I think that your heart is in the right place. I have
some differences of opinion regarding details and, to some degree, style. As an example of the latter, I would have left names out. That way you could have still said everything you wanted to say but, at the same time, allowed for those mentioned to save face.
Regarding some of the issues, I would check with some one, like Barry Vogel, the issue of confidentiality. Non-profit boards do enjoy a degree of confidentiality, but the question is how much and whether confidentiality here is an excuse to cover-up rather than to protect privacy.
I believe the strongest point in your arguments is how the elected board
members really are the representatives of the membership and how it is, not only their right but also, their duty to have a say in the kind of programming and advertising policies of the station. You are completely right when you argue that the membership needs and wants to be involved.
This is irrefutable and I think that you should mention while on the air how the staff has said to you that members don't care. This a warning sign of being out of touch. The best thing to do , in my opinion, is to choose one or two major points and stick with them. All other details can follow. So that your intentions are clear, I wouldn't send the pamphlet out until after the election and then I would send it regardless of the outcome.
I heard Zack last night and think he did well, especially when he recognized the caller who asked for a different kind of music. Everyone was using the buzz word 'diversity' but only Zack demonstrated sensitivity to the concept.
I am one of those who very much enjoy the kind of music they play in the
mornings (when I can hear it), but diversity is not about what one likes but what others like.
Good luck, and thank you for your commitment.