Background

	 Na Leo, established in 1993, was the last of the access
organizations to commence operations.  It covers the Big Island,
with offices in Hilo and Kailua-Kona.  Na Leo has an annual
budget of approximately $350,000 spread between the two sites.

     The Kona office receives three percent of the gross revenues
from the cable companies in its area; Hilo received two percent,
until May 31, 1995, and now receives three percent.(1)  At present
the sites are run on separate budgets.  The Hilo office is 800
square feet, and the Kona office is 960 square feet.  Both
offices provide training, equipment, and edit bays; neither has a
studio.  Na Leo has no money for grants to users.  The size of
the Big Island has precluded services from reaching the entire
island; the districts of Ka'u and Honoka'a currently do not
receive cable services.


Training

     Training for the Hilo office started in April 1995.
Training for the Kona office had not been established as of July
1995, as the Kona office was opened on July 1, 1995, and the
equipment had not yet been assembled.  At the time this report
was prepared, the Hilo office had trained thirty individuals.
Training was not advertised or publicized at this time because of
the backlog on the Hilo waiting list, which contains
approximately 130 people.  Na Leo is only able to train eight
people per month, with a backlog (at this rate) of sixteen
months.  The Kona wait list is between 50 and 60 people.

     Training is offered monthly and consists of sixteen hours
covering camera operation, audio, lighting for television, taping
in the filed, editing, and finalizing the show.  As a part of the
certification process, each person must produce two public
service announcements within eight weeks, or the person will have
to repeat the training course to be certified.  The cost of
training is $25.  Certification in one Na Leo site entitles the
user to services at both sites.

     An evaluation form has not been established yet.  No
statistics are available as of the time this report was prepared.


Equipment Availability

     Equipment is made available to all certified users on a
first-come, first-served basis.  There are no equipment
restrictions.  Priority of use is made in the following order:

     Residents of Hawai'i county

     Staff and volunteers of community service organizations

     Representatives from governmental and educational
     institutions located on the Big Island

     Students of any educational institution located within the
     county

Non-locally produced tapes cablecast over the community channel
must be sponsored by a local resident or organization.

     The Operations Coordinator checks out each piece of
equipment for defects before it is loaned out, and the equipment
is inspected for defects upon return.  If a piece of equipment is
found to be defective upon return, it is immediately withdrawn
from service.


Broadcast Access

     Na Leo schedules its programming on a first-come, first-
served basis.  It is still so new that it has not experienced the
necessity of limiting the number of programs being aired.  It
does have guidelines in place for that situation, with priority
being given to locally produced programming, programs not
previously aired, and programs produced by new users.


Editorial Guidelines

     Na Leo does not preview the tapes it cablecasts.  It makes
its restrictions known and requires presenters and promoters to
sign a statement of compliance.  Na Leo's program content policy
is to prohibit:

     (1)  Obscene or indecent matter as defined in the 1992 FCC
          guidelines;

     (2)  Materials containing speech not protected by the United
          States Constitution;

     (3)  The direct or indirect presentation of lottery
          information;

     (4)  Materials designed to promote the sale of commercial
          products or services;

     (5)  Advertising, publicity, or promotion of a candidate for
          political office, excluding group-sponsored political
          debate; and

     (6)  Material which might violate any state, federal, or
          local law, including the laws on defamation, unfair
          competition, and violation of trademark or copyright.


Promotion

     Na Leo will list a program in its televised program schedule
for that day if the program is submitted four weeks prior to "the
deadline."  While its Handbook states that programs submitted
four weeks in advance "may" be listed in the program guides with
Jones and Sun, the general manager responded that "since the
program channel guide for Jones is produced in Honolulu, for both
the cable channel and newspaper ads, the cable access channel is
only listed generically."  The general manager indicated that
this failure to list the channels is a fiscal issue of the part
of Jones Spacelink, its cable provider.

     The survey indicates that Na Leo lists the programs on their
respective days, and will run promotional spots for producers if
the producers made them, on a "run of schedule basis."


Viewership

     Na Leo does not have any viewership statistics.  However, it
has logged 20,000 calls to its IVBB since it started broadcasting
in October 1994.


E & G Programming

     Na Leo itself does not produce programming.  Due to staff
limitations, Na Leo has not actively pursued program production
by educational or governmental institutions.  Na Leo has
contacted a number of educational and governmental institutions,
and to date response has been minimal.  UH-Hilo cablecasts an
agricultural course and a Hawaiian language course, and UH-Hilo
Athletic Department and UH-Hilo College of Continuing Education
and Community Services use the IVBB.  Na Leo also receives
educational course programs from DOE and County Council meeting
programs.


Budget

     Na Leo's budget is approximately $350,000 in franchise fees
from Jones Spacelink, Sun Cablevision, and Chronicle Cablevision.
Na Leo does not specifically allocate funds for each of the PEG
components.  Most of the funds are expended to cover the costs of
staff, but as some of the positions are not being filled, there
will be a savings of approximately $50,000..


Proposed Insurance Deposit and Fees

     In the spring of 1995, Na Leo proposed that each access user
be charged a $5 user insurance fee and make a refundable $100
deposit for using Na Leo's equipment, despite language in the
policy and procedures manual stating that the only cost involved
is the cost of the training workshop.  The purpose of the fee is
to provide a self-insurance pool in the event a piece of
equipment is damaged, lost, or stolen, and the user is unable to
pay for the repair or replacement cost of the equipment.

     This proposed policy raised an immediate outcry among users
and potential users.  None of the other public access
organizations in Hawai'i have such a requirement.  It was alleged
that the threshold requirement of $100, even if refundable, was
simply too costly for many local residents.  The board, according
to general manager Juergen Denecke, has dropped consideration of
the $100 charge but the size of any other fees that might be
imposed instead is still to be determined.


Board Membership

     Na Leo objects to the elected board format for several
reasons.  One is cost; Na Leo estimated that the cost of mailing
two first-class envelopes (ballot plus return envelope) to each
of the 35,000 subscribers would be $22,400, or over 6 percent of
the Na Leo budget, not including printing costs.(2)  However,
costs could be reduced to less than a quarter of that if a bulk
mailing was made, without postage on the return envelope, or
reduced to zero if the ballot was placed in the cable
subscribers' monthly bill (assuming the affected cable companies
are willing to cooperate).

     Na Leo's second comment was that it would be "very probable"
that the balloting process would discourage community members
from considering the possibility of becoming a director.

     Third, Na Leo wrote that it is "VERY probable" (emphasis in
original) that an elected board would be divided into special
interest groups, which could lead to "stalemates and chaos for
budgets, policy decisions, etc."

     Fourth, "it is not a given" that either cable subscribers or
access users are more qualified than anyone else to perform the
oversight functions of a director, and in fact, more micro-
management might occur as a result.  At present, the bylaws
require that the board "be generally reflective of the ethnic,
geographical, and cultural diversity of the County and the
public, educational, and government groups."(3)  Additional
criteria are expertise and the willingness to commit time and to
contribute to the board.  Na Leo adds that in the relatively
small Big Island community, it is still possible to make personal
assessments of these qualities.  At present, the board consists
of individuals of diverse ethnic heritage, from different part of
the island, and there are 5 members from the public, 5 from the
educational, and 3 from the governmental sector, plus 2 cable
company representatives.

     Na Leo does not have any advisory committees.  As discussed
below, the opportunity for public input into its discussion and
decision-making process is minimal.


What Could the State Do to Try to Help Na Leo Meet PEG Goals

     Na Leo states that the National Association of Regulatory
and Utility Commissions recommended that franchising authorities
contract with non-profits to manage access, which would help
distance the government from First Amendment and possible
conflicts.  Na Leo then adds that "[f]or the State now to single
out PEG corporations with specific Board of Directors
requirements, which do not universally apply to all other Boards
of Directors, is a risky strategy which can be interpreted as
undue government control and thus challenges the core of the
First Amendment."  (In reality, however, it would appear that the
State is at present in much more of a controlling position by
having free rein to appoint a majority of the board members than
it would by establishing requirements that the board or voters
would have to fulfill.)


What the State Can Do to Help Na Leo Promote the G Function

     Na Leo says that the Legislature took a step in the right
direction by funding S.B. No. 1939, C.D. 1 (1995),(4) which
provided funds that would allow the neighbor island access
centers to tape legislative proceedings and show them during
prime time so that a large audience could view them.  The general
manager states that "I would urge the State to expand on these
efforts and provide funding for the necessary infrastructure."

     Na Leo notes further that there is "no comparison between
the facilities, resources, and employees between O'ahu and the
neighbor islands, yet the neighbor islands are expected to
produce the same services with a vastly smaller financial basis."  


Public Comments

     The Bureau was contacted by independent producers from the
Big Island with complaints and comments about Na Leo's
procedures.  A copy of a letter from Na Maka 'O Hilo is included
as Appendix D.  The most serious complaints revolve around the
issues of the $5 equipment use fees and the $100 deposit, as
discussed above, and the lack of public information about the
board's processes and public input into the decision-making
process.  Na Leo is the only public access organization in Hawaii
that does not have any advisory boards.  The access producers
group Na Maka 'O Hilo reported to the Bureau that they had
experienced difficulty in receiving copies of the agendas and
board minutes on a timely basis,(5) and were limited at board
meetings to speaking for three minutes at the beginning of the
meeting.  Members of the public are also allowed to speak for
three minutes on action items only, but not on other items such
as discussions of policy.  Given the fact that Na Leo has no
advisory boards and no other form of public input, these rules
seem unduly restrictive.

     Na Maka 'O Hilo takes the position that a cable access
membership should be formed, with the board elected by the
members.  While Na Maka did not specify who the membership should
consist of, in most places, members are either the producers or
other who have demonstrated an interest in the access
organization, often by paying dues.  Na Maka's concerns appear to
be that, at the time this study was researched, no one on the
board has personal insight into how a public access program is
made, and that some decisions are being made in a factual vacuum.
The Bureau was informed in mid-November 1995 that a Na Maka
member was appointed to the Na Leo board.

     Na Maka criticizes the current training program as
inadequate and does not impart essential video production skills.
Na Leo states that due to heavy demand for training and limited
equipment that it was not possible to provide a comprehensive
video training course.  Na Leo will also provide consultation on
an individual basis, and states that trainees who have used the
consulting process have had no particular difficulties in
preparing public service announcements.  The Bureau does not have
the expertise to determine the appropriateness of the training
process, as it is technical in nature.  Na Maka 'O Hilo also
suggests, as training is limited, that Na Leo institute an Open
Mike type of program in which people with a non-commercial
message can get air time without training or certification.