Debate confronts Idaho Public Television's value
Cynthia Sewell and Anna Webb
January 17, 2010
Idaho Statesman
Gov. Butch Otter's proposed cuts to Idaho Public Television are just the latest in a long and sometimes stormy relationship between the Statehouse and state-owned public TV.
His hope to wean IPTV from state general tax dollars over four years is challenging lawmakers to tackle questions that have simmered for years.
How valuable to Idahoans is a service like IPTV's "Idaho Legislature Live" - the only way people around the state can see complete coverage of the Legislature?
How important are locally generated shows, like "Outdoor Idaho," "Dialogue," and the popular kids science show "D4K"?
And at the core of it all: Should the state even be in the business of owning and funding a public television station?
For some Idahoans, like Weiser resident Taro Stahl, the issue comes down to money - and the state no longer has enough.
Stahl says he likes a lot of the programming on IPTV but ultimately believes it is a luxury - as is all television.
"I can't eat it, it can't give me a job, it can't shelter me," Stahl said.
But some say public television is even more vital when times are tough.
"I am concerned for those families that cannot afford the more expensive options out there for other channels," said Josephine Halfhide of Boise.
The same points are being made at the newly renovated Statehouse.
The economy "makes it very difficult for the state to fund everything that we have in the past," said Rep. Robert Schaefer, R-Nampa. "Those of us that appreciate public TV should be the ones contributing to it. I will be helping pick up the cost myself."
Others, like House Minority Leader John Rusche, D-Lewiston, think public television - and U.S. 95 - are central to the connectivity between northern and southern Idaho.
Schaefer favors the gavel-to-gavel coverage, the open lens and open microphone provided by IPTV's legislative coverage.
"I think the state should be providing that service on its own for the taxpayers. That's a legitimate role of government," he said.
Even the state's top officials are their own microcosm of the differing opinions.
At a recent press conference, first lady Lori Otter said the Otters don't financially support or watch public television. But Lt. Gov. Brad Little is an advocate of public television; his wife, Teresa Little, served on the Friends of Public Television board.
"I don't have satellite or cable. I support the programming, I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I support it. É I watch it all the time," Little said.
But he noted one change that may affect IPTV's role as an educational resource for rural communities.
The state has invested about $50 million in the Idaho Education Network that will connect classrooms around the state through broadband, possibly making rural schools less reliant on IPTV for educational material.
HOW IT ALL STARTED
Public television began in Idaho in 1965 at Station KUID in Moscow, operated by students and professors on the University of Idaho campus.
In 1971, then Boise State College and Idaho State University established their own educational stations. The three operated separately for nearly a decade.
But a few years later, the public television system had its first scuffle with the Legislature, and its first near brush with extinction.
KUID produced controversial documentaries about the timber industry in northern Idaho, and the exposure of children in the Silver Valley to lead from mining.
In response, the 1981 session of the Legislature eliminated nearly all public television funding.
A year later, the public outcry forced lawmakers to relent, with the stipulation that the three stations operate as one statewide entity and report directly to the Idaho State Board of Education.
The Legislature restored funding - but only to about 50 percent of what it was before the documentaries aired.
IPTV weathered more controversy in 1999 and 2000 after airing national documentaries about the ways schools deal with the harassment of homosexual students, and about a child growing up with gay parents.
The Legislature didn't cut funding, but the Idaho State Board of Education required IPTV to post disclaimers about its programming on air, online and in publications.
The board lifted the disclaimer requirement in 2002.
But some lawmakers at the time had made up their minds.
"I think it has outlived its usefulness," former Sen. Stan Hawkins said then. The conservative firebrand added that for what the state was paying to support the network, "We could probably buy every resident in the state of Idaho a dish and a digital TV with 265 channels and be done with it."
WHAT ARE THE COSTS?
In reality, the station today spends far less money.
IPTV sends Oscar the Grouch to every remote pocket of the state each year for about $1 in tax money for every man, woman and child in Idaho.
The $1.5 million from the state general fund - a quarter of IPTV's annual $7 million operating budget - has paid for salaries, rent and the power bill.
If Otter's proposed cuts to IPTV go through, the station would likely move to a "market driven" scenario, where programming goes to the parts of the state that give the most money.
Right now, individuals and corporations in Southwest Idaho are responsible for more than 80 percent of IPTV's donations.
"We have enough basic, private support for the Treasure Valley, eastern Idaho and the Coeur d'Alene area," said Peter Morrill, IPTV general manager.
But that leaves some key parts of the state out. Morrill said the station would have to take a close look at areas around Moscow and Twin Falls to see if they can be self-supporting.
IS THERE MORE MONEY OUT THERE?
When it comes to private fundraising, Morrill said IPTV is already outpacing its peers - other statewide, state-licensed public television stations.
More than 60 percent of IPTV's annual operating costs come from private donations.
Sen. Shawn Keough, R-Sandpoint, said fundraising is a conversation that still needs to be had.
The Legislature and the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee need to hear more about Otter's proposal, as well as alternative solutions from Morrill, she said.
"My district is Sandpoint and Bonners Ferry. It's difficult in spots to get IPTV, but that being said, there are Idahoans up there who like it.
"My approach has been to communicate with constituents about their priorities. If it's a service you want, how are you willing to help pay for it?" Keough said.
Little said the ultimate decision about the future of IPTV is not up to the executive branch, but is one that will be made by legislators after lots of people have weighed in.
If there's a better solution than cutting back funding, lawmakers will find it, Little said.
Originally posted at http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/1044758.html
The News Story posted here is provided by permission of its original publisher and does not necessarily reflect the views of Idaho Public Television.