As Orange County Co-Director for CURE, as well as being a member of the Castle Coalition partners of the Institute for Justice, those volunteer efforts have enabled me to network with hundreds of property rights victims and victors around the country.
Earlier this year I spoke at one of our property rights conferences in Long Beach at which representatives of San Diego’s Grantville Action Group, GAG, attended. The following is the response to an email from Brian T. Peterson, president of the GAG, that he sent to Huell Howser. Brian’s email covered litigation between the city of San Diego and the county of San Diego on a project where no blight existed. Brian’s concern was triggered by the LA Times report of Mr. Howser’s 14 segment TV series on redevelopment activities around the state that is funded by the California Redevelopment Agency.
Following is Brian’s communication to the activists after his receiving a reply from Huell Howser. As acknowledged in Brian’s letter we have hit a nerve with Huell who is being used by those who are funding this effort. Let me urge everyone reading these posts to send letters and place calls to Mr. Howser and tell them you are mad as hell and want him to either cancel the balance of the RDA series or include commentary that all redevelopment projects are not successful. In addition another way to clean up an area is to model the Platimum Triangle project in Anaheim that does not include the use of eminent domain. Mayor Curt Pringle addressed this approach at our Institute for Justice conference held in the Washinton DC area.
If Huell continues to sell one side of the bogus redevelopment story then we must continue to put his feet to the fire of public opinion. This group effort will surely impact his favorable viewer ratings. If not, this series is “cherry picking” at its finest.
Notes: A copy of this post is being sent to Huell as well as my Twitter account.
Huell Howser can be reached at 323.953.5380 or huell@calgold.com
“Huell Howser is Not a Shill for the CRA (Well, This is What He Told
Last weekend the LA Times reported that PBS TV personality Huell Howser is taking $350,000 from the California Redevelopment Association to produce 14-part series on redevelopment areas in California. If you saw the first one on NTC, you know this is bound to be a 14-part infomercial for the redevelopment industry. Tuesday I called his office to talk to him about this and to make sure he knew both sides of redevelopment. His receptionist told me he was unavailable, and instructed me to write an e-mail, so I did…
Early this morning Huell called me at the pet hospital. He was not in good mood. He is very upset that people are calling him a shill for the CRA. He said he is not. According to Huell, it is not his job to present both sides of an issue. He told me that even the seemingly most benign stories have a dark side, and it is not his job to go there. This was his explanation for ignoring all controversy regarding redevelopment.
When I could get a word in, I asked him if this series would show any communities that are not state-mandated redevelopment project areas. His reply was that he does that all the time with his other shows and that this series would be devoted to what he perceives as redevelopment successes. We finished our rather long phone conversation with me suggesting he go to the Platinum Triangle in Anaheim, which is a redevelopment success, but one that does not use eminent domain for private benefit and does not divert property via the tax increment financing scheme.
Still, contact Huell at Huell@calgold.com, or 323-953-5380. Ask him to present all sides of the redevelopment story.
If anyone has any questions, you know where to find me…just like Huell Howser
“According to Huell, it is not his job to present both sides of an issue. He told me that even the seemingly most benign stories have a dark side, and it is not his job to go there.”
Make sense to me, it isn’t his job to present both sides of the story. Seriously, Huell seems to be an all around nice guy, at least this is how he appears on TV. Picking a fight with him to backfire on you.
“a fight with him to backfire on you”
I meant WILL backfire… It already has somewhat.
I also tried to debate to Huell on this issue, but all he said was “GEEE WHIZZ LOOK AT THAT AVOCADO-EATING DOG!”
I agree with Lam Pho. It’s ridiculous to expect that Huell Howser is suddenly going to become an investigative reporter. That’s not what he does and I can’t imagine his shows being further from that model.
You’re picking on the wrong guy, Larry. Go get a real, investigative reporter to dig into your concerns.
#3,
Well, that would be distracting. But some dogs really do dig avocados!
Lam Pho.
Sorry but you are wrong. Up until he accepted this contract my wife and I have enjoyed his programs. In fact we briefly met him at a Disneyland Hotel fundraiser and expressed that appreciation.
While his work on PBS should provide both sides of issues, or so I believe, this 14 segment series is one sided. At this point I am not sure where his series will run and what ground rules apply.
Huell and I spoke by phone exactly one year ago when he shared some of the redevelopment projects he planned to tour and produce for his TV audience. At that time he confirmed being paid by the CRA and yet said he is non political. If you check to see how much money the CRA spent in support of redevelopment activities in this state and possibly the recent property rights ballot measures there is no question as to their agenda.
While I don’t wish to pick a fight with Huell, I will not back down from exposing his selling out for the almighty buck, especially after hearing that we would expose his participation in this feel good policy when homes and businesses are being taken when the property oqwners have no desire to sell. And let me also point out that Prop 99 does not offer the protection that CA voters bought into. If it protected your (businesses and) owner occupied homes then why are property owners in Long Beach and Baldwin Park hiring attorney’s?
Your first point is correct. On TV he comes across like a nice guy. That is no different then when we met him two years ago. I can point out a lot of “nice guys” whom we helped get elected to office who themselves started out as “nice guys.”
Here you go, Art
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l99Ek4YtTuw
anon. Is it raining where you are writing from?
As always, you are all wet on this debate.
“anon. Is it raining where you are writing from?
As always, you are all wet on this debate.”
Whoa. Well I’m convinced. Not.
Could you please explain to us why Huell Howser’s shows “should provide both sides of issues”? Really? Should Sesame Street provide information about toys manufactured in China that had toxic elements because Mattel bought them from China and advertised in the show?
You’re imposition of investigative reporting standards onto a Huell Howser show just makes no sense.
Howser’s shows are entertainment, not investigative news reports, go and get Geraldo Rivera To do a piece on the RDA abuses.
Howser is not a reporter and he has no professional obligation to show anything he doesn’t feel like.
On the other hand he does have a moral obligation to know what his sponsor is really up to, and to reject their overtures if he doesn’t like what they’re doing. Howser cannot be ignorant of the abuses of Redevelopment in California, especially toward the funky, offbeat places and land uses that he specializes in gawking over. He’s taking the CRA money and running with it. So be it. Freedom.
And we who object to his behavior have the freedom to boycott his programs – all of them – if we wish.
Mr. Zenger,
You’re right. And one may as well boycott Sesame Street while they’re at it. It’ll have about the same results.
Look, Larry, I respect your passion on the eminent domain issue and I’d probably agree with many of your positions. But I think this is a case where your passion has clouded your rationality. As others have noted, find a different horse to ride what the CRA does into the public square.
“You’re right. And one may as well boycott Sesame Street while they’re at it. It’ll have about the same results.”
Wrong. Not even PBS will run a program if nobody is watching it. They’ll replace him with the DooWop special or a Lawrence Welk Revival.
Mr. Zenger,
Yeah, but do you really think that Larry’s crusade against Huell Howser would drive viewership down to the point of PBS canceling his shows? Not likely.
anon.
I have another email from the GVG in San Diego stating that Huell is starting to get upset with our collective hammering. His teflon image is being challenged perhaps for the first time in his popular PBS career.
Yes, he is free to do whatever he chooses and I am free to lobby him to give us some face time to show the other end of the spectrum.
I think back to last Dec. when those writing posts, or readers responding to “definition of marriage” stories, on this blog were expending a lot of energy on the Prop 8 ballot measure result. One supporter of Prop 8 was harrased for sending in a $100 contribution to the YES side and was hammered. I refer to Margie Christoffersen, manager of the El Coyote Coffee Shop in LA.
Folks. That’s First Amendment freedom which is no different than my exposing Huell’s series as an “informercial” promoting CRA member bogus property rights projects rather then his traditional travel accounts.
All these apologies for poor Huell. Just because he’s a holly jolly guy doesn’t give him a free pass pawn off propaganda–even if it is so called entertainment.
At very least PBS should issue a notice/disclaimer that these programs are info-mercials for the CRA, that the content is purely promotional for that agency. And it has no factual basis whatsoever other than to hype their agenda.
At least on network television you typically can identify commercials when you see them. This approach is far more devious–and I fault PBS for this sham more than I do Mr. Howser.
It could very well be Huell thinks being Walter Cronkite for all we know. But PBS should know better.
Hoff.
Very well stated. I will forward your suggestions to both Huell and PBS.
Having appeared as a guest on multiple public airwaves programs the hosts instructed me to avoid any political endorsements or partisan positions. I would opine that this series warrants an opposing view or equal time.
#16, excellent point. PBS is public. And the public has a right to know that what it’s seeing is CRA propaganda/garbage. At the very least they should give equal time to Redevelopment failures and abuse story. That’s a program I would actually pay to see.
I believe Howser is actually smarter than he seems on TV. Maybe he will see the light.
Hoff & David.
As stated in my post I copied Huell for two reasons. First. To let him know that we are not going to put our heads in the sand as he continues this one sided series. Second. To copy him as I try to do whenever I mention someone in a story all the way to Arnold in SAC and presidents Bush & Obama in DC.
In addition to copying Huell I sent a copy to one of the players at PBS and received the following reply.
“Please remove me from your mailings. — kyork@kpbs.org
I sent back a confirmation of that corrective action request and asked for a comment for which I will not be holding my breath.
I’ve withheld my membership payment to PBS before–when Bill Moyers got pulled off the air for being outspoken against Bush and the Iraq War.
I’m going to pull my membership again. As I said whether or not Huell realizes he’s a prized CRA pawn, PBS should realize it and provide equal time to the victims of redevelopment.
Those people whose lives have been ruined should have an equal voice.
Hoff. Thank you for expressing your disappointment in PBS for going along with this pro redevelopment series.
May many others around the country follow your lead in cancelling support of this or any other public funded PBS station that refuses to provide balanced topic coverage.
In addition to putting this story on the Juice blog I have sent over 1,000 email copies to my redevelopment/eminent domain data base around the country. You can also find this post on my Twitter account. In fact, so can Huell which should make him happy
twitter.com/larrygilbert
Larry, I understand your frustration with Huell, but my point was simply that I don’t think it’s Huell’s job to present both sides of the story. Look, you are passionate on the eminent domain issue and of course, there are others on the other side that are just as passionate. It would be a good issue to debate, but I personally would not expect Huell Howser to represent both sides on every topic on his shows or referee a debate. I look elsewhere for that, like John Stewart or maybe Rush Limbaugh for fairness :))
Lam.
Agreed. This is a great topic to debate. In this case we have an issue that is beyond Huell Howser called use of the public airwaves for a political infomercial.
So our angst really applies to PBS for airing this series and Huell for telling me that his programs are not political yet are just that.
This is not a wing it story. Ask him to confirm or deny our conversation prior to his commencement of this series.
To the best of my knowledge, having watched many of his programs this is a first and, based on our feedback to him, will probably be his last tilted effort.