Message from David Hernandez President,

Since the onset of this crisis, we at the Los Angeles Public Access Coalition have addressed all departments, City Council members, City Attorney and Mayor with respect to protecting the First Amendment Rights of Los Angeles Public Access Producers and Cable Subscribers.

 

As we have reported, all requests for clarity and accountability have been ignored. As a result we appealed to the Attorney General Edmund Brown for assistance.

 

All agree our concerns are valid, but all advise they are without the ability to bring a reasonable and viable resolution to the Public Access Cable Crisis.

 

Many individuals and organizations have rallied to our side as supporters and advocates for a Non Governmental controlled system for Public Access.

 

We are pleased to announce that Common Cause has joined the battle to save Public Access.

 

They have sent out a massive Email appeal to their members, nationwide, to facilitate Email letters to Attorney General Gerry Brown and City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo to seek injunctive relief under the (Unfair) Business and Professions Code 17200 Section 3 against Time Warner Cable for shutting down the 12 channels and studios.

 

The response has been widespread and is ongoing. We look forward to the challenge ahead and pledge to all Cable Subscribers that we will continue this fight to its conclusion.

 

 

Attorney Generals Response

Below is the response we received from the Attorney Generals Office to our second request for help.

 

As requested, here is the statement from the California Attorney General’s Office:

 

“A law was enacted two years ago that shifted control of cable franchises from the counties/cities to the state.  A delayed provision in that law just went into effect on Jan. 1, 2009, and relieved the cable companies of any obligation to pay for, or maintain, studios or equipment for public access television.  Cities or counties may opt to pay for it, but LA has chosen not to because of its fiscal situation.  That left some public access shows unable to broadcast; some survived because they have their own studios.”

 

- Abraham Arredondo

  Spokesman

  California Attorney General’s Office

Well that is not good enough! Will be posting our response later this morning.

Stay tuned.

Refund or Replace Campaign

TIME WARNER CABLE

 

REFUND or REPLACE

OUR PUBLIC ACCESS CABLE CHANNELS IN LOS ANGELES

 

 

TIME WARNER CABLE SHUT DOWN ALL 14 PUBLIC ACCESS  CABLE CHANNELS IN LOS ANGELES on JANUARY 1^ST  2009 

 

• Time Warner Cable subscribers were notified that should the agreement between Viacom and Time Warner fail and there was a loss of three cable channels, they would refund subscribers for the loss of programming.

 

• As a subscriber who has lost Public Access Programming, I would like a refund on my monthly Time Warner Cable Bill. As this broadcasting was conducted an average of 160 hours per week, four weeks, on average per month, I believe a one dollar per month refund is well within reason.

 

 

The Los Angeles Public Access Coalition believes

you are entitled to a REFUND from Time Warner Cable

for the lost channels

 

• Please join me and the Coalition in demanding that all Time Warner subscribers in the City of Los Angeles are entitled to a $1.00 refund for the channels they removed and for which they are over-billing us on our monthly statements.  

 

• Furthermore this must be an ongoing refund for each and every month we do not have our public access cable channels.

 

Please click on this link  drhassoc@earthlink.net

 

to join the REFUND or REPLACE campaign to regain our Public Access Channels or get a

REFUND

please give us name address and phone number in the  Email link here so we can help!

 

 

 

 

 

David R. Hernandez

President

Los Angeles Public Access Coalition

 

Attorney General 2nd request!

LOS ANGELES PUBLIC ACCESS

COALITION
(LAPAC)
David Hernandez, President
 P O Box 9158    No. Hollywood

91609    Tel 818-448-3403

 

 

 

January 3, 2009                                  VIA FAX  &  FEDERAL EXPRESS

Hon. Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
Attorney General, State of California
Department of Justice, Public Integrity Unit
P O Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

 

PIU #255137  Urgent Request for Reconsideration

Dear Attorney General Brown,

 

We are in receipt of an obvious form letter from the California Department of Justice , Public Inquiry Unit (PIU #255137) in response to our request for your office to pursue Injunctive Relief on behalf of the millions of Time Warner Cable subscribers residing in the City of Los Angeles.  When Time Warner closed fourteen public access cable channels and studios in the City of Los Angeles on December 31, 2008 they were fully aware that their actions would deny their subscribers services that had been provided to the public for over 25 years and were considered, “public assets”.

 

The Mayor of the City of Los Angeles, City Council members and the City Attorney have refused to respond to our letters requesting Injunctive Relief, under the California Business & Professions Code 17200 Section 3, (Unfair Business Practices).  And, they have made no effort to replace the public access facilities with the moneys provided by Time Warner Cable Franchise Fees, for that purpose.

 

The DOJ Public Inquiry Unit response to our request for Injunctive Relief, is unacceptable and dismissive of the serious allegations made in our complaint.  The PIU response suggests that we seek our own resolution with Time Warner Cable and is a preposterous suggestion considering the harmful actions of Time Warner Cable. The millions of cable subscribers residing in the City of Los Angeles are unable to seek alternative public channels and studios. 

 

We take exception to the Public Inquiry Unit suggestion that it is our responsibility to resolve this matter without the assistance of the Department of Justice.  

 

Please see government Code Section 12511 and 12550 

       “The Attorney general shall take charge  of any investigation or prosecution of violation of law of which the Superior Court has jurisdiction”

 

Furthermore, according to the Office of Attorney General website, “about us” page reads: 
   “Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. was elected statewide to serve as the chief law officer of California. It is the duty of the Attorney General to see that the laws of the state are uniformly and adequately enforced (California Constitution, Article V, Section 13.) The Attorney General carries out responsibilities of the office through the California Department of Justice.
     “The Attorney General represents the people of California in civil and criminal matters before trial, appellate and the supreme courts of California and the United States. The Attorney General also serves as legal counsel to state officers and, with few exceptions, to state agencies, boards and commissions. Exceptions to the centralized legal work done on behalf of the state are listed in Section 11041 of the Government Code.”
    “In addition, the Attorney General establishes and operates projects and programs to protect Californians from fraudulent, unfair, and illegal activities that victimize consumers or threaten public safety, and enforces laws that safeguard the environment and natural resources.”

It is our opinion the Attorney General has direct supervision over the District Attorneys of the several counties of the State and may require of them, written reports as to the condition of public business entrusted to their charge.  When he deems it advisable or necessary, in the public interest, or when directed to do so by the Governor, he shall assist any District Attorney in the discharge of his duties, and take full charge of any investigation or prosecution of violations of law of which the Superior Court has jurisdiction.  In this respect he has all the powers of a District Attorney, including the power to issue or cause to be issued subpoenas or other process.

 Therefore we are renewing our urgent request for you to take the following action on behalf of the independent public access producers and the millions of cable subscribers in the City of Los Angeles We are seeking a review of the Public Inquiry Unit’s response and request your immediate attention to our request as follows:

FILE FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF under California Business & Professions Code 17200 section 3. The basis for this action is as follows:

California’s unfair competition statute, Business and Professions Code sections 17200-17208, like  its federal counterpart, section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act(15U.S.C  Section 45 et seq), serves as a general prohibition on unfair and deceptive business practices and also as an antitrust law.

Section 17200 defines “unfair competition” to include any “unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business act or practice” as well as “unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading “.There are five potentially distinct theories of liability under section 17200.

1.      Unlawful business acts or practice;

2.      Unfair business acts or practice;

3.      Fraudulent business acts or practice;

4.      Unfair, deceptive, untrue or misleading advertising; and

5.      False advertising and related practices covered by B&P 17500-17577

 

The broad purpose of Business and Professions Code section 17200 is “to permit tribunals to enjoin on-going wrongful business conduct in whatever context such activity might occur.”(People v. McKale (1979) 25 Cal.3d 626 In particular the purpose of the “unlawful” practice provision it “to extend the meaning of unfair competition to anything that can properly be called a business practice .

The U.S. Supreme Court in FTC v Sperry & Hutchinson, 405 U.S. 233, 244(1972), in which the Court held that FTC Act Section 5 could reach beyond “the letter and spirit” of existing trade regulation laws to other wrongful business practices. The Sperry & Hutchinson noted the relevant factors for determining unfairness to be: “(1) whether the practice offends public policy, (2) whether it is immoral, unethical, oppressive, or unscrupulous; (3) whether it causes substantial injury to consumers. In brief, the court must weigh the utility of the defendant’s conduct against the gravity of the harm to the alleged victim.

Here, the action of closing fourteen public access studios and channels offends public policy , is immoral, unethical, oppressive, unscrupulous and causes substantial injury to consumers who will be prevented from viewing independent programs on the City public access channel. The gravity of the harm to consumers outweighs any benefit to Time-Warner.

We are hereby requesting that you file for a Temporary Restraining Order against Time Warner to continue the service until such time as the City has provided alternative and equal facilities.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

David R. Hernandez

cc:

Stanley K. Sheinbaum

Ed Asner

The Caucus

Center for Creative Voices in Media

Full Disclosure Network, Leslie Dutton

ABC Nightline, Bonnie McLean Western Bureau

L. A. Weekly, Patrick Range McDonald

Los Angeles Times. Reed Johnson

 

LA Times on Loss of Public Access

Cable flips channel on public

access TV

A new California law allows Time Warner to close 12 studios that provided community programming in Los Angeles. Critics say a valuable 1st Amendment platform is lost.

By Reed Johnsonreed.johnson@latimes.com

January 5, 2009

For decades, public access programming on cable television has provided a virtually free forum for community activists and aspiring entertainers, for preening star wannabes as well as serious-minded political watchdogs.

But in Los Angeles and across California that forum began crumbling last week, a development that advocates say will strip ordinary citizens of a valuable 1st Amendment platform.

A provision of a law passed by the Legislature in 2006, which took effect Thursday, allows cable television providers the option of dropping their long-standing obligation of providing free studios, equipment and training to the public. In return, providers must pay a substantial annual fee and continue to provide a minimal number of public education and government channels.

The new law is designed to make it easier for phone companies to enter into the lucrative cable market by relieving them of certain money-draining contractual obligations.

In Los Angeles, 12 public access studios that provided programming for 11 community channels have been closed by Time Warner Cable Inc. That means much of the city’s diverse, neighborhood-specific public access shows may disappear.

If that happens, Los Angeles cable subscribers would be losing an outlet for their particular communities’ programming, said David Hernandez, president of the Los Angeles Public Access Coalition.

“It’s the regional broadcasting capability that’s lost,” he said.

Twenty other states, including Texas, Nevada, Florida, Illinois and Michigan, have enacted legislation similar to California’s Digital Infrastructure and Video Competition Act, or DIVCA, according to the nonprofit Alliance for Community Media. In several of those states, the loss of production studios was bitterly fought by opposition groups to little avail.

But the waning of public access programming in California would carry special significance for the nation, said Ron Cooper, a public access advocate and regional treasurer of the Alliance for Community Media in Sacramento.

“The rest of the country is watching,” Cooper said. “And not because it’s a good example — quite the opposite.”

In Los Angeles, public access covers an array of citizen-produced shows, including “Soul & Sound of Watts,” “East L.A. After Dark” and a late-night program by sexologist Dr. Susan Block. Between 30% and 35% of all programming is religion-oriented.

Although public access television often is mocked as a showcase for eccentric narcissists and sensationalistic provocateurs — what Cooper referred to as “naked Nazis” — he said only a small proportion of its content fits this bill.

“For the city of Los Angeles, the city of angels, the media capital of the world to say there is no room for public” access, Cooper said, “I don’t even know how to describe it.”

Time Warner says it is only complying with the provisions of the new law, which still requires a limited number of public, government and education channels funded by a fee calculated by 1% of gross annual revenue. In Los Angeles, that fee for Time Warner amounts to about $5 million, which is in addition to a $25-million annual franchise fee.

“The spirit of DIVCA was to create a level playing field for all competitors,” said Patricia Fregoso-Cox, vice president of communications for Time Warner Cable for the western region.

Fregoso-Cox said the company would continue to reserve four area cable channels for so-called PEG (public, education and government) content and that it had no plans to convert those to commercial programming. One city-run public access studio, in Boyle Heights, will remain open, at least for now.

As for the 12 studio closings, she said: “We have an exit strategy. Some of the buildings we own, some of the buildings we lease. Some of the buildings will be repositioned for other programming.”

In Los Angeles, the cavalcade of characters, gadflies and watchdogs that populate the public access channels aren’t going away without a fight. Hernandez has written to City Atty. Rocky Delgadillo and California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown to ask for injunctive relief against the studio closings.

“It’s a two-pronged immorality,” said Leslie Dutton, executive producer and host of the Full Disclosure Network, an Emmy-winning public access news broadcast.

“It’s immoral for the city to do nothing to replace the assets that are being taken from the public with the millions of dollars that are still coming to them, and No. 2, for preventing Time Warner from closing the channels down.”

Dutton and others say there is no guarantee that any of the four PEG channels will be used for public access programming. They also say that neither Time Warner nor the city gave adequate public notice of the studio closings.

“There wasn’t a flier or a handout or anything telling what this was,” said Rob Baker, producer of “The John Kerwin Show,” a celebrity-oriented talk program that taped what could be its last episode Dec. 17. “Nobody knew that public access is hearing its death knell.”

On the contrary, Fregoso-Cox said, “this isn’t something that hasn’t been communicated, that people aren’t aware of.”

The closing of the city’s studios is only one consequence of a nationwide campaign by phone companies — including AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Qwest Communications International Inc. — to move into the cable market.

Many cable providers, meanwhile, are trying to compete in the phone market by bundling services (cable, phone, Internet), resulting in an escalating turf battle among powerful multimedia companies seeking control over a growing universe of information-delivery systems.

California’s legislation, drafted by then-Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, a Los Angeles Democrat, was signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in September 2006. Nuñez said the law would increase competition and lower cable subscribers’ rates, a contention challenged by consumer groups.

Public access advocates acknowledge that YouTube and other Internet-based platforms have given new outlets for citizen expression. But, they point out, YouTube doesn’t provide free professional studios, equipment and training, nor does it pay for the staff to run the facilities.

Furthermore, Hernandez said, because public access television “is a public asset already, why should the public give up something that belongs to them?”

Public access advocates in Los Angeles and other California cities won’t have an easy time getting back in the studio. Cities are broke, and Los Angeles officials question whether the funds exist to help offset the studio closings.

A city report estimates that the annual cost of staffing and operating a 12-studio system would be $2.7 million, plus a one-time $4.5-million equipping cost, excluding rent.

“We’re looking at a year in which we’re looking at a $400-million deficit,” said Jose Cornejo, chief of staff for Councilman Tony Cardenas.

Cornejo said Cardenas and other City Council members had been scrutinizing the effect of the new law for many months and concluded that their hands were tied by the state.

The council therefore decided to adopt the recommendations of a report by the Board of Information Technology Commissioners. The report said the city should consolidate its control over the four remaining channels so they wouldn’t revert back to Time Warner’s management, as would be possible under the new law, Cornejo said.

“Time Warner is saying, ‘I now can do this. Go fly a kite, council,’ ” Cornejo said. “They usurped our jurisdiction with DIVCA.”

Councilman Bill Rosendahl, a former cable executive, said he supported public access as a 1st Amendment right and “an electronic soapbox.”

He favors studying whether it would be possible for the city to dedicate more funding toward it. But he said the city must address many pressing financial needs.

“We’re in this spot not because the city of Los Angeles created it but because the Legislature did,” he said.