'Olelo Community Television

My comments in red

`Olelo Committed to Protecting Client Privacy and Preserving Its Independence as a Private, Non-Profit Organization
('Olelo Committed to hindering Free Speech)

In 2002, at the request of the Community Television Producers Association (the organization that was instrumental in 'Olelo's creation), the Office of Information Practices (OIP) issued an advisory opinion suggesting that Olelo was a state agency for the purposes of the State Uniform Information Practices Act (UIPA) because of what OIP wrongly perceived to be a close contractual relationship between Olelo and the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (DCCA).

UIPA is designed to make government records accessible to the public. However, Olelo is a private non-profit corporation, not a state “agency” subject to UIPA. Further, in our opinion, OIP has no jurisdiction over a privately run, non-profit organization such as Olelo.

Despite Olelo's strong disagreement with the OIP's opinion, we have voluntarily complied with the spirit of UIPA, giving individuals access to many records, including vendor contracts, invoices, inventory lists, policies, memos and correspondence, personnel-related information (?), production proposals, and planning documents. (maybe some of the above, but certainly not all)

As a non-profit access organization, Olelo has long been committed to making its relevant (relevant to what?) business practices transparent and accountable. Olelo's bylaws and business practices are considered far more open and inclusive than the majority of non-profit organizations. (keeping in mind most nonprofits don't get all their funds through government mandated funds, that must be returned to government upon dissolution along with the equipment and the building) Oelo (sic) seeks to balance the need to fulfill reasonable requests¹ and its ability to conduct business, devoting its limited resources (7.5 million dollars this year is not what I would categorize as "limited") to its core mission – supporting community access programming and services. (notice it does not say supporting client programming and services leaving it open for them to use the funds to support THEIR programming and any other services they desire to support, at their sole discretion)

¹ from their bylaws: " Section 12.8a Inspection by Directors, DCCA, Oceanic: In the event a member of the Board, the Director of the DCCA or the President of Oceanic, or their respective employer, is involved in any activity or possesses an interest which is adverse to the Corporation, the Corporation, through its President/CEO, shall have the right to withhold from inspection any books, records or other materials which the President/CEO feels, in his/her reasonable discretion, are related to the dispute or interest which is adverse to the Corporation, provided the President/CEO’s decision to withhold such records or materials is ratified at the next meeting of the Board. Members of the Board shall not disclose any confidential or proprietary information of the Corporation without the consent of the Board, the Corporation's legal counsel or by law.

Recently, Olelo received requests (by individuals [CTPA members] citing UIPA) for the names, home addresses, phone numbers and email addresses of its master client list in both written and electronic format. (the request was actually for "Public Disclosure Documents" required to be compiled by state &/or federal law) This request caused Olelo to carefully consider the consequences, liabilities and risks of publicly disclosing its master list. Specifically, Olelo does not want to violate the privacy interests that its clients have in their contact information. ('Olelo mandates its clients to sign form s that state: " I understand that my contact information below will be made available to the public in connection with the Program.") Such a list could be used to facilitate spamming, unwanted mail, or phone solicitations. (It could also be used to distribute factual information about 'Olelo & its Board of Directors.)

We are equally concerned about the time and money spent on voluminous and bureaucratic requests that, ultimately, take away from our ability to expand community access and client services. ('Olelo has created the problem by not making documents readily available on their own, like they used to. In my opinion this is intentional to increase the total to make it appear to be "voluminous". The money spent on these unquantified "voluminous" requests is paid for, again, by "public" money. What takes away from their mission is mostly due to their disorganized, inefficient method of storing documents)

After careful consideration, Olelo's Board of Directors has decided to challenge OIP's opinion and is seeking a legal review and confirmation of Olelo's status as a private, independent non-profit organization. We will continue to allow access to many of our corporate records, such as reports to the DCCA, our annual audited financial statements, our contracts with vendors, our contracts with DCCA, our final operating procedures and policies, our minutes of Board meetings, and other similar corporation documents. (How accountable is that when they do not provide the full list. Will they make it available on their own volition via board handouts & their website, or will they continue to require the people to submit requests so they can continue to cite "voluminous" requests, when it suits their purpose?)

In addition to preserving the confidentiality and privacy of our clients, our goal is to confirm our independence in order to reduce the risk of government interference in our day-to-day operations and to increase available resources to focus on our mission of building community through public, education and government access services. (as long as the Government has control over the purse strings, bylaws, appointment and removal authority of the majority of the board members, manner and frequency of reporting, and other corporate documents, 'Olelo can not keep government from "interfering")

Olelo will not share its email list with others and will not use the list for commercial purposes.

Bottom Line: 'Olelo does not want to make their list available because they do not want clients to be able to easily pass information amongst each other regarding issues like discriminatory scheduling practices, shows not airing as scheduled, poorly maintained equipment, etc. (you know I could go on and on).
'Olelo has been in existence for 14 years now, yet they just recently compiled a client email list and sent out their very first email to it, which was this document! So their first use was the same as the purpose of their newsletter, propaganda. The email list is for one way communication, so client responses will not be seen by all other clients if they choose to reply, only staff will see it. The highest degree of control. Please keep in mind the reason for Public Access to Media is for people to exercise Free Speech and PEGs are supposed to be facilitating it, not controlling it!