In order to expedite communication and make the most efficient use of valuable time and resources, I request that all correspondence be conducted by e-mail.  In this way, the resolution of this matter can occur more quickly and more openly as legal counsel and other interested parties can be apprised of the record in the most timely manner. In order to help 'Olelo I will make all of my correspondence to them through e-mail and will be happy to copy their legal counsel and any other parties that they might request.

dark text = original letter   light text = my response
 

June 9,1999   Mr. Jeff Garland 47-490-A Ahuimanu Road Kaneohe, Hawai'i. 96744 Dear Mr. Garland, I am writing in response to your request for specific information about the actions that led to your recent suspension from 'Olelo. At this juncture, the only next step with us is for you to appeal the decision. There Will be opportunity at that time to further examine  the actions that led to our decision. You must address your appeal to Lurline McGregor, Executive Director c/o 'Olelo. Respectfully,   Miki Lee Director of Operations

M. Lee
A. Angel
L. McGregor
c/o 'Olelo Community Television
1122 Mapunapuna Street
Honolulu, HI 96819

      This is my good faith effort to meet the appeal deadline. However, any procedural or substantive deficiencies in my appeal should be excused because of Olelo's failure to provide me with the information and clarification I requested. I need the information to better understand  the reasons for my suspension and the appeal process and guidelines.

     Dave Mulinix's reason for suspending me after giving me his written warning had nothing to do with his warning which referred to contacting staff. His witnessed, spoken reason was that I contacted your auditor whom to my understanding is not 'Olelo staff. Unfortunately he wouldn't provide me with his reasons in writing.

      I am still  unclear about the specific appeal guidelines so at this time I am requesting them in writing as well as being allowed to videotape the appeals process if I am afforded an audience with any of the involved parties. Your policies state" If you wish to appeal the director's decision, submit your version of the issue in writing to the Executive Director  within 7 calendar days of the date of the Director's decision". As you have not provided me with "your version of the issue in writing", I don't see how you can expect me to give you my version of a version that apparently isn't available. Does the Executive Director make her decision alone or does she consult with all parties involved &/or the Board of Directors? Who will be held accountable for the final decision? The original warning came from Dave, to which I responded yet Angela responded to that, which I also responded to and the present correspondence came from Miki, all with neither aknowledgment nor responses to my queries.

     I noted that  your policies allow twice as long for an 'Olelo reply (10 working days) as the accused (7 calendar days) and find that a bit unfair. Allowing from "the date of the Director's decision", does not provide me with the exact date so how am I to know if I am in compliance?  Usually the accused would be allowed more than a week from the time of receipt of the letter. If it took a week for the client to receive the letter, how would he\she be able to respond within the allotted time? The time 'Olelo allots itself to respond would guarantee their ability to comply.

      My instinct tells me I shouldn't even bother to appeal your decision due to the fact 'Olelo has never completely adhered to or followed through in good faith on their agreements with us in the past. Attached please find a copy of your Violations and Sanctions. It would appear that you are not following your own procedures because if this is only my second alleged violation, according to your rules on "Violations and Sanctions" a warning is given upon the first alleged violation, which you gave me, but without naming anything specific, only very broad allegations. On the second alleged violation a 30 day suspension may be given. I don't see a 1 year suspension listed there, even the third suspension is only 90 days and unless you are counting the letter Gerald wrote (but you can't because that was more than a year ago) it still would only be the third. Not even if you add them all together and then add it all again could you come up with a year (90+90+30+30 =240 days). It would appear you have confused the rules with your notification of one year suspensions for "Commercialism" in  'Olelo's "In Sync" newsletter sent out Oct. 15, '97. If you're making the rules up as you go then I guess you're probably within your rights, so "I appeal" your decision as I surely can't figure out how you came up with it.

     Due to the fact that you have not yet provided me with the specific information on my alleged violations in writing that I requested, as well as the convoluted and nonspecific way you are proceeding with this matter, I request you immediately restore my privileges until my final means of appeal has been exhausted, because then and only then can I be pronounced "guilty". I'm guilty and punished before I have the opportunity to prove my innocence, where's the "democratic process" in that?

     Your incessant creation through the U.S. Mail of long twisted "paper trails" are seemingly designed only to "wear clients down". This practice can only facilitate stretching this whole situation past the 30 days that according to your "Violations and Sanctions" should be my punishment.

     This type of diversion, as with the HENC agreement and the "merger", continues to divert 'Olelo from fixing problems that if truly fixed would potentially make all these attempts at de-focusing from the real issues and this sort of communication unnecessary.

     The attached information is from the most recent Operating Policies I was able to obtain from CTPA and ACTF and I truly hope that at least one of those two dedicated, long-standing volunteer producer/tech organizations would be kept up to date on any changes made by you.

      In light of  the Sunday June 13, 1999  Honolulu Advertiser "Letter to the Editor" I am in hopes that you will see the importance of focusing on the mission of "access" now since it would appear there is yet another "disgruntled client" out there somewhere willing to speak out. Could there be more?

     I look forward to the time when we can get back to the mission clearly delineated in Olelo's bylaws.

I appeal sincerely,

Jeff Garland
 

Miki,

As Lurline has an auto responder supposedly to block my e-mails, would you please be so kind as to forward a copy of this e-mail to Lurline. I would greatly appreciate an e-mailed acknowledgment from Lurline that she received a copy of this appeal as well as all my other correspondences concerning this matter.

Thanks in advance for your prompt e-mailed response.

Sincerely,

Jeff Garland
 

CC:
DCCA Director Kathryn Matayoshi
DCCA CATV Div. Administrator Clyde Sonobe
Congressman Neil Abercrombie
Senators Mizuguchi, Ihara, Fukunaga, D. Ige, Anderson, Nakata,
Governor Cayetano
State Auditor
Office of Information Practices
State Ombudsman
Reps. Say, McDermott,  Catalani, Case
Mary Fitzgerald, FCC
Irwin Yamamoto
John Feil
Pedro Valdez
Howard Hanada
Randy Roth, President Hawaii State Bar Association
Wendy Arbeit, President Community Television Producers' Association
Aloha Community Television Foundation
Common Cause Hawaii
ACLU Hawaii
Bunnie Riedel, E.D. Alliance for Community Media
Miki Lee, 'Olelo Operations Director, & Board Director, Alliance for Community Media
Honolulu Advertiser
Honolulu Star Bulletin
HPAM Legal Council
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

      3. Violations and Sanctions:

      I. In order for these policies and procedures to be
effective and for 'Olelo's operations to run smoothly, a system
of sanctions or penalties has been instituted. There are two
types of violations, major and minor, which may result in
sanctions such as temporary suspensions, written warnings, up to
and including permanent revokation of the privilege to utilize
the facilities. The Executive Director or designee is authorized
to issue warnings or suspensions. Warnings are in effect for one
year from the date of issue.

     A. Major violations: Result in immediate suspensions and
may include up to permanent revocation of privileges to utilize
the facility and resources, depending on the severity of the
violation/s. These may include, but are not limited to:

     1. Commercial, profit-making use of facilities and/or
          failure to report monies received as sale/rental of
          public access productions.
     2. misrepresentation of user's affiliation with 'Olelo:
          The Corporation for Community Television, to others;
     3. falsifying forms or refusing to sign required
          documentation;
     4. persistent or extreme abuse or harassment of
          others (staff, visitors, users);
     5. taking or reserving equipment without permission;
     6. tampering with equipment. schedules;
     7. theft or vandalism of the property or of any
          employee, user or visitor; - --
     8. failure to return equipment through intent; negligence,
          loss or theft; and
    9.  repeated minor violations.

     1. First violation written warning:
     2  Second Violation 30-day suspension
     3. Third violation 90-day suspension
 

 Minor violations may include, but are not limited to:

 1. Failure to cancel an equipment reservation
 2. tardiness in pick-up or return of equipment without notification or approval;
 3. eating, drinking or smoking in non-designated
 areas -
4. failure to clean up after using facilities-
 

      II. Other sanctions May be prescribed by the Executive
 Director or his designee include, but are not limited to:

1. requirement of re-attending orientation or. training sessions and/or re-certification;
2 - requirement of demonstrated proficiency or understandings;
3. de-certification; and
4. established, short or long-term, probationary periods.

 1. Request a director's review of the matter, in writing,
 within 7 calendar days of the event; The Director shall respond
 within 10 working days.

  2. If you wish to appeal the director's decision, submit
your version of the issue in writing to the Executive Director
 within 7 calendar days of the date of the Director's decision.
The Executive Director shall respond within 10 working days with
 a final and binding decision.

3. Only in cases of permanent revocation of the privilege
to utilize 'Olelo facilities and resources, may appeal to the
 Board be made, in writing. The Board may elect to review at
their regular meeting or designate a single Board member or
 committee to deal with the appeal; upon request by the Executive
 Director. The Board may modify the Executive Director's
determination or any sanctions imposed or may make a new
 determination or impose new sanctions. The decision of the Board
 shall be final and conclusive.