk that an mixed-used building comprising office space and retail venues would soon be erected. Across 10th Street, in the former SF Mart building, will be eventually be occupied by Twitter and that may spur development of this empty space.

This lot next to the LGBT community center, situated on Market between Octavia and Laguna Street, has seen construction start-and-stop at least twice in the last six-years. A huge blue crane, outside the left side of the frame, towers over the site and is routinely rotated frequently left hanging over Market Street. At the lowest level is a small pond. I believe the lot was supposed to turn into condos, with maybe a few stores on the street level.

At the intersection of Market, 16th and Noe Streets is where you'll find this hole. It's remained vacant for decades, except during select years when it has been a Christmas tree lot at holiday time.

The last report I could locate on anything happening here comes from a January 2010 post at Curbed SF:

Though local paper Castro Courier had reported that Upper Market's "hole in the ground" project at 2299 Market was on "indefinite hold" due to (what else?) financing issues, the Duboce Triangle Newsletter said in their most recent issue that the five-story, 18-unit project is actually rumbling forward. 

Whatever. The usual lack of development or construction surrounds this hole, which has been vacant since 1981.

BAR: Bad Communication Jeopardized
Housing for Gay Seniors and PWAs

The twists and turns over the years related to the former UC Berkeley Extension campus located on the edge of the Castro, necessary to making the property suitable to meet diverse commercial and community housing needs has been difficult to follow.

My friend Tommi Avicolli Mecca, longtime queer justice and housing advocate, has been involved in the years-long process and performed well keeping colleagues up to speed on the project. He's mentioned in today's Bay Area Reporter story written by Matthew Bajko, regarding the latest disputes.

What really caught my eye in the piece was the passage about lack of transparency on the part of Openhouse, an LGBT senior housing project whose executive director is Seth Kilbourn. He first came to my attention when he was an HIV advocate at the Human Rights Campaign in DC for nine years, before moving on in 2006 to become Equality California's policy director.

Let there be no mistake about this. Kilborn is a top member of the Gay Inc circle that runs gay community organizations and is trained not only to carry out the standard executive level of leadership, but to also do as little democratic engagement with the grassroots as possible. At every step, info is not forthcoming, town halls are not held, regular vital communication never occurs.

Let's zero in on the problems mentioned in the BAR story created by Kilborn, adhering to Gay Inc rules of keeping partners and the larger community ignorant of his machinations:

When the jettisoning of the on-site affordable rental units was first proposed, Openhouse, which has teamed with Mercy Housing California to build its project, did not object. Instead, the agency sided with the proposed fee change and sent out an action alert in May asking supporters to contact planning commissioners and urge them to back the fee proposal. 

"The $17 million fee takes the place of building multifamily units on the site that would be affordable to low-income renters. But the fee does make the Openhouse project possible," wrote Kilbourn.

He later added, in bold italic type for emphasis, that, "Without the fee, Openhouse can't build the housing that LGBT seniors and their friends so urgently need. As a result, the project could die or be delayed indefinitely."

The alert was the first time many community leaders learned that changes to the original deal were being proposed. ...

One partner in this complex business project, an AIDS housing bureaucrat, was so furious about Kilborn's double-dealing he denounced it in no uncertain terms as a "screwing" of the affected communities. Called to account, the BAR noted:

While Kilbourn stopped short of issuing a formal apology for not notifying the community sooner about the proposed changes to the development deal, he did tell the Bay Area Reporter that Openhouse now regrets that decision.

"Yes, we absolutely should have brought this idea to the community sooner than we did. Regretfully, we didn't bring the idea to the community and we should have once the Mayor's Office of Housing sent the letter to planning," said Kilbourn. "I do regret that it unfolded the way it did." ...

So typical of a Gay Inc leader to fear formally saying the word sorry, and to now claim communication would have helped. Kilbourn's pronounced lack of genuine transparency in the housing deal raises concerns of what else he may be doing behind his community partners' backs.

Exactly how much evidence does the at-large LGBT community need about lack of democratic engagement from Gay Inc executives and how it is harming our political and social health, before more folks demand accountability and transparency from gay advocacy organizations?

Perhaps gay sunshine advocates should apply to George Soros for grant money to bring democracy to Gay Inc. If he can make democratic ideals take hold, survive and thrive in former Communist nations in Europe, he should be able to do the same for the gay American movement.

Openhouse, like GLAAD, HRC, EQCA, NGLTF, Freedom to Marry and so many other groups, do serious harm to our collective political health and spiritual wellness with their secrecy and withholding of so much information. We simply will not achieve lasting and fulfilling liberation without total institutional openness and respectful engagement.

Tracy Morgan, Wrestlers Meet GLAAD Execs;
Barrios Avoids Gay Critics

(June 21 presser in Nashville. L to R: Kevin Rogers, Morgan, Herndon Graddick of GLAAD. Credit: Getty Images.)

After comedian Tracy Morgan made stupid and offensive comments during a stand-up routine last month, in which he said he'd kill his son if he were gay, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation launched a campaign against him. GLAAD demanded a few things, including having Morgan publicly meet a diverse collection of gay critics. He went on an apology tour, facing criticism and questions from community activists and mainstream reporters.

In a similar, but much less public vein, the advocacy group has been meeting for months with executives and wrestlers over several instances of homophobic speech uttered by the entertainers:

GLAAD is in discussions with World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) to train its on-air talent, including its performers, following another anti-gay outburst by a WWE personality over the 4th of July weekend. ...

As for how this fits in with our ongoing work with WWE, GLAAD provided training to members of WWE’s editorial staff and writing team in May, but because this event was not intended to be televised, and it took place during an unscripted interaction with the audience, none of the people we had already trained were involved.  As a result, we are now  in discussions with WWE to provide trainings to its on-camera talent, including the wrestlers themselves. ...

It fascinates me that GLAAD demands a comedian meet gays upset with his alleged funny routine, and the comedian agrees to do so with cameras rolling, while the group also arranges less public face-to-face briefings and trainings for WWE employees, all part of an accountability package crafted by GLAAD.

At the same time, however, GLAAD has ignored calls for soon-to-depart executive director Jarrett Barrios, other executives and board members to hold open forums with gay critics unhappy with lots of issues pertaining to the group.

Why is it GLAAD pressures comedians and television wrestlers to make themselves available for direct public criticism or trainings to improve their speech, but rebuffs being held to the same accountability standards for the gay community?

I'd like to see Barrios, his staffers and board members, organize a series of public forums at gay community centers across the country, and explain their behavior regarding their cozy relationship with AT&T and other corporations, stewardship failures and prove their relevancy. How pathetic is it that Barrios couldn't even go on a gay radio show and deal with community anger over GLAAD's meltdown?

And that is not enough. GLAAD folks need to be trained in democratic engagement and transparency - town halls, disclosure of sponsorship contracts, open board sessions, the immediate posting on their site of three-years' worth of IRS 990s and financial statements - as part of their rehabilitation with the community. (It's outrageous that GLAAD currently shares only one year's IRS 990 and financial statement.)

If Tracy Morgan can meet with gays angry with him, Jarrett Barrios and GLAAD leaders should be able to do the same.

EQCA's Champagne Debut of New ED;
Host Committee = PG&E

More elitist crapola from Equality California. There may be a new executive director running the show, but it's the same old same old operation with a group of wealthy gay Democrats aligning our movement with the likes of a public utility and corporations.

It is asking too much of EQCA to announce both a glam booze-driven welcoming soiree for Roland Palencia and a down-home, free, town hall meeting not sponsored by any corporate interests to take place in San Francisco. Nope, EQCA can only do one thing at a time and right now that means installing and crowning our new state leader, who was chosen without a single open meeting to discuss what the grassroots wanted from the new ED.

What we're getting is the roll-out of a new product - Palencia, with all the attendant glossy photos, a glowing bio, upbeat predictions for future successes and adoring fans necessary to launch a new brand.

Sure, the piss queens directing EQCA and their myriad commercial backers should be allowed to have another in their endless series of cocktail receptions, to keep up appearances that all is okay with the gay agenda in California, but what about those of us demanding democratic engagement? When do our needs get addressed by Palencia?

My gut feeling is that we will wait at least three months before Palencia holds an open forum. Until then, we'll have to settle for him appearing at events like this. From an email circulating tonight:
 

The Boards of Directors of
Equality California and the Equality California Institute
cordially invite you to a champagne toast to

Welcome
Roland Palencia 

 Equality California's New Executive Director

Tuesday, July 19
5:30 to 7 p.m..
This event will be held at
The Bubble Lounge
714 Montgomery Street

Tip a glass with Roland and other supporters of full equality,

and renew your commitment to our movement.

My commitment to the movement does not any renewing with a glass of the bubbly, downed at a lounge surrounded by fabulously wealthy A-gays and their Democratic Party friends. How about EQCA developing a much-need program of democratic engagement with the grassroots?

More from the invitation:

We welcome you to join our Host Committee at these levels:

Co-Chair: $1,000 | Co-Host: $500 | Friend of Roland: $250

HOST COMMITTEE:

I plan on attending the July 19 reception and witnessing this charade of political engagement. After all, it's free and I can pass on the alcohol, sipping instead on sparkling mineral water.