GUEST COLUMN:Righeimer KOCE facts all wrong

It is tempting to ignore Jim Righeimer’s recent assaults on the sale of KOCE-TV as merely personal and uninformed opinion (“KOCE-TV, district’s deal done dirt cheap,” July 21; “Lack of transparency in KOCE deal,” June 30).

However, because the Daily Pilot inexplicably chose to print not one, but two, opinion columns on its front page instead of the editorial/opinion page, some of its readers may believe the articles were actually news reporting.

In addition, after meeting with Righeimer and clarifying errors and innuendoes, some of which he assured me he would correct but did not, it is important to set the record straight.

Righeimer peppers his writing with disparaging innuendoes and inferences, such as referring to the sale of KOCE-TV as “the so-called sale” and placing the word “slimy” in quotation marks, suggesting that is how representatives of either the KOCE Foundation or the Coast Community College District characterized the televangelist organization that sought to purchase the station.

Righeimer then complains he was forced to read the actual sale agreement because “neither of the two major papers in Orange County had the same terms of the sale.”

This was not a “so-called sale.” It was a sale. Righeimer may not like the terms, but it was and is a sale. The district sold KOCE-TV to the KOCE Foundation for an $8 million down payment and additional terms based on a bid of $32 million.

When I spoke to Righeimer, whom I have known for many years, he could not identify anyone who has referred to the televangelists as “slimy” and promised me he would correct that. He did not.

Righeimer began his first column with the claim that the terms of the sale were cloaked in secrecy. He then contradicted himself, complaining he had to read the entire sale agreement to get the facts.

He was able to do so because the agreement is a public document, available to anyone and anything but secret.

Being forced to read the actual purchase agreement because newspapers reported different stories is not a reason to criticize the district, the foundation, the process or the terms of the sale agreement. Instead, Righeimer should call into question the accuracy of the reporters covering the sale.

Many of Righeimer’s “facts” are as erroneous and damaging as his innuendoes and inferences. He asserted the district “rejected an all-cash bid for $40 million” from the televangelists.

Fact: The district did not reject the bid. The $40 million offer came in after the deadline and was therefore ineligible for consideration.

Furthermore, at no time did either the bidding process or application stipulate the sale must be for cash. The Superior Court which upheld the sale did not hold the sale must have been for cash. It was not until the appellate court ruled otherwise that either of the parties or any other bidders, except the one who legally challenged the sale, believed a cash transaction was required.

Righeimer’s column explicitly relied on a June 23, 2005 4th District Court of Appeal opinion. When I met with Righeimer, he was unaware the June 23 opinion was ordered by the court itself not to be published and was vacated, and that a subsequent opinion handed down on May 25, 2006 is the operable opinion. Nor did he correct this in his second article.

Further, Righeimer falsely claims the district “has to pay KCET-TV $375,000 per year” for telecourses and advertising. Assuming he meant KOCE-TV, not KCET-TV, either way, the district is not paying either station for telecourses or advertising. The district is receiving those services from KOCE-TV as part of the final negotiated terms and KOCE-TV receives credit for the costs of those services toward the purchase, but receives no payments in any amount from the district.

Righeimer then falsely asserts the “district’s trustees allowed the KOCE-TV Foundation to borrow $10 million from a bank, secured against the assets of the TV station and all of its equipment.” The district had no role whatsoever in how the foundation raised funds to purchase the station. The foundation raised significant contributions in addition to securing loans secured against pledges in the same manner many nonprofit organizations do.

Righeimer falsely states the foundation purchased the station “with no money down, put $2 million in its pocket and sold airtime back to the district to make its payments to the district.”

Facts: A cash down payment of $8 million was made to the district in the first week of November 2004. There is no “$2 million in the Foundation’s pocket” as alleged by Righeimer. There was a $2 million line of credit which was available to the foundation but has never been accessed.

Righeimer closed his first column on this subject promising in his next installment to “look at the settlement and how much more money the college trustees left on the table.” He could not keep that promise because, once again, he did not have a firm grasp of the facts. The district left nothing on the table because it was not part of any settlement, nor did it approve the terms of any settlement. The settlement was between the foundation and Word of God Fellowship Inc. (aka Daystar). The settlement was and remains confidential. As a result of the settlement, all lawsuits were withdrawn, including those against the district by Daystar.

There is more, but I hope this response will assist readers of the Daily Pilot in understanding that whatever Righeimer’s or anyone else’s opinion may be about the sale of KOCE-TV, the facts do not support the outrageous assertations and conclusions in Righeimer’s opinion columns.

One more thing, Righeimer claims I called him, displeased with his article, and he has talked “to all of the players.” Sadly, even these statements are wrong. Mel Rogers, president of KOCE-TV, and I did meet with Righeimer (at my suggestion). However, we told him neither of us had been directly involved with the sale negotiations and he might want to speak to either our general counsel or one or more of those who negotiated the sale.

He chose not to … therefore not having spoken to those with the greatest knowledge, much less “all” of the players. And … I did not call Righeimer. I merely returned his call. There is a difference. It is simply another pesky little thing called a “fact.”