Here are two E-mails relating to the settlements which we are told have been agreed to but not yet signed.
Subject: [NewPacifica] PLAINTIFFS STATEMENT REGARDING LAWSUIT NEGOTIATIONS
Sat, 03 Nov 2001 18:14:02 -0500
Leslie Cagan <email@example.com
The plaintiffs in the four law suits are happy to announce that as a result of negotiations with the defendants from the Pacifica Foundation we are confident that a final agreement will be reached early next week. We hope that everything will be completed within the next few days, and as soon as that is done we will release all the details of the agreement. Until the agreement is finalized we are forbidden by the terms of the mediation from discussing or releasing any of the details.
We believe that implementation of this agreement will begin the re-building of the Pacifica Foundation. While commitments to accountability and democratizing the Foundation are part of the agreement, we will all have to remain vigilant during the upcoming transitions.
We thank the listeners, producers, staff, LAB members, affiliate stations and others throughout the country who have been the backbone of this struggle, and whose continued support and involvement will bring us to our common goals to serve the mission of Pacifica and achieve our vision of free speech, community and corporate free radio.
Subject: [NewPacifica] Mediation Confidentiality
Mon, 5 Nov 2001 09:44:54 -0800
“Carol Spooner” <firstname.lastname@example.org
Dear Everyone --
I know everyone cares as passionately about this as I do ... and it is terribly hard for you not to know what the terms under negotiation are & for me not to be able to tell. But the mediation, is not concluded under the governing laws of California until an actual document is signed. And it is very hard for the “co-relators” -- especially the “activists” -- not to be able to tell either. (Yes, I have discussed the details with the “co-relators.”) But they are also bound by mediation confidentiality and cannot say anything about the details, so please don't give them a hard time. If there have been “leaks” they didn't come from us, and should not have come from anyone else.
I should also say that none of the “co-relators” have the ability to “reject” any of the terms. The California Attorney General is the official “plaintiff” in the case -- and he is the one who has to sign off on it.
(I notice that someone published the phone number of the former attorney on our case. Dan Bartley was replaced as our attorney last summer. If the person who publised Bartley's number wants to drive up our attorneys' fees by publishing phone numbers ... I'll be happy to send you the bill!)
I've pasted the law the governs “civil mediation” below. These are very different laws than the laws governing union negotiations or class action settlements. (None of the cases are class actions ... those are both extremely expensive & were not possible under applicable California laws in this kind of case over governance of a nonprofit foundation.)
Holding my breath & thanking you all for your support ...
California Evidence Code §1119(c)
“All communications, negotiations, or settlement discussions by and between participants in the course of a mediation or a mediation consultation shall remain confidential.”
California Evidence Code §1125(a)
“For purposes of confidentiality under this chapter, a mediation ends when any one of the following conditions is satisfied: (1) The parties execute a written settlement agreeement that fully resolves the dispute.”
California Evidence Code §1126
“Anything said, any admission made, or any writing that is inadmissible, protected from disclosure, and confidential under this chapter before mediation ends, shall remain inadmissible, protected from disclosure, and confidential to the same extent after mediation ends.”
[We can release the written agreement after it is signed and mediation ends.]
Back to the Pacifica Theft Page.
To my home page.