LOS ANGELES PUBLIC ACCESS

COALITION



(LAPAC)

David Hernandez, President

P O Box 9158

No. Hollywood

91609

818-448-3403

November 30, 2008

Rocky Delgadillo

Los Angeles City Attorney

200 North Main Street

Los Angeles, California 90012

Attention: Mr. Delgadillo,

Re: Public Access Studios

Request for Action

Dear Mr. Delgadillo,

As a long time community advocates who have witnessed first hand the value of Public Access, we look to you for help.

On December 3, 2008 the Los Angeles City Council will be hearing the public access issue once again and could take action which will allow a vital public asset to be compromised.

As Time Warner Cable has announced it will be closing fourteen public access studios on December 31, 2008, the welfare of those who produce, participate and view public access television will be gravely impacted.

The issue has moved forward from committee without the benefit of either a Financial Impact Report or Community Impact Report. As the City will be responsible for establishing the public access facility/capacity, no action can be taken without the proper evaluation and assessments for the financial resources needed to implement and sustain such an operation.

The same can be said for the impact on the public welfare. Without a community impact report, our council members can not determine with any accuracy the full extent of the loss to the community.

Page 2

I realize the process is in motion and there will be a resolution at some point but for now, we are faced with the clear and immediate fact that the studios will be closing in less than one month with no process or procedure in place to insure the transition does not adversely impact the residents of Los Angeles. The studios should not close until our rights are secured.

Therefore I am respectfully requesting you take the following action on behalf of the residents of Los Angeles:

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.

Page 3

I am 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.

I as well as Public Access Producers, Community Advocates and subscribers thank you for the consideration you will give to this vital and time sensitive matter.

David Hernandez, Chairman

Los Angeles Public Access Coalition (LAPAC)

PO Box 9158,

North Hollywood, CA 91609

818 448 3403



Associates of LAPAC



Missy Woodward Leslie Dutton,

Critter Crusades Full Disclosure Network

Dr. Dan Wiseman Charlotte Laws

You’re Neighborhood Council

Kevin McKenna, Producer Dr. Susan Block

Executive Director IDEAS

Charlie Mount Elaine Brown

CLASSIC ARTS SHOWCASE



Lady Cage-Barile Keith Hardine

Michael Cohen (Partial Listing)