Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

Recently you published an editorial in which you expressed your opinion about the proposed sale of KSTK to Coast Alaska.

The members of the KSTK board, the Coast Alaska board, and yes, even the KFSK board, have spent a lot of time

examining the options available, and after much thought and discussion, came to the proposed transfer. The membership of KSTK, (that is, all donors of $20 or more in the past year) were advised of the particulars and invited to vote at a special meeting held for this issue, and approved it unanimously. This is now undergoing the process of paperwork to apply for the transfer with the Federal Communications Commission.

Why?

First, the finances of KSTK are sound. The station has shown a balanced budget every year, and contributes as a member of Coast Alaska.

The problem is in the recent changes of government grants, both federal and state, especially in something called NFFS, or Non-Federal Funding Sources. Boring, yes, but important to understand that among other requirements, federal (CPB) grants require a certain level of NFFS for a station before they will award the annual grant. Recently this threshold amount was increased, beyond what we can raise locally, endangering KSTK’s federal funding, a substantial part of the annual budget.

The State of Alaska also

supports KSTK with an annual grant (APB), and this is part of NFFS, but it is also a matching grant that requires the federal money to be in place. That amount has also been reduced during the recent financial woes of the state.

These same issues affect all public radio stations. The amount of private giving (NFFS again) in Wrangell is the difference, with a smaller

population and our own local economic issues. We just won’t close the new, bigger gap with local giving.

The transfer of the station to Coast Alaska circumvents this problem, by the wider footprint of Coast Alaska being able to cite more NFFS, thereby qualifying for the grants for KSTK.

It does this without dismantling the building and transmitters, all the physical assets that took so long to establish, and would be hard to replace. It maintains KSTK as an entity that can receive this funding and continue operation. It also preserves what has been built in a reversible state, that could someday be locally owned again.

Who is Coast Alaska? It is a consortium of five community stations formed to manage the finances of the members. (Your editorial states seven

stations, but three of those are the KTOO group in Juneau.

See coastalaska.org) KSTK is a founding member, and has paid into the savings and strength of Coast Alaska. Other members are KFSK

(Petersburg), KRBD (Ketchikan), and KCAW(Sitka). Coast Alaska issues the pay checks to the employees of all these stations, manages

accounting, insurance, and engineering services. So you see, KSTK is a part of Coast Alaska.

“Selling” KSTK to Coast Alaska is like putting your house or business in your spouse’s name; it is a bookkeeping measure that changes little in actual operations, but changes a lot in terms of grant funding eligibility.

You propose that KSTK should just dissolve and KFSK set up a repeater here, and employ a couple of locals on the KFSK payroll. This shows a lack of understanding how public radio is funded, and the role of Coast Alaska.

The problem with that, is the loss of all the state and federal funds that go to a separate station, with an increase in costs to KFSK. (KFSK will not receive double grants by serving Wrangell, the monies KSTK would receive would be gone.) This weakens KFSK, Coast Alaska, and finishes off KSTK altogether. It further weakens our local economy by the loss of jobs. Plus, the KSTK and KFSK employees are all paid by Coast Alaska already.

Thanks to everyone for their interest and support.

Walter Moorhead,

KSTK Board Member