HomeMy WebLinkAboutWMFE Capacity Grant Agreement 2007
City of Winter Springs I Community Communications. Inc.
CAPACITY GRANT AGREEMENT
This Agreement made and entered into this j :J T day of A Pit" L 2007, by and
between the City of Winter Springs, Florida (CITY) and Community Communications,
Inc. (WMFE).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, WMFE seeks funding to expand its production and programming "capacity"
to develop, produce. and program new and current local programs on WMFE; and
WHEREAS. with this additional capacity the locally produced programs developed by
WMFE will provide relevant and important information that will address issues within the
CITY and the Central Florida region; and
WHEREAS. the CITY and WMFE desire to enter into an agreement whereby the CITY
shall provide WMFE with a "capacity" grant of $5,000 per year for a period of three
consecutive years;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises contained herein and for good
and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. Term and Termination. The term of this agreement shall begin on April 1, 2007 and
shall continue through March 31, 2010. However, either party may terminate this
Agreement, without cause, at the end of each twelve-month period upon providing
the other party a written notice of termination no less than ninety (90) days before
the end of the current twelve-month period. Said notice of termination shall be
delivered by certified mail or in person to the address specified in the section
regarding Notice herein.
2. CITY's Obligations. The CITY shall provide WMFE with a capacity grant (GRANT)
of $5,000 (Five Thousand Dollars) each year for a minimum of three consecutive
years, beginning on April 1, 2007 and ending on March 31, 2010, for a total GRANT
of $15,000 (Fifteen Thousand Dollars) unless this Agreement is terminated pursuant
to the section Term and Termination above. Each annual payment shall be by check
made payable to Community Communications, Inc. and mailed to the address
indicated in the section regarding Notice herein.
3. WMFE's Obligations.
A. WMFE shall develop, produce and schedule locally produced programs as
described in the Capacity Grant Request Related to WMFE's Vision for Our
Future document dated July 5. 2006 as presented to the CITY, with a copy of
said document attached to and incorporated herein as Attachment "A". These
programs are scheduled to begin on WMFE by May 31, 2007. WMFE shall
provide topic coverage of issues about or related to the CITY as conceptually
described within said document.
B. WMFE retains exclusive editorial and content control of any programs resulting
from the additional capacity that this Agreement makes possible. WMFE shall
own the copyright to said programs, including the right to make recordings of the
Capacity Grant Agreement from WMFE -Draft 08.09.06 Page 1 of 6
City of Winter Springs I Community Communications. Inc.
programs and to use and re-use such recordings, in whole or in part, for radio
and television broadcasting, cablecasting, audiovisual and closed circuit
exhibition and other electronic and mechanical distribution of whatever kind
. throughout the world in perpetuity.
C. WMFE will provide the CITY a written report at mid-year and at the end of each
full GRANT year containing a list of topics and issues covered that relate to the
CITY.
D. WMFE acknowledges that it is seeking additional funding from other sources to
support additional programming capacity. Prior to accepting the CITY'S first
GRANT payment, WMFE shall certify to the CITY that WMFE has sufficient funds
to carry out its obligation to the CITY.
E. WMFE shall do all things legally necessary to maintain its corporate, not-for-profit
status in the state of Florida throughout the term of this GRANT Agreement. If
WMFE should lose its corporate status, it shall immediately notify the CITY and
the CITY reserves the right to immediately terminate this GRANT Agreement.
F. WMFE shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and
regulations (including all fire, health and other applicable regulatory codes) and
obtain, and possess throughout the term of this GRANT Agreement, all required
licenses and permits applicable to its operations.
G. WMFE shall comply with Title VII of the Civil Rights act of 1964, as amended,
and not discriminate against any person with regard to race, color, creed,
religion, gender, age, national origin, marital status, sexual orientation or
disability.
4. Central Florida Alliance Network Participation:
A. WMFE will provide each week starting in January 2007 and for a period of not
less than three consecutive years, at no additional grant expense to the CITY, an
exclusive block of airtime for programming to be provided by the CITY for
broadcast on WMFE's Central Florida Alliance Network (CFAN) channel. At least
one block each week will be scheduled within primetime hours (7PM - 11 PM).
The length and quantity of the airtime block will be as described within
Attachment "A".
B. Said block of airtime is provided as an added value to the CITY in exchange for
the capacity GRANT. If said GRANT is no longer made available by the CITY to
WMFE, the block of airtime offered to the CITY may be terminated by WMFE at
its sole discretion.
C. The CITY's programming for said airtime shall be provided by the CITY to WMFE
through the Government Cable Channel or directly by the CITY. The CITY shall
provide the delivery method and format for the programming will be mutually
agreed upon by both parties to assure compatibility with available playback
methods.
D. The CITY will promote its CFAN offerings within its own programming and other
CITY publications. WMFE will promote the block of programming within
Capacity Grant Agreement from WMFE -Draft 08.09.06 Page 2 of 6
City of Winter Springs I Community Communications. Inc.
programming breaks of WMFE CFAN, and via other promotional materials of
WMFE.
E. Programming provided by the CITY will comply with WMFE's production
guidelines and adhere to FCC Rules and Regulations for telecast on Public
Television, including closed captioning.
F. The block of programming from the CITY will include a WMFE CFAN logo
electronically inserted by WMFE from the WMFE facility. This logo will not
interfere with an appropriate logo as may be inserted by the CITY.
G. WMFE reserves the right to p~eempt any or all parts of the block of programming
for unique or exceptional"public service" instances which might lead to WMFE's
different use of the CFAN channel during that period.
5. Errant or Excess Disbursement. WMFE expressly understands and agrees that
the GRANT amount constitutes the total amount to be paid by the CITY under this
Agreement. WMFE shall be liable for repayment of any funds which have been
disbursed in error or are in excess of the GRANT amount.
6. Indemnification.
A. WMFE shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the CITY, its officials, agents,
and employees from and against any and all claims, suits, judgments, demands,
liabilities, damages, cost and expenses (including attorney's fees) of any kind or
nature whatsoever arising directly or indirectly out of or caused in whole or in part
by any act or omission of WMFE or its subcontractors (if any), anyone directly or
indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whose acts any of them may be
liable.
B. Likewise, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the limitations set forth in
paragraph 19, the CITY shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless WMFE, its
board, officials, and staff from and against any claims, suits, judgments,
demands, liabilities, damages, cost and expenses (including attorney's fees) of
any kind or nature whatsoever arising directly or indirectly out of or caused in
whole or in part by any act or omission of the CITY or its subcontractors (if any),
anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, or anyone for whose acts any of
them may be liable. .
C. Each party certifies that any and all materials furnished by them for the
programming produced or aired under this Agreement are either owned by them
or otherwise authorized for such use without further obligation to any third party.
If, by a reason related to the content of any program produced or broadcast
pursuant to this Agreement, there is any claim or litigation involving any charge
by third parties of a violation or infringement of their rights, each party to this
Agreement shall be solely responsible for the content that they directly provided
for the program and accordingly, each party shall indemnify and hold harmless
the other party from any liability, loss or expenses arising from such claim or
litigation.
Capacity Grant Agreement from WMFE -Draft 08.09.06 Page 3 of 6
City of Winter Springs I Community Communications, Inc.
7. . No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement does not create, and shall not be
construed as creating, any rights enforceable by any person or entity other than the
parties to this Agreement.
8. Notice: Other than matters relating to production and telecasting activities related to
this Agreement, any notices hereunder shall be in writing and will be deemed
received when delivered in person (with proof of delivery), by facsimile transmission
(with transaction report). or upon receipt if sent by overnight express mail or certified
mail (return receipt requested), postage prepaid and properly addressed to the other
party at the following addresses (or such other address as either party shall have
specified by written notice to the other party in accordance herewith):
As to CITY:
Name Ronald W. McLemore
Title
Address
City Manager
1126 East SR 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708
As to WMFE:
Name
Title
Address
Jose A. Fajardo
President
Community Communications, Inc.
11510 East Colonial Drive
Orlando, FL 32817
9. Relationship. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended, or shall be
construed. as in anyway creating or establishing a partnership, joint venture or any
other form of legal association or relationship between the parties hereto or as to
deem WMFE as the agent or representative of the CITY for any purpose or for any
manner whatsoever.
10. Force Majeure. Neither party to this Agreement shall be liable to the other for failure
to perform due to acts of God, fire, flood, epidemic, labor dispute, civil commotion,
act of government (other than the City), or any other cause or event beyond the
control of and without the fault of either party.
11. Assignment. Neither party shall assign any rights or duties under this Agreement
without the prior written consent of the other party. Failure to comply with this section
may result in immediate termination of this Agreement by notice to the original party.
This section shall not prohibit WMFE from entering into any subcontracts for the
proviSion of services agreed to herein.
12. Relief. If at any time after the execution of this Agreement it is reasonably believed
that any party has violated the terms of this Agreement, the other party shall have
the right to seek appropriate relief including, but not limited to, a permanent
injunction restraining further violations, recovery of amounts paid pursuant to the
terms of this Agreement and/or damages, as appropriate, and reasonable attorneys'
fees.
Capacity Grant Agreement from WMFE -Draft 08.09.06 Page 4 of 6
-.
City of Winter Springs I Community Communications, Inc.
13. Waiver. The continued performance by either party hereto, pursuant to the terms of
this Agreement, after a breach or default of any of the terms, covenants or
conditions herein shall not be deemed a waiver of any right to terminate this
Agreement for any subsequent breach or default. Any expressed or implied waiver
of any breach or default of any of the terms, covenants or conditions herein shall not
be construed or act as a waiver of any subsequent breach or default and shall not be
construed to be a modification of this Agreement.
14.Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed
and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of Florida without regard to
principles of conflicts of laws and, in the event of litigation in connection with this
Agreement, venue shall lie in Seminole County, Florida.
15. Severability. Any covenant, condition or provision contained in this Grant
Agreement that is held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or
unenforceable shall not affect the validity, legality or enforceability of any other
covenants, conditions or provisions herein contained.
16. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the
parties hereto with respect to the subject matter hereof; any representations or
statements heretofore made with respect to such subject matter, whether verbal or
written, are merged herein. This Agreement shall supersede any other prior
agreements, whether verbal or written, regarding the subject matter.
17.Amendment. Any amendments, alterations, modifications or waivers of provisions
of this Agreement shall be valid only when made by written instrument, specifically
referencing this Agreement, and duly signed by both parties.
18. Signatory. Each signatory below represents and warrants that he or she has full
power and is duly authorized by their respective party to enter into and perform this
Agreement. Such signatory also represents that he or she has fully reviewed and
understands the above conditions and intends to fully abide by the conditions and
terms of this Agreement as stated.
19. Sovereign Immunity. Nothing herein shall be deemed a waiver of the City's right to
sovereign immunity pursuant to section 768.28, Florida Statutes (2006). The
provisions of section 768.28, Florida Statutes shall hereby be deemed fully
incorporated herein by this reference.
[signature page to follow]
Capacity Grant Agreement from WMFE -Draft 08.09.06 Page 5 of 6
\
City of Winter Springs I Community Communications, Inc.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly signed.
Agreement as of the date first above written.
CITY
By:
~~M ?>>cfw,~
SiW1ature: J
KO/llAl;() W. I'I1CJ..c PJ6,ec
Printed Name:
Ci'i WI AlVA p.. c ~
Title:
sealed and delivered this
~"A- -h..-c-J-u
Printed N~ ,..."..,,\
tc.t \ 'J e-t-... c...e- v
Title:
Capacity Grant Agreement from WMFE .Draft 08.09.06 Page 6 of 6
(-4
RECE~'lED
MAR 2. 8 '.f.FI"o'
L"...
CH 24 TV/DT. 90.7 FM. WMFE.ORG
Q) mmll
CITY OF V'I1NTER SPRINGS
City Manager
March 27, 2007
Ronald W. McLemore, City Manager
City of Winter Springs
1126 East SR 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
Re: WMFE CAPACITY GRANT
Dear Mr. McLemore:
Enclosed please find two signed copies and the first year's invoice for the
Capacity Grant Agreement dated 4/1/2007. Also enclosed is a completed form
W-9.
In accordance with Item 3.0. of the Agreement I certify that WMFE has sufficient
funds on hand and pledged to go forward with the project.
If you have any questions feel free to call me at 407-273-2300 #130.
WMFE is grateful for this Capacity rant
Jose A.
President & Chief Executive Officer
enclosures: Capacity Grant Agreement, W-9 and Invoice
11510 East Colonial Drive · Orlando, Florida 32817-4699 · 407-273-2300
".1( 1(
.,
CH 24 TV/DT. 90.7 FM · WMFE.ORG
Q) mmo
Member-supported pUbl1c broadcastmg smce 7965
To:
The Honorable John F. Bush, Mayor, City of Winter Springs
The Honorable Michael S. Blake, Commissioner
The Honorable Donald A. Gilmore, Commissioner
The Honorable Joanne M. Krebs, Commissioner
The Honorable Sally McGinnis, Commissioner
The Honorable Robert S. Miller, Commissioner
Ronald McLemore, City Manager
July 5, 2006
Please accept this letter and the documents that come with it as WMFE's formal request for
you and the City of Winter Springs to consider and fund a multi-year "capacity" grant for WMFE.
I will telephone you soon to follow-up and to ask that WMFE's grant request be placed on
your agenda for formal consideration by the City of Winter Springs. Please be on the lookout for my
call, won't you?
The public broadcasting stations of WMFE respectfully seeks $5,000 each year for a
3-year period from the City of Winter Springs in partial support of the additional capacity
WMFE needs in order to create the local programming described in these papers.
Within those local programs, these are the kind of illustrative issues featuring the City of
Winter Springs that WMFE would address today were the stations to have the "capacity" to
launch these proposed local programs:
City of Winter SprinQs
1. Wi-Fi: First Steps to City-wide Wireless Interconnection
2. One-on-One With: Mayor John Bush
3. Town Centre: Inviting or Unimaginative?
4. Consolidation: A Closer Look (i.e., fire and rescue services between city and county
governments
5. Round Table - City Mayors: Winter Springs, Apopka, Ocoee, and Oviedo
6. Orlando Philharmonic at Central Winds Park
7. Parks & Recreation: Added Value to Quality of life
8. Up Close: Black Hammock
9. Family Politics -- How Cities and Counties Get Along
10. Home Rule: Demystified
11. Code Enforcement - 24 hour clock
Local issues addressed in such programming will be produced in such a way as to offer context
and understanding to our listeners and viewers in such a manner as only a public service medium, like
WMFE, can be trusted and depended upon to produce and deliver.
These programs, described in the attached documents arise as a result of an 18-month Talk
to Us - We're Listening project WMFE recently completed during its 40th anniversary celebration.
11510 East Colonial Drive · Orlando, Florida 32817 -4699 · 407-273-2300
J"
,
.
Additionally, during the last several months WMFE has purposefully included as many
elected representatives from the City of Winter Springs as would attend various "media panels"
whereat the stations facilitated each panel to "vet" the results of the Talk to Us - Were Ustening
project. Each panelist was invited to offer and discuss their view of the role an electronic public
service medium like WMFE might more relevantly play in Central Florida. Most recently, I have
personally followed-up with many of the panelists from the City of Winter Springs to share the final
results of the panelists' findings and discuss the next steps WMFE will take to fully enact the vision.
As an outcome of this regional talking-listening-vetting initiative, WMFE was encouraged to
expand its local public service media potential. This anticipated expansion reaches toward a more
relevant local program service for our constituents. And our constituents include the same
constituents as are the City of Winter Springs due to the fact that WMFE's broadcast signals
blankets your area.
With the pride we take in having met the initial promise of our founders from 40 years ago,
we reach today toward a more meaningful potential. That reach has shaped WMFE's Vision for
Our Future: Promise, Pride & Potential campaign. The Vision and its potential are suitably and
visually described on the enclosed DVD and CD/ROM (previously provided to those attending the
media panel lunch and not included in their packet).
As a result of successful fundraising for this Vision Campaign, WMFE will gain an additional
$807,000 each year for 3-years to fund the Vision and create the additional capacity -- beyond the
stations' current $7.1 million dollar annual operating budget -- to launch each element of the vision.
The "capacity" grant WMFE seeks from the City of Winter Springs represents a modest
percentage of the total goal. The stations are also seeking proportionally similar grants from other
local governments in Orange, Seminole and Osceola counties. In total, local government funding
will represent less than 25% of the annual Vision Campaign goal.
While WMFE seeks approval of such a "capacity" grant for use during your fiscal year 2007,
the funds will not be needed until the late spring of next year. Thus, the actual amount WMFE
would require during that period would be only half of the amount requested.
The public broadcasting stations of WMFE invite your review of this vision. We encourage
your support, and we stand ready to more fully describe the value to constituents in the City of
Winter Springs that will result from the local programming coming forward from this vision.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Stephen McKenney Steck
C'~:~
~L~
Chief Executive Officer
Ol-Packet cover Itrdoc
~l .r
2-Cover Page. doc
.......
(i)Promise, Pride & PotentialmlillJ
$5,000
Capacity Grant Request
Each Year for Three Years
(Commencing Spring 2007)
In Support of
Local Programming Initiatives
Related to
WMFE's Vision for Our Future
t (
3-TOC.doc
lm.iil... ...~
-
(i) Promise, Pride & Potential .....
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ITEM
A REQUEST OVERVIEW... ... ... ... ... . .. ... .. . ... . .. ... ... . .. '" .. . .
8 VISION SUMMARY
Creating & "Vetting" the Vision................................
Overview - Local Program Elements.......................
Overview - Other Elements of the Vision... . .. .. . ... .. . ...
Funding the Vision - Revenue Sources & Allocations..
- Rationales & Responses...........
C SPECIFIC LOCAL PROGRAM ELEMENTS
Central Florida Almanac... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ......... ... ....
The Arts Connection On TV... ... ... ...... ... ... ... ...... ......
On The Line. .. .. . .... ... . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .... ... ... ......... '" ... ... ..
WMFE In-Depth... ...... ... ... ............ ... ... '" ... ... ... ......
Allocation of Dollars and Indusions..........................
Central Florida Alliance Network (CFAN)... ......... ... ...
D REPURPOSING LOCAL PROGRAMMING..............................
E WMFE AUDIENCE DATA
WM FE -TV. . . . .. . .. .. .. . .. .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. ..
90.7 WMFE-FM...... '" ...... ... ... ... ......... ... ... ... ... ... ...
F THE DIFFERENCE: WMFE VS. GOVERNMENT CABLE CHANNELS...
G PUBUC PERCEPTIONS OF PUBUC BROADCASTING... ... _....
PBS - Roper Poll........................... ...... ...... ...... .....
CPB - The Tarrance Group Survey...... ......... '" ... ....
H WMFE INFORMATION
IRS 501 (c)(3) Status Letter....................................
WMFE Governing Board & Senior Staff....................
SEPARATE ATTACHMENTS
For Members Only monthly magazine
2005 Annual Report
DVD/CD-ROM
PAGE
1-2
3-9
1 0-11
12-13
14-21
22-25
26-28
29-31
32 -34
35-36
37
38-39
40-42
43
44
45-47
48
49-56
57-60
61
62
i
Page - 1
mwme
o Promise. Pride & Potential ...
A - REQUEST OVERVIEW
The public broadcasting stations of WMFE respectfully seeks $5,000 each year
for a 3-year period from the City of Winter Springs in partial support of the additional
capacity WMFE needs in order to be a more locally relevant medium by producing the
local programming described in these papers.
Within those local programs, below are the kinds of illustrative issues featuring the
City of Winter Springs that WMFE would address today were the stations to have the
"capacity" to launch these proposed local programs:
City of Winter SprinQs
1. Wi-Fi: First Steps to City-wide Wireless Interconnection
2. One-on-One With: Mayor John Bush
3. Town Centre: Inviting or Unimaginative?
4. Consolidation: A Closer Look (Le., fire and rescue services between city and county
governments
5. Round Table - City Mayors: Winter Springs, Apopka, Ocoee, and Oviedo
6~ Orlando Philharmonic at Central Winds Park
7. Parks & Recreation: Added Value to Quality of Life
8. Up Close: Black Hammock
9. Family Politics - How Cities and Counties Get Along
10. Home Rule: Demystified
11. Code Enforcement - 24 hour clock
The "capacity" grant WMFE seeks from the City of Winter Springs represents a
modest percentage of the total annual revenue goal shown in Table A on the following
page. The expenses to fully enact all elements of the Vision are shown in Table B.
While WMFE seeks approval of such a "capacity" grant for use during your fiscal
year 2007, the funds will not be needed until the late spring of 2007. Thus, the actual
amount WMFE would require during that period would be only half of the amount
requested.
The stations are also seeking proportionally similar grants from other local
governments in Orange, Seminole and Osceola counties.
In total, local government funding will represent less than 25% of the annual
Vision Campaign goal.
,
\
04-Req Ov.doc
2.
WMFE's Bud et
$207,000 26%
3.
Local Foundations
$100,000 12%
4.
$60,000 7%
County Governments - Orange @ $40k
- Seminole @ $30k
- Osceola $20k
$90,000 11%
5.
School Boards -- Orange @ $30k
- Seminole @ $20k
- Osceola $10k
(50% of school district goal)
(33% of school district goal)
17% of school district oal
6.
Cities -- $20k from the Crty of Orlando (or 2.5% of total goal)
$10k each from Winler Park, Allamonte Springs. Sanford & Kissimmee (or 1.2% each of tolai goal);
$5k each from A 0 ka, Winter S rin s, Oviedo, & Ocoee or .6% each of total oal
$50,000 6%
$807,000 100%
TABLE B
. Annual Expense (each year for 3 years):'
7.
Local program
initiatives
$560,000 69%
IIRI. ~ onthe~. .. .~~
8.
Communil Outreach
$132 000 17%
9.
Increased romotion & enhanced national
ram schedule
$115,000 14%
10.
Yearl Total
$807,000 100%
Page - 2
C
Total Local
Government
Funding --
$200,000
or 25%
C
Of which
WMFE seeks
only 36%
($200,000)
from Local
Government
Page - 3
mmn~
-
(i) Promise, Pride & Putential ....
B - VISION SUMMARY
Creating and Vetting the Vision
"Context." "Localism. " "Bridge building." "Community connectivity. "A catalyst for community
change."
These are among the words and values WMFE has heard spoken from many in our region
to whom the stations listened.
Respondents observed that commercial electronic media does not substantively
accommodate these values in their coverage of local issues relevant to the lives of viewers
and listeners in Central Florida.
These same respondents and those from whom WMFE later sought confirmation have
encouraged the public broadcasting stations of WMFE to become a more locally relevant
electronic public service medium.
lJ. fh
)Jnn;Vd$;I'J"Y
(i)-
In celebration of WMFE's 40th anniversary, the stations chose to celebrate by looking
forward, not backward, developing a new multi-year programming vision for our future.
As a result, the stations created a multi-year campaign to develop, fund and produce local
programming that will especially distinguish WMFE from its other electronic media
colleagues in Central Florida. Programming will be produced that will be centered upon
those words and values: "Context." "Localism." "Bridge building." "Community connectivity.
':.4 catalyst for community change. "
..
() Promise. Pride & Potential Iillllli
The campaign became known as A Vision for Our Future:
Promise, Pride & Potential!
mmn
Talk to us...
~G>mrm
we Ire listening!
To create such a vision, the stations launched the Talk to Us-
We're Listening initiative, receiving a wide range of input from
Central Floridians. Respondents represented diverse
occupations and points of view, as well as gender, ethnicity,
lifestyle, age and geography. Additionally WMFE heard from
members, listeners and viewers as well as non-members and
those that do not listen to or watch WM FE.
Page - 4
WMFE called these respondents "talkers." Fifty-four talkers offered their remarks over a
span of 11 lunches in WMFE's TV studio.
"Talkers" from these community elements were represented.
Local media - print, radio, TV
Education - public, private,
homebound
Cultural - music, art, dance and
historical organizations
Social/Civic - service clubs,
leagues, societies,
Ethnic - NAACP, Hispanic &
Asian Chambers of Commerce
Government - state legislators,
county and city commissioners,
school board members
Business - small to large, and
mom & pop to Fortune 500, area
chambers of commerce
Children - YMCA,day care
centers
WMFE members, sponsors,
individual and foundation donors,
non-members
Infrastructure - hospitals,
transportation, law enforcement
The Challenoed - homeless,
handicapped, under &
unemployed, United Way
See page 7 for a roster of these studio "talkers" and the community categories they
represent.
No, WMFE didn't include just friends to "talk to us." The stations listened to those who
were not members of WMFE, and who were not viewers or listeners. Additionally, one or
two of the talkers were media critics, and several were in the media business.
WMFE asked each talker to answer 5 specific media-related questions - live, in front of a
studio audience. Each talker comments were recorded and transcribed for review by
WMFE's listeners.
Studio Listeners
Here are those questions. . .
1. In terms of program service, what do you expect of electronic
media (broadcast television and radio) in Central Florida by 2010?
2. Should WMFE deliver elements of what you expect?
3. Can WMFE deliver what you expect and what will WMFE need in
the way of resources to do so effectively?
4. Why would you expect others to view or listen to the program
elements you have suggested?
5. With whom might WMFE collaborate to deliver your expectations
more effectively?
Page - 5
Additionally, WMFE broadcast on-air announcements encouraging viewers or listeners to
answer the same questions via an online questionnaire at WMFE's Web site or by leaving a
voice mail with a similar response.
Here's what WMFE heard from selected talkers and other respondents (a complete
transcript of all talker's remarks and on-line responses are included on the CD/ROM)
From a local newspaper owner From a local commercial television station chief
and publisher: "I suggest WMFE executive: "Our commercial stations do a very job on
search its own area for something that breaking news, but we don't focus on the background and in-
needs to be done, something that can depth look at our communities. The local arts community is
only be done by a real area institution, totally neglected by commercial broadcasters. The
an area-wide Central Florida institution independent film maker has no voice in commercial television
such as this (WMFE), something that big and local history is barely addressed. And let me tell you,
dollar broadcasting won't touch with a Orlando is a place that desperately needs to finds its roots and
fifty-foot pole. That job is real deep news develop an identity. I just want to point out that the big hole that
coverage of Central Florida, of the big we commercial broadcasters leave and which is an open
picture and the smaller pictures, of the opportunity, it's there for you to run right through it."
economic, political and personal news,
the life and death news, our From a local home builder: "Public broadcasting has
governments, our celebrations, our the capability to expand news coverage and opinion pieces
problems, our failures and our beyond the norm in commercial broadcasting, that
successes. ' coverage should not only be informative, it should be
comprehensive, unbiased, educational and maintain a
sense of fairness."
From a city Qovemment administrator: "1 would love to see WMFE reaching out to a
larger cross-section of our community, reaching out to all of the stakeholders. And I'd like for
our public station to be a bridge-builder in our community, a witness to community
involvement and community improvement, a catalyst for community change and for personal
development. '
From a From a social
seNice
philanthropy
From a homeless aQency leader: representative:
advisor: "' resent "WMFE can be a ground breaking station "WMFE has the
the media's overall that provides the local coverage that local opportunity to talk
assumption that the stations ignore because they are unwilling about our political
way in which I want to devote the airtime needed to fully structures, our
to be informed is explore an issue." environmental issues,
through bites - particularly water, and
sound and visual. 1 our economics. We
rely on WMFE and are a unique
90.7 to provide in- From a local weekly newspaper editor: community socially
depth reporting, not "WMFE should easily be able to deliver on those because of our growth
just on broad issues, expectations, especially with regard to the and our changing
but to tell the local reliable and quality delivery of credible local demographics and
stories of special news and information that supports the our mobility. WMFE
interest that make community, that supports WMFE and, and that is absolutely the right
our communities and the overall product is not tainted by the need for organization to deliver
others unique. financial profit." this programming in
Please continue to
be the media leader an in-depth and
in providing in-depth thoughtful manner."
reporting. "
Page - 5
Whether "talking" in the studio or responding online, Talk to Us... We're Listening launched
WMFE on a course appropriately suited to enhance how WMFE will continue to distinguish
itself in today's electronic media environment of mergers and consolidations and the
resultant diminishment and loss of community voice.... provided WMFE could "vet" the
initial findings among a wider group of Central Floridians. This decision to ask others to re-
affirm or to amend the results led to the next phase of Vision building.
WideninQ the Input
WMFE produced a 50-minute program documenting the Talk to Us - We're Listening
process and describing the outcomes and potential results. The program - A Vision for Our
Future - was recorded "live" in front of a studio audience of 140 stakeholders. The program
was broadcast in primetime across the entire "cluster" of WMFE's stations: radio, TV
(analog and digital channels), on-line, and over WMFE's special radio channel for the
visually challenged. Throughout the next several months, the program was re-broadcast
during various time periods, assuring a large cumulative audience of Central Floridians.
I~II. ~ ,-
~~-
f ~Mf~ -- .~t;:J
.~
(Above pictures from the studio production of A Vision for Our Future: Promise, Pride & Potential!)
Next, at the stations' Public Broadcasting Center, WMFE hosted 25 separate "media
panels" attended by 179 guests. Trustees from WMFE's lay governing board served as
hosts for each panel (see page 8 and 9 for a roster of all media panelists).
Using excerpts from the Vision broadcast, WMFE's CEO and President each described the
initial research results. They previewed the potential local WMFE program elements which
might be produced as vehicles to carry the local issue-oriented news and information
segments. They related those segments to the essential findings from the research... .and
then facilitated a question and answer period with the panel.
The Q&A centered on the role of public service electronic media (WMFE) and whether or
not such a role - as showcased in the vision excerpts -- was in accord with the panel's own
individual and collective perceptions and expectations. As each panel discussed the vision,
appropriate changes and adjustments were noted for inclusion in the final vision plan set in
place upon the conclusion of the media panel phase.
.r.
.A~
(Above, pictures from among the 25 Media Panel Discussion Groups)
Page - 7
Lastly, WMFE's CEO and President met with more than 125 panel members in the weeks
after the panelist's attendance. These meetings sought to gain greater clarity regarding a
panel member's suggestion or point of view. Additionally, WMFE's CEO held one-on-one
meetings in the community with more than 30 selected individuals whose calendar did not
allow attendance at the WMFE-based panel event.
"Talker" Roster
Business Communitv-
Hank Fishkind, President, Fishkind & Associates
Ray Gilley, President, Metro Orlando Economic Development
Com
Beat Kahli, CEO, Avalon Park
Ann Sonntag, Publisher, Orlando Business Journal
Jacob Stuart, President, Orlando Regional Chamber of Com
Challenaed -
Bakari F. Bums, Chief Executive Officer, Health Care Center for
the Homeless
Marie Simpson, District Administrator, Division of Blind Services
Gregory Smith, Executive Director, Florida Literacy Coalition
Cultural-
Alan Bruun, Artistic Director, Mad Cow Theatre,
Tippen Davidson, Founder-Director, Central Florida Cultural
Endeavors,
Margot Knight, President, United Arts of Central Florida,
N. Y. Nathiri, Executive Director, Assoc to Preserve Eatonville
Community,
Robert Swedberg, Executive Director, Orlando Opera,
Education -
Sara Van Arsdel, Executive Director, Orange County History
Center
Lisa Early, Children & Ed Director, City of Orlando
Thomas E. Gamble, President, Brevard Community College
Patricia Goldman, Teacher of the Year, Seminole
County/Heathrow Elementary
Daniel Holsenbeck, VP-University Relations, University of Central
Florida
Paul Sanchez, Executive Director, Seminole Education
Association
Ethnic -
William Gary, President, NAACP - North Brevard Chapter
Marlene Lasch, President, Asian American Chamber of
Commerce
Ramon A Ojeda, President, Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Paul Perkins, Jr, Civil Rights Advocate
Government -
Marcia Hope Goodwin, Director, Office of Communications &
Neighborhood Enhancement, City of Orlando
Shannon McAJeavey, President, Tiger Bay Club of Orlando
05-Creating Vis. doc
Ken Shipley, Chairman, Osceola County Government
David Simmons, State Legislator, Rorida House of
Representatives
Lou Treadway, Chairman, County Walch
S. Scott Vandergrift, Mayor, City of Ocoee
Infrastructure -
Kevin Beary, Sheriff, Orange County Sheriff's Office
Stephen Gidus, President, Home Builders Assoc 01 Metro on
John Hillenmeyer, President & CEO, Orlando Regional Healthcare
Michael Snyder, Executive Director, Orlando-Orange County
Expressway Authority
Local Media-
Hal Boedeker, Television Critic, The Orlando Sentinel
Jim Clark, Editor, Orlando Magazine
Henry Maldonado, VPIGeneral Manager, WKMG-TVIChanneI6
Lindy T. Shepherd, Managing Editor, Orlando Weekly
Marsha Taylor, News Director, WDBO 580 News Radio
Dave Wiethop, Editor, Watermark
Social Civic -
Richard Foglesong, Professor/Political Science, Rollins College
Sydney G. Green, Sustainable Orlando Director, Healthy
Community Initiative
Rev. Fred Morris, Executive Director, Florida Council of Churches
Muhammad Musri, Co-Chair, National Conference Community &
Justice
WMFE -
Hal Kantor, Sponsor, Lowndes Drosdick Kantor & Reed
Margaret Linnane, Executive Director, Rollins College
Philanthropy & Nonprofit Leadership Center
Ann Manley, Executive Director, Dr. Phillips Inc.
N. L. Peterzel, Member, WMFE
Barbara Roper, Membe.r, Former Chair, WMFE Board
Youth/Children -
Christina Delk, Owner, Kids R Kids Quality Learning Center
Jim Ferber, President, Central Florida YMCA
Kelly Morrell, Community Relations Director, UCF Student
Government Association
Beth Ruchlin, Parent, Independent Television Producer
Linda Stone, Developmental Psychologist, Howard Phillips Center
for Children and Families
mtml
~~
o Promise, Pride & PotentiallilE1ll
County Government
Brenda Carey, Commissioner, Seminole
Don Fisher, Acting County Manager, Seminole
Ajit M. Lachandani, County Manager, Orange
Bill Lane, Commissioner, Osceola
Allee Mercer, Commissioner, Osceola
Paul Owens, Chairman, Osceola
Bill Segal, Commissioner, Orange'
Robert B. Sindler, Commissioner, Orange
Kenneth Y. Smith, Commissioner, Osceola
Linda Stewart, Commissioner, Orange
Randall C. Morris, Commissioner, Seminole
Bob Dallari, Commissioner, Seminole
Steve Triggs, Communications Manager, Orange
Mildred Fernandez, Commissioner, Orange
Donald J. Madden, Chief PIO, Osceola
Steve Olson, Community Info. Dir., Seminole
School Boards
Ron Blocker, Superinlendent, Orange
Joie Cadle, Member, Orange
Barry Gainer, Member, Seminole
Jim Marlin, Vice Chairman, Orange
Jeanne Morris, Chairman, Seminole
Blaine A. Muse, Superintendent, Osceola
Judge "Rick" Roach, Member, Orange
Dylan Thomas, Dir of Communications, Orange
Jay Wheeler, Member, Osceola
Anne Geiger, Member, Orange
Thomas E. Chalifoux, Jr., Chairman, Osceola
Karen Ardaman, Chair, Orange
Dede Schaffner, Member, Seminole
Cities
J. William (Bill) Arrowsmith, Vice Mayor, Apopka
Michael S. Blake, Commissioner, Winter Springs
Michele Brennan, Dir of Communications, Orl
John F. Bush, Mayor, Winter Springs
Jamie Croteau, Asst City Manager, Ocoee
Billie L. Dean, Commissioner,Apopka
Mark Durbin, CHy Manager, Kissimmee
Linda S. Goodwin-Nichols, Mayor, Kissimmee
Russel Hauck, Mayor, Allamonte Springs
Randy Jones, Commissioner, Sanford
Wendell McKinnon, Vice Mayor, Kissimmee
Sarah Reese, Commissioner, Altamonte Springs
Gerald Seeber, City Manager, Oviedo
S. Scott Vandergrift, Mayor, Ocoee
Joy Wright, Community Relations Mgr, Ocoee
Steve Wolfram, Commissioner, Allamonte
Springs
Jerry Gemskie, Mayor Pro- Tem, Kissimmee
Scott Anderson, Commissioner, Ocoee
Robert S. Miller, Commissioner, Winter Springs
Thomas G. Walters, Mayor, Oviedo
Vicki Vargo, Commissioner, Orlando
James Greer, Vice Chair, Oviedo
Sherman Yehl, City Manager, Sanford
Marilyn Ulster McQueen, Commissioner, Apopka
Byron W. Brooks, Chief Administrative Officer,
Orlando
Donald A. Gilmore, Commissioner, Winter
Springs
Kathy S. Till, Commissioner, Apopka
Marcia Hope Goodwin, Dir - Community Affairs,
Orlando
Sally McGinnis, Commissioner, Winter Springs
Media Panel Attendees
(January 6, 2006 - June 13, 2006)
Susan Vernon-Devlin, PIO, Oviedo
Jon Batman, Commissioner, Alia monte Springs
Art Woodruff, Commissioner, Sanford
George Colombo, PR Consullant, Winter Springs
Foundations
Derek J. Blakeslee, Trustee, The Bond Ftnd, Inc"
Teresa Borcheck, Sr. VP, Endowment & Ftnd.,
Chesley G. Magruder FtndJSun Trust Bank
Patricia Caine DeYoung, Ftnd. Administrator,
Darden Restaurants Ftnd.
L. Evans Hubbard, Chair, A. Friends' Ftnd. Trust'
Kathy and Richard Lee, Trustee, The Lee Ftnd.
Ann F. Manley, Exec. Dir, The Dr. P. Phillips Ftnd.
Jon P. Stine, Trustee, Harry P. Leu Ftnd"
Richard M. Strauss, Treasurer, Elizabeth Morse
Genius Ftnd.
Patty Maddox, President, Winter Park Health Ftnd.
Nancy F. Peed, Exec. Dir., Foundation for OCPS
Corporate
R. Randolph Lyon, Jr., President, Xentury City
Development Co.'
John N. Rigsby, President-FL Group, Bright House
Networks'
Randall Robertson, President, R. B. Robertson
& Co"
James C. Robinson, Attorney, Giles &
Robinson, P. A"
Malcom Kirschenbaum, Of Counsel, Gray
Robinson Attorneys at Law'
Paul H. VWche, Wyche & Associates
Nancy Gemskie, Chair, Kissimmee City Authority
Randy D. Scheff, VP - HR, Siemens Power
Generation, Inc.
Juan Lynum, Managing Partner, Lynum &
Sanchez,PA
Donald B. Boone, EVP, J. Rolfe Davis Insurance'
Michael Snyder, P.E., Exec Dir., Ort - Orange
County Expressway Authority
Alan C. Villaverde, VP & GM, Peabody Orlando
G. Geoffrey Longstaff, Chairman, Mercantile
Commercial Capital, LLC'
W. Kelly Smith, Attorney, Smith & Mackinnon'
Jacob V. Stuart, President, Orlando Regional
Chamber of Commerce'
Dick J. Batchelor, Founder and President,
Dick Batchelor Management Group
James C. Brock, Attorney, Law Offices of James
C. Brock'
J. Christian Fenger, President - Central Florida
Division, Bright House Nelll'lorks'
Stephen Gidus, Partner, PSG Construction Inc.
Marshall E. Vermillion, Regional President,
Wachovia Bank'
TlCo Perez, Attorney, Baker & Hostetler
Laurence J. Pino, Chairman & CEO, Dynetech
Corp'
Hal H. Kantor, Named Partner, Lowndes Drosdick
Doster Kantor & Reed'
George S. Fender, Partner, KRG&G
J. Gordon Arkin, Partner, Foley & Lardner'
Jim DeSimone, VP of Media & Communications,
Darden Restaurants, Inc.
Patrick T. Christiansen, Shareholder/Partner,
Akerman, Senterfltt & Eidson, PA
Bud Brewer, President & CEO, MPB
Communications
, WMFE Cornerstone Member
Page - 8
mn
~..
0> Promise, Pride & Potentialli1l!Jlll
Media Panel Attendees
(January 6, 2006 - June 13, 2006)
Community Advocates
Judy Albertson, CNmer, Albertson-Peterson Art
Consuttants'
Salvatore P. Chidichimo, Brigadier General,
USA, Retired"
Jean E. Siegfried"
Barbara Roper, Former Chair, IMvlFE"
Charles Bosserman"
Ellen and Herb Weiss"
Betty Anne and N .L. Peterzell
Amelia and John D. WIlliams"
Barbara E. Hansen, Vascular Specialists of
Central Florida"
Michele "Chele" Hipp
Emerson R. Thompson, Jr. Judge, Fifth District
Court of Appeal
Royce B. Walden
Martha and Whitworth W. Cotten, Jr."
David A. Libert"
Media
Hal Boedeker, lV Critic, Orlando Sentinel
Tippen Davidson, CEO/President & Co-Ed~or,
Daytona Beach News Journal"
Henry Maldonado, VP & GM, VVKMG-lV
William P. Bauman, VP & GM, WESH-lV
Jim Clark, Publisher, Orlando Magazine
Robin Smythe, GM, Central Florida News 13
Ann Sonntag, Publisher, Orlando Business
Journal
Shawn Bartelt, VP & GM, WFlV
Education/Culture/Social Services
Linda Chapin, Director, Metropolitan Cenler for
Regional Studies, UCF"
Marilyn Crotty, Exec. Dir., Tri-County League of
Cities
Margot H. Knight, President & CEO, United Arts
of Central Florida
Richard Foglesong, Prof of Politics, Rollins
College
James W. Ferber, President & CEO, Central FL
YMCA
Sara Van Arsdel, Exec. Dir, Orange County
Regional History Center
Donna Sines, Exec. Dir., Community Vision
Robert F. Stuart, Exec. Dir., Christian Service
Center for Central Florida
Mark Brewer, President & CEO, Community
Foundation of Central Florida
Sanford C. Shugart, President, VCC"
Thomas E. Gamble, President, BCC
Daniel C. Holsenbeck, VP-University Relations,
UCF
Page - 9
Page - 10
Bm~
-
G Promise, Pride & Potentia'. II""
8 - VISION SUMMARY
Overview
Local Program Elements of the Vision for Our Future
"Context." "Localism." "Bridge building." "Community connectivity. 'J!l. catalyst for community
change. "
As previously explained, these are the key and oft-repeated words and values that WMFE
heard spoken by the "talkers" and written by the on-line respondents to whom the stations
"listened." Not surprisingly perhaps, these same values were re-confirmed or "vetted" by
the members of the 25 media panels WMFE facilitated after the Talk to Us - We're
Listening project concluded.
Respondents observed that commercial electronic media does not substantively
accommodate these values in their local coverage of issues relevant to the lives of their
viewers and listeners in Central Florida.
These same respondents and the panelists from whom WMFE later sought confirmation
have encouraged the public broadcasting stations of WMFE to become a more locally
relevant electronic public service medium.
To this end and summarized below, WMFE will add new local programs and increase the
frequency of others. Each is summarized below. A more detailed explanation of each
program is found in Section C.
These local program series create the programming "capacity" for which WMFE seeks
partial funding from local government to accommodate. Please note that all program titles
are considered "working titles."
TV only
(39 programs per year, 30 minutes each, Friday @ 9pm)
WMFE- TV's television programming will be enhanced with the addition of Central Florida
Almanac. Each episode of the weekly program will focus on two, perhaps three issues
confronting Central Floridians. Almanac will offer context, comparisons and consequences,
providing you and other viewers information on the ''why'' and "what now" of each issue.
USIHE$$
ATe..
The crucial accounts of Central Florida tourism and our regional economy will have a home
on the Business Watch segment within each Almanac.
Page - 11
Radio only
(52 programs per year, 60 minutes each, Wednesdays @ 6pm)
On 90.7 FM, WMFE will expand On the Line (OTL) to a weekly program from its current 5-
times per year status.
On the Line examines a relevant topic with area newsmakers and other key subject matter
or issue related spokespersons. OTL encourages the public radio listener (an intelligent,
involved, and civically informed and active person) to call in and ask questions "on the line."
Segments recorded from each live On the Line will improve Central Florida's presence
within the local segments of NPR news programs.
-
All WMFE media - TV (analog and digital channels), Radio, Web
(3 programs per year, for TV: 60 minutes each, Thursday @ 8pm; for radio: daily
modules each week during local cut-aways in All Things Considered and Morning
Edition; additionally, each local program series will focus on the selected "in-depth"
subject)
WMFE will also restore In-depth to its original frequency and multi-media character-
utilizing television, radio and the Web three times a year to address regional issues in-
depth over a week-long period.
TV only
(39 programs per year, 30 minutes each, Friday @ 9:30pm)
WMFE-TV's commitment to the coverage of regional cultural affairs calls for a weekly
television version of its successful Arts Connection now in its 13th year on 90.7 FM. The
Arts Connection on TVwill showcase what's happening culturally for the coming weekend
and examine issues in-depth relating to arts and culture in Central Florida.
06-LeI Pgm Elements - OV.doc
Page - 12
mme
G Promise, Pride & Potentiel 11"11
B - VISION SUMMARY
Overview
Other Elements of the Vision for Our Future
Respondents in WMFE's Talk to Us - We're Listening project suggested several other
substantive and relevant elements that WMFE is accommodating within the overall Vision
campaign.
It should be noted, however, that THESE ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS ARE NOT PART OF
WMFE's "CAPACITY" GRANT REQUEST TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT NOR WILL ANY
LOCAL GOVERNMENT FUNDS, PER SE, BE APPLIED TOWARD THESE ELEMENTS.
These elements will be funded separately through the generosity of other donors.
Additionally, partial funding of these elements will come through funds WMFE is and has
been setting aside expressly to demonstrate its own commitment to the Vision
Local government issues will still be included in these elements that are local programming
oriented such as the Outreach initiatives described below. Issues surrounding local
government permeate - directly or indirectly -- the fabric of any region. Rightly so, those
issues will remain a focus of any local program element whether or not the "capacity" to
produce such programming is partially funded by local government.
~OutreachlO
All WMFE media - TV (analog and digital channels) Radio and Web, Print (FMO)
(Twice per year, throughout all day parts, via all local programs and within station breaks as
appropriate)
Given the additional"capacity" that WMFE will gain as a result of successful fundraising for
the Vision campaign, some of those funds will launch extensive community outreach
programming initiatives!
WMFE's vision commits the stations to utilizing its media resources to educate and
increase awareness of challenges facing Central Florida. Twice a year WMFE will call on
the power and influence of its national and local programs, collaborating with local
organizations, governments, foundations and other local media to create extensive
community outreach programming focusing on issues suggested by a region-wide
Outreach Advisory Committee. Illustratively, such issues might address a paucity of civic
leadership, diminishing volunteerism, an increase in childhood obesity, illiteracy and
home/essness.
The community outreach initiative will be enhanced with WMFE's increased promotion and
awareness initiatives (described below) which will include more print ads, improved on-air
promotion, better utilization of wmfe.orq and the addition of outdoor advertising.
Page - 13
~f
(~.~
mlEJ[!l ;;r..=.....
Bolster the National Program Schedule
The first thing almost all respondents said was for WMFE to "enhance its national
programming schedule!"
PBS and NPR programs are the foundation of WMFE's audience; therefore the stations will
bolster its national programming schedule.
WMFE- TV/oT will carry more nature, science and news documentaries from sources such
as National Geographic Society and the BBG. The rights for additional programs of
Mystery!, Masterpiece Theatre and of new British comedy titles will be purchased.
For 90.7 WMFE-FM, the station will re-acquire programs to add to the schedule such as
Sunday Baroque, Sound and Spirit and Says You!
Increase Promotion and Advertising of WMFE Programming
In real estate its location, location, and location. At WMFE, respondents said it needs to be
"promotion, promotion, and promotion!"
For the past few years, WMFE has been promotion poor. Adding both new revenue from a
successful Vision fundraising campaign and new in-kind trade opportunities will enhance
and help promote and position the new programs envisioned within this Vision, which in
turn will increase WMFE's audience and membership.
~
Ii .- .... . - . d -.~' '_"-, : ........, ~. . . '
New Digital Broadcasting Technology for WMFE-FM
In a parallel yet separate campaign, 90.7 FM will expand to Ho Radio which will allow
WMFE to broadcast multiple channels of radio programming including a full-time NPR news
and classical music channels.
07 -Other Elements.doc
mmnl),
(l) Promise, Pride & Potential -
Page - 14
8 - VISION SUMMARY
Funding The Vision for
Our Future
Overview
The estimated annual expense to fund all the elements of the vision is $807,000 each year
for a three year period.
Overall sources for the $807,000 revenue necessary to fund WMFE's "capacity" to fully enact
the vision are shown in Table # 1 below.
The amountWMFE is seeking from the City of Winter Springs is shown in Table # 2, line 24
on the next page. The hypothetical and illustrative manner by which the City of Winter
Springs's "capacity" grant creates opportunity for program "inclusions" for the City of Winter
Springs is shown on page 37.
WMFE is raising campaign funds now with a goal to have donor commitments in-hand by
October 2006 and vision related programming on air in during the spring or summer of
2007.
On pages 22 and 23, the rationale for why local programming was selected for local
government funding as well as ~ the amount of $200,000 was derived is explained.
Additionally, pages 24 and 25 speak to the "is $807,000 too low?" question and to the
rationale for a 3-year campaign versus a longer length.
Table # 1
REVENUE SOURCES & ALLOCATIONS
(Annual)
1. $807,000
2. $300,000
3.
$207,000
4.
$200,000
5. $100,000
6. $807,000
C
SOURCE
100%
The total annual revenue needed to fund WMFE's
"capacity" to fully enact the vision
Amount of funds WMFE seeks from Congress to partially
support selected elements of the vision
Amount of funds from WMFE's own budget to partially support
selected elements of the vision (includes members and local
corporations)
37%
26%
25%
Total amount of .capacity" grants WMFE seeks from all Local
Government entities to partially support selected elements of
the vision (see lines 7, 11, and 15 in Table # 2 next page)
Amount of funds WMFE seeks from Local Foundations to
partially support selected elements of the vision
Total revenue needed
12%
100%
Page - 15
Table # 2 below shows the annual amount WMFE seeks from the City of Winter Springs in
Column A, line 24.
Table # 2
ALLOCATION OF THE $200,000 LOCAL GOVERNMENT "CAPACITY" GRANTS
(UNE 4, ABOVE)
(Annual)
7. $90,000 11% County Governments (3)
8. $40,000 Orange (5% oftetal goal) (44% of county gO\l't goal)
9. $30,000 Seminole (3 7% of tolal goal) (33% of county gov'l goal)
10. $20,000 Osceola (25% of total goal) (23% of county govt goal)
11. $60,000 7% School Boards (3)
12. $30,000 Orange (3.7% of tolal goal) (50% of school board goal)
13. $20,000 Seminole (2.5% of total goal) (33% of school board goal)
14. $10,000 Osceola (1.2% oftolal goal) (17% of school board goal)
15. $50,000 6% Cities (9) ($50,000 total accommodates on/y5 cities as WMFE anticipates 5 of
the 9 cities will participate at the outset. with the remaining 4 ioining within the year)
16. $20,000 Orlando (2.5% of total goal) (40% of city goal)
17. $10,000 Altamonte Springs (1.2% of total goal) (20% of cily goal)
18. $10,000 Kissimmee (1.2% Of total goal) (20% of city goal)
19. $10,000 Sanford (1.2% of lotal goal) (20% of city goal)
20. $10,000 Winter Park (1.2% of total goal) (20% of city goal)
21. $5,000 Apo pka (.6% of lotal goal) (10% of city goal)
22. $5,000 Ocoee (.6% of total goal) (10% of city goal)
23. $5,000 Oviedo (.6% oftolal goal) (10% of city goal)
24. $5,000 Winter Springs (.6% of total goal) (10% of city goal)
25. $200,000 25% Total amount of .capacity" grants WMFE seeks from all Local
Government entities to partially support selected elements of
the vision
,
.
Page - 16
Table # 3, Column A below shows the annual expenses for each element of the Vision.
The expense for all the local programming associated with this "capacity" grant request is
shown in Column A, line 27 ($474,417).
The total expense for each local program associated with this "capacity" grant request is
shown on lines 27A - 27F. For clarity, the allocation is sub-totaled between television
programs (line 270) and radio programs (line 27E). Those subtotals are then further
allocated to each specific program series (lines 27 A, B, C and E) based upon the number
of programs expected to be produced for that series each year. Each specific program
series expense is then further divided by the number of programs within the series to reflect
a per program expense shown in parenthesis.
The expenses shown in the Vision elements Lines 28 - 30 ARE NOT PART OF THE
"CAPACITY" GRANT REQUEST TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
Table # 3
ALLOCATION OF THE PROGRAMMING EXPENSES REQUIRED TO FULLY ENACT
THE VISION
(Annual)
26. $807,000 The total annual expense necessary to fund the WMFE's
"capacity" to fully enact the vision
27. $470,41.7 58% 4 prime-time program series associated with local news,
information, and cultural affairs as follows...
A. $197,256 Central Florida Almanac (46% of all TV programs) Fridays @ 9pm
39, 3O-minute programs per year -- ($5,058 per program)
B. $197,256 Arts Connection on TV (46% of all TV programs)- Thursday @ 9:30pm
39, 30-minute programs per year ($5,058 per program)
C. $34,305 WMFE In-Depth (8% of all TV programs) - Thursdays @ 8pm
3, 6Q..minute programs per year -- ($11,435 per program)
D. $428,817 Sub-total all TV programs
E. $41,600 On The Une (100% of all Radio programs) -Wednesdays @6pm
52, 60 minute programs per year - ($800 per program)
F. $470,417 Grand total all prime time local program series
28. $236,643.00 30% Outreach programming
29. $49,500.00 6% Paid Promotion: print ads, billboards (not including in-kind trades)
30. $50,440.00 6% Enhanced National Program Schedule
31. $807,000.00 100% Total all elements
Page - 17
Of the grand total of the .Iocal program elements of this vision associated with this
"capacity" grant request - ($470,417 from Table 3, line 27), WMFE seeks a total of
$200,000 from all local government entities combined. The rationale for this amount is
described on page 22.
The allocation of the $200,000 from local government to EACH local program series is
further defined in Table # 4, below.
Table # 4
ALLOCATION OF $200,000 LOCAL GOVERNMENT "CAPACITY" GRANTS BY
PROGRAM SERIES
(Annual)
32.
$200,000
The Local Government 'capacity' grants will fund 42.5% of the 4
prime-time program series associated with local news,
information, and cultural affairs as follo'NS...
33. $83,834 42.5% of Central Florida Almanac ($2,150 per program) 39, 3O-minute
Line 27-A programs per year - Fridays @9pm
34. $83,834 42.5% of The Arts Connection on TV ($2,150 per program)
Line 27-8 39, 30-minllte programs per year - Wednesdays @ 6pm
35. $14,580 42.5% of WMFE In~Depth ($4,860 per program)
line 27-C 3, 60-minute programs per year -- Thursdays @ 8pm
36. $17,680 42.5% of On The Line ($340 per program)
Line 27-E 52, 60 minute programs per year - Friday @ 9:30pm
37. $200,000 Total Local Government 'capacity" grants
.<
Page - 18
If one chose to ask how many overall dollars each local government cateQorv (county
government, school boards, and cities) would fund each local program series each year,
these are the results shown in Table # 5 below. The rationale for how each local
government entity is apportioned is described on page 23.
Table # 5
ALLOCATION OF $200,000 LOCAL GOVERNMENT "CAPACITY" GRANTS BY
CATEGORY AND BY PROGRAM SERIES
(Annual)
38.
B
Percent
of
. '$200,000
$90,000 45%
A. $37,725
B. $37,725
C. $6,561
D. $7,956
$60,000 30%
A. $25,150
B. $25,150
C. $4,374
D. $5,304
$50,000 25%
A. $20,959
B. $20,959
C. $3,645
D. $4,420
39.
40.
c
...-.-- -.." . , .
4vvaekly_pr'irn~timepr<>gram series featuring local news,
. 'ir.lf()rm~tion,andcultural affairs .
Total funds WMFE seeks from County Governments (3) in
Orange, Seminol.e and Osceola County
Central FloridaAlmanac (or $967 per program)
The Arts Connection on TV (or $967 per program)
WMFE In-Depth (or $2,187 per program)
On The Une (or $152 per program)
Total fundsWMFE seeks from County School Boards (3) in
Orange, Seminole and Osceola County
Central Florida Almanac (or $645 per program)
The Arts Connection on TV (or $645 per program)
WMFE In~Depth (or $1,458 per program)
On The Une (or$1D2 per program)
Total funds WMFE seeks from selected Cities (9) in Orange,
SeminOle and Osceola County
Central Florida Almanac (or $538 per program)
The Arts Connection on TV (or $538 per program)
WMFE In-Depth (or $1,215 per program)
On The Une (or $85 per program)
Page - 19
The same allocation method may be extended further by noting how many overall dollars each
specific entity within each local government cateoorv would fund each local program series
each year are shown in Tables # 6 - 8 below.
Table # 6
ALLOCATION BY EACH ENTITY WITHIN EACH COUNTY GOVERNMENT
- Orange, Seminole, Osceola --
(Annual)
A
Grant dollar
. allocation
B
Percent
of
$200,000
45%
41.
$90,000
42.
$37,725
A. $16,599
B. $12,449
C. $8,677
$37,725
A. $16,599
B. $12,449
C. $8,677
43.
44. $6,561
A. $2,887
B. $2,165
C. $1 ,509
45. $7,956
A. $3,501
B. $2,625
C. $1,830
C
4 weekly prime-time program series featuring local news,
information, andculturataffairs
Total funds WMFE seeks from County Governments (3) in
Orange, Seminole and Osceola County
Central Florida Almanac ($967 per program)
Grange (44% of county gov't goal) = $425 per program
Seminole (33% of county g0l/1 goal) = $319 per program
'Osceola (23% of county g0l/1 goal) = $222 per program
The Arts Connection on TV ($967 per program)
Orange (44% of county gov1 goal) = $425 per program
Seminole (33% of county gOI/'t goal) = $319 per program
'Osceola (23% of county gOl/'t goal) = $222 per program
WMFE In-Depth ($2,187 per program)
Orange (44% of county gOI/'t goal) = $962 per program
Sem inole (33% of county g0l/1 goal) = $722 per program
Osceola (23". of county gov't goal) = $503 per program
On The Line ($153 per program)
Grange (44% of county gov't goal) = $67 per program
Seminole (33% of county gOI/'t goal) = $50 per program
Osceola (23% of county gOl/1 goal) = $35 per program
.
"
Page - 20
Table # 7
ALLOCATION BY EACH ENTITY WITHIN EACH SCHOOL BOARD
- Orange, Seminole, Osceola -
(Annual)
46.
Percent
of..
$200,000
$60,000 30%
47.
$25,150
A. $12,575
B. $8,300
C. $4,276
$25,150
A. $12,575
B. $8,300
C. $4,276
48.
49. $4,374
A. $2,187
B. $1 ,443
C. $744
50. $5,304
A. $2,652
B. $1,750
C. $902
4 weekly prjme-timeprogram series featuring local news,
. . ... inf()rmation, and cultural affairs
Total funds WMFE seeks from County School Boards (3) in
Orange, Seminole and Osceola County
Central Florida Almanac ($645 per program)
Orange (50% of school board goal) = $323 per program
Seminole (33% of school board goal) = $213 per program
Osceola (17% of school board goal) = 110 per program
The Arts Connection on TV ($645 per program)
Orange (50% of school board goal) = $323 per program
Seminole (33% of school board goal) = $213 per program
Osceola (17% of school board goal) = 110 per program
WMFE In-Depth ($1,458 per program)
Orange (50% of schoot board goal) = $729 per program
Seminole (33% of school board goal) = $481 per program
Osceola (17% of school board goal) = $247 per program
On The Une ($102 per program)
Orange (50% of school board goal) = $51 per program
Seminole (33% of school board goal) = $34 per program
Osteola (17% of school board goal) = $17 per program
.
,
Page - 21
.. . GIant dolJar .... .. :~~~tnt ..
. allocation . . $200~000
54.
55.
51.
$50,000
52.
$20,959
53.
A. $8,384
B. $4,192
C. $4,192
D.
E.
F.
G. $2,096
H.
l. $2,096
$20,959
A. $8,384
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G. $2,096
H.
L $2,096
$3,645
A. $1,458
B. $729
C. $729
D.
E.
$4,192
$4,192
F.
G. $365
H.
I. $365
$4,420
A. $1,768
B. $884
C. $884
D.
E.
F.
G. $442.00
H.
I. $442.00
.'. --.. ....".. ........--.--.."....-................. --""-, _.....___... ... ................ '..__d..___.....
......... - --- -. .... - ---- .. ....--..--. .-..
4 weekly pfime-timeprogram series featuringlocalnE:!\Vs, .
. . inforlTlation; and cultural affairs .. .. ..
25% Total funds WMFE seeks from selected Cities (9) in Orange,
Seminole and Osceola County (WMFE anticipates 5 of 9 cities will
participate at the outset, with remaining 4 joining within the year)
Central Florida Almanac ($538 per program)
Orlando
Altamonte Springs
Kissimmee
Sanford
Winter Park
(40% of city goal) = $215 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
Apopka (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
Ocoee (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
Oviedo (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
Winter Springs (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
The Arts Connection on TV ($538 per program)
Orlando
Altamonte Springs
Kissimmee
Sanford
Winter Park
(40% of city goal) = $215 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
(20% of city goal) = $107 per program
Apopka (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
Ocoee (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
Oviedo (10""" of city goal) = $54 per program
Winter Springs (10% of city goal) = $54 per program
WMFE in-Depth ($1,215 per program)
Orlando (40% of city goal) = $486 per program
Altamonte Springs
Kissimmee
Sanford
Winter Park
(20% of city goal) = $243 per program
(20% of city goal) = $243 per program
(20% of city goal) = $243 per program
(20% of city goal) = $243 per program
Apopka (10% of city goal) = $122 per program
Ocoee (10% of city goal) = $122 per program
Oviedo (10% of city goal) = $122 per program
Winter Springs (10% of city goal) = $122 per program
On The Line ($85 per program)
Orlando
Altamonte Springs
Kissimmee
Sanford
Winter Park
Apopka
Ocoee
Oviedo
Winter Springs
(40% of city goal) = $34 per program
(20% of city goal) = $17 per program
(20% of city goal) = $17 per program
(20% of city goal) = $17 per program
(20% of city goal) = $17 per program
(10% of city goal) = $9 per program
(10% of city goal) = $9 per program
(10% of city goal) = $9 per program
(10% of city goal) = $9 per program
t
,
Page - 22
FUNDING RATIONALE
Why Seek Funding From local Government Entities?
Why Select "local Programming" Versus Any Other Element?
How Was The Sum of $200,000 Determined?
How Were Allocations Determined Between Each Entity?
1ll'iMn~
-
() Promise, Pride & Potential IlII!lIl
Some media panels - particularly in the post-panel one-on-one visits - asked of the
rationale for seeking funding from local government entities, how the amount of $200,000
was determined, and how the "allocations" were derived between each entity.
Essentially, the answer is tradition, common sense, and size.
Why Seek Funding From Local Government Entities?
Rationale: Given the 34-year tradition of general support grants being made to WMFE (and
to other qualified public broadcasting entities) by the U.S. Congress and the Florida
Legislature from tax payer revenue, the tradition and precedent for supporting the "greater
good" of public service media has been firmly established and has consistently withstood
ideology-based challenges. Additionally, WMFE has been a recipient in the past with
similar grant making relationships with several local government entities.
Why Select "local Programming" Versus Any Other Element?
Rationale: Because the preponderance of local issues the new local Vision programming
will address are found in local government (cities, county government and public school
boards), it seemed to WMFE that local government should be a source for some of the
funding for WMFE's needed capacity to produce such issue programming.
If "greater good" and a more informed local citizenry are the results of the programming,
and if local government is expected to consider supporting such values (which it historically
does), then WMFE's application of "common sense" leads WMFE to ask local government
to step up to help support a portion of the capacity WMFE needs to address citizens'
interest in being better informed about their local government through the local
programming the additional capacity will advance.
How Was The Sum of $200,000 Determined?
Rationale: The other part of "common sense" centered on the question of "how much?"
should local government be asked to consider.
WMFE's answer is: less than 25% of the total goal, and only 43% of the local programming
expenses. To WMFE, either amount seems reasonable given that the preponderance of
local issues the new local Vision programming will address reside in local government.
On a narrower, individual government basis, the amount WMFE seeks from a city or a
county school board struck most panelists as reasonable and respectful.
Many panelists also noted that WMFE' s request is neither for a "contribution" nor for a
"warm and fuzzy" general support grant. They suggest that most elected local government
officials will see that there is literally a return on investment - to the tax payer -- in the
capacity that WMFE builds which results in specific issue oriented programming that
respondents arid panelists have encouraged WMFE to address.
Page - 23
Additionally and correctly, WMFE also turns to sources other than local government for
considerably more than half of the funding of the vision elements.
How Were Allocations Determined Between Each Entity?
Rationale: Entity budget size and population became the final arbiter of how to apportion
the total among the parts. The individual grant amounts then led to showing the number of
issue inclusions in a similar manner. At all times, this style of presentation is for
illustrative purposes not necessarily practical programming purposes.
Arithmetic weight or proportionality is not used in this manner to program a broadcast
schedule or to produce a program series, nor should arithmetic or proportionality be
used to measure the effectiveness of such a grant. Just like no art patron who invests
a large sum of money in acquiring an original Picasso or Monet would determine the
artistic "value" of the piece by dividing the square inches of the painting by the amount
of the purchase, one should not literally use the number of "issue-inclusions" as a
method to "value" or judge this investment.
When WMFE gains the capacity to produce these programs, the standards a donor
should bring to bear on judging the effectiveness of their grant should center on the
outcomes, understandings, and the community connectivity and bridge building that did
not programmatically exist on WMFE before the grant was offered.
As a result of such programming, WMFE suggests that if reasonable programming and
issue "impact" and "illumination" occurred then the purpose of the grant has been
achieved.
As a result of the manner by which these tables are presented and topics are
suggested, one might conclude that the stations are "selling" air-time or creating a
work-for-hire. That is definitely not the case
The stations are asking local government entities and other donors to help build
WMFE's local programming capacity, to help create a robust and relevant local public
service medium where a lesser one exists today, and to help address the gaps that
exist in local electronic media's perceived inability to consistently address local issues
with substance and objectivity.
With that capacity fully realized the stations will be able to launch the programming
illustratively described herein.
Page - 24
mmnGt
o Promise, Pride & Potential Gllln.
RESPONSES
Is $807,000 per year too low?
Why a 3-Year Life to the Campaign?
As WMFE had no preconceived vision concept in mind before the Talk to Us - We're
Listening project was initiated, the amount of $807,000 was therefore not a figure subject to
discussion by those respondents.
That amount, however, was known by the time WMFE began the vetting process with the
25 "media panels." And the amount did become a subject on which some panelists
expressed an interest.
When the Vision expense of $807,000 each year for a three year period came up as part of
the presentation, the discussion that did occur on t~e issue revolved mostly around two
points: the expense amount, and the three year "life" of the campaign.
Is $807,000 per year too low?
As to the expense issue. from those panelists who had either media or related business
experience, the amount seemed "too low" for them.
Post-panel assessments led WMFE staff to conclude that the "too low" reaction stemmed
more from the manner by which WMFE chose to present and oversimplify the figure - in
the interest of time -- rather than any belief that the figure was too low.
The presentation focused too laser-like on the actual cash expense of the literal and
incremental elements of the Vision... .to the exclusion of presenting, in a full cost
accounting of those elements already in place and funded that make such an incremental
expense literally "incremental" to the exclusion of all else.
The unintended ~clusion of "all else" is already included in the current infrastructure of
WMFE's core business. The funding and stability of WMFE's core business makes
focusing on and presenting just the incremental, not fully expensed. elements of the vision
appear to be "too low." Were the other in-place and already-funded infrastructure expense
~ on which the vision will be mounted - fully accounted and presented, the Vision expense
number would total about $1 million to $1.3 million dollars rather than the $807,000.
Essentially, the $807,000 expense is primarily the salary cost for the additional creative and
technical staff professionals required - beyond WMFE's existing staff - to produce, host,
administer, promote and technically accommodate the local programming elements. The
remaining expenses are directed to program acquisition and advertising.
Put another way, the programming and other elements of the vision do not fund nor are
necessarily expected to fund those items that are already funded and expected to be
Page - 25
funded by WMFE's existing budget like: production equipment, facilities, utilities, and
management.
Given that WMFE's very brief panel presentation on "funding the vision" elected not to
present the cost-accounting for such in-place and funded expenses, to the uninitiated it
created a perception of "too low,"
Why a 3-Year Life to the Campaign?
As to the three year "life" of the campaign, most panelists agreed with it... .once discussed.
In the non-profit, charitable world, an anticipated time period longerthan 3-years often
creates the perception by the donor that the beneficiary may be thinking or expecting the
grant to be an "entitlement." Many donors do not find the that expectation suitable and it
complicates the grant making consideration process.
Concurrently, in the media business, "3-years" is a programming lifetime for a number of
reasons.
First, viewer and listener programming preferences gradually change. Production practices
evolve. Donors (or commercial sponsors) become fatigued. The environment in the
community gradually changes. And professional creative staff come and goes.
Anyone or a combination of these media business reasons make a candid and forthright
grant request -- for a time period greater than 3 years - naive at best to unrealistic at worst.
Now, to be sure, WMFE fully intends to have a robust and relevant local program presence
after three years. As such, though, it just may not be this one...or it may not be with all the
specific donors WMFE expects to fund the first three years.
DB-Funding the Vision.doc
Ilmln-. ......:
W
() Promise, Pride & Potential ......
Page - 26
c- SPECIFIC LOCAL PROGRAM ELEMENTS
...
$197,256 is the annual expense to WMFE to have the 'capacity" to produce CFNBW
From which WMFE seeks $83,834 (42.5%) from all local government sources
($37,725-45% county, $25,150-30% schools, $20,959-25% cities)
1V Only
39 programs, 30 minutes, Fridays at 9:00 PM (re-broadcast on the weekend, and with multiple replays on WMFE
CFAN throughout the week, in addition to segment reversions for WMFE-FM, web podcasts & VOD)
Central Florida is one of the nation's fastest growing regions. With this growth comes the
challenges and news unique to Central Florida. Central Florida Almanac (CFA), a 3D-minute
program to be telecast Friday evenings at 9:00 PM, will report these challenges and the regional
news of the week that surrounds them. Reported concisely and delivered thoughtfully, CFA will
address these challenges with local newsmakers best suited to bring context, clarity and the why
now/what next element knowledgeable viewers expect from public television rather than just the
what they get from commercial electronic media. Produced in the studios of WMFE, CFA will
frequently feature program segments produced in the field.
Hosted by an articulate and respected television professional, CFA will address up to two
subjects on each program. CFA will begin with a re-view of the week of news from Central
Florida in a brief three minute segment.
After the week in review, CFA's host will lead a discussion with a relevant news-maker or a
panel of various newsmakers related to a significant topic of the week affecting Central Florida.
CFA will also feature various commentaries on relevant subjects offered by a revolving roster of
local newsmakers as well as from CFA's own stable of local grass roots commentators.
Toward the end of each CFA, a stand-alone 4-minute segment - titled Business
Watch -- will be especially devoted to an exploration of Central Florida tourism
and other local business issues.
Finally, adjacent to CFA's 2-minute closing credit roll, three-quarters of the screen will be
assigned to a fast paced visual and aural chronicle highlighting local government issues coming
in the week ahead. Like the opening re-view, this pre-view will literally close the book on the
final "pages" of our Central Florida Almanac.
While other news programs provide the headlines of the week, WMFE's CFA will provide depth
and context to topics in a length not found in other local electronic media. Rather than quantity
of stories, WMFE's CFA will focus on providing a quality explanation of a topic, helping put into
context today's local challenges. CFA will aid the viewer in better understanding the issues that
affect and impact us daily.
Believing that a public TV viewer is capable oHorming their on conclusions, CFA will avoid over-
using interviews or discussions with local journalists from print or electronic media, preferring
instead to offer a direct perspective from the newsmaker rather than a perspective filtered
through a journalist.
Page - 27
,Notional Program Rundown
39 programs, 30 minutes, Fridays at 9:00 PM (re-broadcast on the weekend, and with multiple replays on WMFE
CFAN throughout the week)
1V Only
3.
4.
Pro ram 0 en
Program Host Opening Tease
Host romotes what's ahead on ro ram.
Fundin Credits
Week's Headlines in Review
The se ment reviews the headlines of the week.
Newsmaker Interview
Host interviews 1 - 3 news makers related to a top story of
the re ion durin the week.
Commentary
A commentary is offered by a subject matter expert from
within Central Florida about the to ic bein discussed
Round Table - A Collective View
Host facilitates a discussion with other local newsmakers
about the week's news.
Citizen Feedback
Through the use of email, voicemail, and person-on,..the-
street montages, .local citizens reflect on the week's news
and offer their own perspectives... adding community
voices to CFA's discussion.
Business Watch: separate 81VV host profiles 2-3 local
and timely tourism/business issues and talks with a local
hotelier, vendor, theme park executive, tourist or a local
owner/o erator about an issue.
Next Week's Pre-view with CFA Credits
27:00 - 29:00
5.
00:50 01:00 -1:10
02:30 1:10 - 3:40
09:00 3:40 -12:40
02:00 12:40 -14:40
06:50 14:40-21:30
01:30 21:30 - 23:00
6.
7.
8.
9.
04:00
23:00 - 27:00
10.
02:00
-I -I .-1 '~ -I 0-1 0
0 S- S- 'Efl S- O S- O
-
D) D) f:h ~' ...... 'Efl D) , ,'Efl CD) f:h C
- 01 0 ......, .::1'- '::I ,
- (J) ~ s:: 'Efl 'Efl I .0 'Efl . en 'Efl 'I\) 'Efl <"'0 'Efl :(;.) 'Efl -<:
::I ...... ..... I '1\) ; -l.. ;0 I\) 0
0 3 'Efl 'Efl 'Efl 0: 0 0 'e; )> 0 0 0 en (;.) '0 0 en ~
c 01 0'1 (Jl I ::J 6 0 en 6 0 C)
~ 01 ~ ~ en ;:+ 6 n. G> 6
(Jl g' 6 6 en (Jl D) 0 0 CD. CD 0
0" N" D) 3" 3 '-' Q. '(Jl ~. :TO (Jl 3 <
< iil 0 -. o ':i- 0 -.
-. 0 ~ CD -0 ::I Ul D) :i" D)
:J ~. (D' 0 0- 3 0 :J ,CD :J :J 0 ,CD ':J
(Jl c. CD D) CD :J C. 0, 0 ~ 0 0 ~
'" -. -. - D) CD m CD
(Jl 0 CD D) '" c. CD CD 0
.p. + >< '0 . -s:
.p. <' . . . ",0
::l
:;t: -
w 0 ""::r
w N . '. ......1.
'.. , >, I , , "~I
.,. , I> ...
w > >< . '"
s:
f\.) . . o>g
-
U1 1R\ n . . ....::r
I'IJ
f\.) 0 OCI,
, .,.... .....'. > I> ' I, ' .. I" .....'.'... > >1. .... ,
w . . . '"
f\.) >< 0 oS:
0
w 'lI: . . ~,a
~::r
,w
f\.) + . ;;;
'.. ," ... I,' ~ ....
--= '.
w > . . c;;
w N 0 -3:
"'0
::l
. . -
w . ~::r
'~
f\.) >< . 0;
'I'
I'.>
w @ . . :::;
w D . -3:
0>0
::l
. -
..... 0 u;::r
U'I
w >< 0 . "',
o.
I " I> """', . .."'.'.' ," '> ." I" .... .' , > .,.' > I '... I>> ....... >.
w 'lI: . !::
,
. . s:
w < !::l'o
::l
-
w N 0 . ",::r
""Ol
,., + . . ~
~
Ol
""-l co f\.) f\.) N f\.) ..... w w w w U1 ..... W U1 co N U1 co ..... 3
0 f\.) 0), f\.) 0
0
..... ....
.p. ..... .p. .p. .p. .p. f\.) (j) 0) (j) (j) ..... w 0) ..... ..... .p. ..... ..... f\.) ~
0 (j) .p. 0 N 0 0) .p. 0 (j) 0
tAl Page 28
l.O
"C
...
0
to
...
III
3
III
"C
CD
...
'<
CD
III
::'
tAl
0
3
::l
c:
-
CD
_Ill
"T1
...
0.:
III
'<
III Z
@ ~
l.O o'
0 :J
0 ~
"tJ :E
3: (l)
<5"
::r
-
III
::l
CL
0
(ji"
g:
0-
S.
o'
:J
0
-
Cf}
"C
(l)
0
~
0"
r
0
0
~
G)
0
<
(l)
....
:J
3
(l)
~
m
:J
~
.:<
-u
....
0
to
...
III
3
-i
0
"U
o'
(fl
Page 29
$197,256 is the annual expense to WMFE to have the "capacity" to produce T AC
From which WMFE seeks $83,834 (42.5%) from all local government sources
($37,725-45% county, $25,150-30% schools, $20,959-25% cities)
TV Only
39 programs, 30-minutes, Thursday's @ 9:30 PM
(Re-broadcast on the weekend, and with multiple replays on WMFE CFAN throughout the week, in addition to web
VOO, and selected podcasts)
The Arts Connection is already a very successful program heard weekly on WMFE-FM, Friday
nights at 7:00 PM and Saturdays at noon. WMFE's Vision calls for WMFE to produce a weekly
version of The Arts Connection, (TAG) for WMFE-TV. The TV version of TAC would be 30 minutes
in length, and will be telecast Thursday evenings at 9:30 PM, with a re-broadcast on WMFE-TV on
the weekend, and many re-broadcasts on WMFE CFAN.
TAC on WMFE- TV will not just explore "what's happening this weekend, n but examine in-depth
issues relating to arts and culture in Central Florida, talk to people in front of the arts and behind the
curtain, and be a stage to discuss the relevancy of arts in our lives, our communities and our
schools.
Hosted by a hip and well informed program host, the TAC on TVwill be produced mostly on video
tape beyond the studios ofWMFE. Within up to three segments in the program, the TAC host will
take the viewer where art is being made and where decisions are being made. A weekly segment
on TAC on TV will introduce a local artist to the WMFE audience, while other weekly segments will
document the life of a play from funding to final curtain, or the plight of a young junior high school
student auditioning for the Florida Youth Orchestra, or a performance of the Orlando Opera as
experienced by a blind patron. Each program will begin or end with a 3 - 5 minute .what's
happening this week" hosted by 90.7's Art Connection host, Becky Morgan.
Each week, TAC on TV will feature a local arts & culture commentary from a range of reputable
critics to patrons and donors to the artists themselves.
The challenge for this program will be to differentiate itself from the radio version of the program.
Instead of just talking to a director or artist about an upcoming event, the TV version will take the
viewer behind the scenes at rehearsal, or into an artist's studio. Take viewers to an event, so they
have a better sense of the experience - for example, the parties at the Florida Film Festival or the
Beer Garden at the Fringe Festival.
.
,.
Notional Program Rundown
For
Page - 30
The Arts Connection on TV
TV Only
39 programs, 30-minutes, Thursday's @ 9:30 PM
(Re-broadcast on the weekend, and with multiple replays on WMFE CFAN throughout the week, in addition
to web VOD, and selected podcasts)
Pro ram 0 en
Host Pro ram 0
Fundin Credits
Local Arts News
Art News presented by radio Arts Connection host
Rebecca Morgan from cameras in the radio studio.
Art venue video used as necessa .
5. Segment One
T AC host is in the field showcasing a local artist,
venue or event. For instance, the program host
could be on the set of the Orlando Opera production
of Aida talking to the stage director about the
building of the set and then later to a cast extra
who's never been to an opera about their experience
on sta e and off.
6. Arts Commentary
Commentary about the arts is offered by a respected
sub'ect matter ex ert from Central Florida.
7. Segment Two
T AC host is seen in a new venue, prOfiling a local
artist, venue or event For instance, the program
host could be at the studios of a local Central Florida
artist, ex lorin her art and conce ts.
8. Youth Reporter Segment
A high schoof student reports on art issues relating
to schools. The report can be about school
orchestras, or funding of arts in the schools,. or
follow the tryouts of aspiring actors .from local
schools.
9; Weekend Preview
T AC host promotes what's happening this weekend
in Central Florida arts.
10. The Sights and Sounds of Art
A visual and aural experience of local arts. No
commentary, just video and sound of events
happening locally in the arts. Segment could feature
a walk around the Winter Park Arts Festival, or a
local violinist playing a piece, or painter painting on a
canvas.
11. Pro ram Close with Fundin Credits over above
mentRunTime
00:30
00:30
00:40
02:30
08:00
02:00
08:00
03:00
02:00
01:00
00:50
CumulatiV'eRu rrT i rne<
00:00 - 00:30
00:30- 01:00
01:00-01:40
01:40 -04: 1 0
04:10-12:10
12:10-14:10
14:10-22:10
22:10 - 25:10
25:10 - 27:10
27:10 - 28:10
28:10 - 29:00
1
,.
-i -i -i ; n -i '0 -i 0
0 0 0 t.9 :::+ S- O 0 0
0; 0; 0; ....
t.9 -->.' t.9: i" 0) t.9 t: 0) t.9 t:
- 0'1 - 0 ...... - ,::::J ::::J
- (f) ~ 3:, t.9 t.9 I 0 t.9 III (f) t.9 tv t.9 - (j) t.9 c..> t.9 ~
::::J t.9 -->. -->. 2S :i:- N -->. 0 '< tv 0 ~
0 3 t.9 t.9 a: 0 0 'a, 0, 0 en c..> 0 0 en
c- 01 01 III I' ::::J" I 0 (J) ~ I 0 G)
g; 0'1 ~ ~ en ;::;: 0 I 0 I
en .w 6 6 (f) en 0) 0 0 CD 0 n CD 0 0
c)" N' 0) 3' 3 ::l. 0 'en 3 ::r en 3 <,
< ::::J 'iii 0 .... 0 0 ....
.... 0 ~ CD "U 0) S' 0) S' 0)
::J ~' (ii' 0 a 3 ,0 ::J' CD ~ 0 CD ~
en a. CD 0) CD ::::J a. 0 Q.. - Q.. 0
" .... .... .... iii" (j)
III 0 CD 0) " a. CD CD 0 CD CD 0) CD
J:>. + x 0 . "3:
J:>. <' .. . . ",0
::I
W 'Ii: 0 . wg:
w N . . ...,......
>> > I: " " + '.", , > " " > >i I i
W > x . '"
3:
tv . 0
. "'::I
....
U1 ~ n . . . ...=r
II.)
tv 0 0 '"
"",',,' ., "',' ",' . '",', "" " ..'",' " , ,,"
""
w .. . . CD
tv X 0 53:
0
. ::I
W 'Ii: . ~ ....
~=r
(,,)
tv + . N
~ ~ '> , L/' ", ,'c,
W > . . w
w N 0 . ~3:
"'0
::I
. . ....
w . ~=r
J:>.
tv X . m
1'1" , """ " I> ".. "'...' ,::, '::::
W @ .. . ::;
w 0 . . ~3:
"'0
::I
. ....
...... iO=r
01
w x 0 . '"
0
I: : : I> .' "" ", ',' ,,", , ,".. '.'....'., .'
,
. . ~
w 'Ii:
(,.) < . . ",3:
"'0
::I
....
w N 0 . ",=r
w 0>
W + . . ~
0>
0) CXl tv tv tv tv ...... W W W W U1 ...... W U1 co tv U1 co ...... 3
co tv ...... ...... w
0
...... ......
w ...... J:>. J:>. J:>. J:>. tv 0) 0) 0) 0) ...... w (J) ...... ...... U1 ...... ...... tv ~
CXl 0) J:>. 0 J:>. 0 CXl J:>. 0 OJ (J)
Page 31
(,,)
co
"C
....
0
co
....
III
3
Ul
"C
CD
....
'<
CD
III
:'
(,,) Z
0
3 2-
cr
::I ::I
t: III
....
CD ~
.Ul CD
-i cO'
=r ;r
t:
.... III
Ul :J
0.. 0.
III
'<:. 0
Ul ~
@ :::!,
0-
eo S.
c.;, o'
0 :J
"'C 0
3: -.
en
"U
(1)
0
~
o'
r
0
0
!!!..
G)
0
<
(1)
:3
3
(1)
:J
.-
m
;:l.
~
-0
a
co
..,
III
3
-i
0
"U
~.
,
.
mmn~
w
C) Promise. Pride & Potential .....
Page 32
On the bin
$41,600 is the annual expense for WMFE to have the "capacity" to produce OTL
From which WMFE seeks $17,680 (42.5%) from all local government sources
($7,956-45% county, $5,304-30% schools, $4,420-25% cities)
Radio Only
52 programs, 1 hour, "live" every Wednesday @ 6:00 PM
(with segment reversions for WMFE-FM's drive time Morning Edition and All Things Considered in addition to web
podcasts)
On the Line (OTL) will focus on two, occasionally three local issues of interest. Each
issue will be set up by a feature produced by the WMFE-FM news team. Within the hour,
the listener will hear a variety of newsmaker voices and other perspectives on the issues.
Creative use of sound will enhance the program while providing additional context.
Approximately 26 minutes will be given to the lead segment, including a 4-minute
issue set-up or "mini" documentary framing the issue and establishing factual context and
consequence from the perspective of issue experts and those affected by the issue.
Next, the OTL host lead a 10-minute discussion inteNiew with a key newsmakerls
involved in the issue. The final 12-minutes of the lead segment will be given over to phone
calls from listeners who will ask the newsmaker live questions "on the line."
A local 2-minute commentary - recorded and offered by another related newsmaker
or an articulate citizen -- will immediately follow centering on the lead issue.
A second 16-minute segment focusing on a different perhaps less difficult yet still
relevant issue will follow. The format will essentially be the same: set up, newsmaker
inteNiew/discussion, and live phone calls.
Two closing segments will follow - featuring a quick response from listeners' e-mail
or voice mail regarding an issue from a previous program, and a "touching bases" segment
featuring quick recoded updates and points of view from elected officials on yet another
current local issue not addressed in the program.
The host/producer will have relevant inteNiew experience, plus the ability to manage
multiple call-in guests and questions. It is probable that there will be several
correspondents included in OTL for the issue set-up pieces, "touching bases," and perhaps
a co-host to facilitate the second feature of each week's OTL.
I
.
Notional Program Rundown
For
On thebine.
Page - 33
Radio Only
52 programs, 1 hour, "live" every Wednesday @ 6:00 PM
(with segment reversions for WMFE-FM's drive time Morning Edition and All Things Considered in addition to
web podcasts)
-
c:
ell
E
Cl
QI
1/1
QI
'5
c:
E
<0
N
Program Open and Host Tease
Host opens OTL with a tease of what coming up within the
ro ram, enerall two, sometimes three issue
2. NPR News
World and national news from National Public Radio)
3. Issue One: Set up
OTL host sets up the issue to be discussed with a produced
feature from a 90.7 FM reporter. This local issue will feature
that which impacts a listener today, to include city, county and
school issues, in addition to local politics, social issues, health
and environment, etc.
4. Issue One: studio interview/discussion
OTL host interviews in-studio (or by telephoi:le) newsmakers
and sub'ect matter ex rts relatin . to the featured issue.
5. Break
6. Issue One -live phone calls
OTl host continues interviews with newsmakers, and takes
live tele hone uestions to newsmaker from 90.7 listeners.
7. Commentary
OTL host introduces a local commentary dealing with the
above issue of the week. Commentary will be from a local
newsmaker, subject matter expert, or from a listener
contribution.
8. Break
9. Issue Two: Set up
OTL host sets up the second issue to be discussed with a
produced feature produced bya 90.7 FM reporter. This issue
ma be softer in nature, re ortin on Ii hter news ofthe week.
10. Issue Two: studio interview/discus
OTL host interviews in-studio (or by telephone) newsmakers
and sub'ect matter ex erts relatin to the featured issue..
11. Break
12. Issue Two: live phone calls
Ort host continues interview while taking calls on the subject
from 90.7 listeners
13. Listener Comments
Program Host reads email comments from listeners on last
week's to ic
14. Checking In & Touching Bases:
In a receded segment, OTL host checks in quickly on a
selected local issue to ain the POV of elected officials
15, Pr ram Close
-
C
Ql
E
Cl
Ql
UI
oS
::s
.5
E
..,
......
co
.....
" Segment;
RunTime'
01:00
05:00
04:00
10:00
00:45
12:00
02:00
00:45
02:15
10:00
00:45
04:00
01:30
04:00
01:00
Cumulative Run
',Time
00:00 - 01:00
01:00 - 06:00
06:00 - 10:00
10:00 - 20:00
20:00 - 20:45
20:45 - 32: 45
32:45 - 34:45
34:45 - 35:30
35:30 - 37:45
37:45 - 47:45
47:45 - 48:30
48:30 - 52:30
52:30 - 54:00
54:00 - 58:00
58:00 - 59:00
.
.
-{ -{ --I (") --I (") --I (")
0 a a (It ;::;: a 0 a 0
-
~ Q) (It Q) ...... -ER ;0. Q) (It c: Q) (It c:
- 0'1 - 0 ...... - :J - :J
- en ~ s: (It (It I 0 (It (II en (It I\) (It -< Gl (It (..) (It -<
:J ...... ...... ^ ),. I\) ...... 0 I\) 0
0 3 (It -ER (It c: 0 0 0 0 <? en (..) 0 <? en -Ilo-
c: 0'1 0'1 0'1 I I (ii. I =r 0 en ::l. 0 G)
Q) 6 ~ ~ ;::;: 0 0 0 6 0 (I) 6
(/) ~ 6 en en !l!. Q) 0 (I) 0 0
cr N. Q) 3 3 .., (II 3 =r t/I 3 <
:J .., < 0 ra (I) "'0 :J nr Cii" 0 :i" iil 0 0 Ql
~. (j)" 0 0- 3 0 :J (I) :J 0 (I) :J ~
(/) c. (I) Q) (I) :J C. S!. Q. co - 0 0
,.;- ~ .., - nr (I).
(/) 0 CD Q) C. (l) CD 0 Q) (l) (l) CD
.b.. + ")(' ,0 . -:!:
I.b.. <!!' .. . . ",0
:J
(..) ~ 0 . ",g:
(..) N . . ........
!
(..) > X . '"
:!:
I\) . . cng
tel IlU ~ -
0'1 ....::T
IV
I\) 0 0 01
i
1(.) .. . . <0
I\) X 0 o:!:
0
:J
(..) ~ . . --
-::T
(,.)
I\) + . "
...... ., 1/ .......
(..) > . . w
(..) N 0 . -:!:
"'0
:J
. . -
(..) . ~::r
~
I\) X . en
(..) @ .. . ~
(..) 0 . . -:!:
010
:J
. -
...... iO::T
01
(..) X 0 . t:l
~ . . ~
(..)
< . . ",:!:
(..) "'0
:J
-
(..) N 0 . ",::T
WO)
(..) + . . '"
...
0)
m CO I\) I\) I\) I\) ...... (..) (..) (..) (..) 0'1 ...... (..) 01 CO I\) 0'1 <0 ...... 3
CO I\) ...... ....... (..) 0
...... .....
(..) ...... -Ilo- ~ -Ilo- ,fa. I\) m m m 0'> ...... (,) m ...... ...... 0'1 ...... ...... I\) ~
(Xl 0'> -Ilo- 0 -Ilo- 0 CO -Ilo- 0 CO 0'>
Page 34
Con
N 0
-0
(3 :s
co t"t'
ru
3 ::r
.CIJ tD
...... It:
:J"
0
C :s
....
<
CD:
CD
<
CD
....
'<
~
CD
0-
::J
CD
CIJ
0-
III
'<
@
C1l Z
0 g,
0 o'
"'C ::J
s: !!!.
~
(l)
cO'
;::!:
III
::J
0-
0
~
.....
fr
s..
o'
::J
0
-.
en
"U
(l)
0
::;;
o'
r
0
0
!!!.
G)
0
<
(l)
.....
::J
3
(l)
~
m
~
~
-u
0
c.c
.....
III
3
--I
0
"U
~.
Page 35
mm:il~
w
() PrUlllISC. Pndt: & Po!.tmlifll mm.
$34,305 is the annual expense for WMFE to have the "capacity" to produce WMFE In-Depth
From which WMFE seeks $14,850 (42.5%) from all local government sources
($6,561-45% county, $4,374-30% schools, $3,645-25% cities)
3 programs, 1 hour, Quarterly on WMFE TV, Thursdays @ 8:00 PM
Support for WMFE's Vision will bring back WMFE In-Depth to WMFE-TV which
discontinued the TV version in 2004 as a result of hurricane related expense reductions
and other issues.
WMFE In-Depth premiered on WMFE in 2002 as a series appearing or heard on all
WMFE media (called multi-platforming) focusing on one topic in-depth. In-Depth featured
news stories and features produced and broadcast each day on WMFE-FM, a special
edition of WMFE On the Line (90.7's call in program), a one-hour program produced and
telecast on WMFE-TV, and resources and content on WMFE's Web site, WMFE.ORG.
Now, WMFE In-Depth is produced three times a year as a radio-only series, and to
date has covered issues like Central Florida's pending water shortage, transportation, tort
reform, the nursing shortage in Central Florida, the Patriotic Act, and Central Florida's
sense of community.
WMFE's Vision calls for the WMFE In-Depth to once again be produced and telecast
on WMFE-TV in a sustainable way at least three times a year and in conjunction with
WMFE-FM and WMFE.ORG. Production staff from WMFE's other Vision programming
initiatives will provide resources for this program.
Notional Weight and Distribution
of Specific Local Government Entity Program Topics
Page 36
3 programs per year, 60 minutes, Thursday's @ 8:00 PM
WID1 WID2 WID3
I I I I I I I I I
County Gov I I I I I I I I I
$40-0range . . . 3
$30-Seminole . . 2
$20-0sceola 0 1
Total Govt I I I I I I I I I 6
County School I I I I I I I I I
$30-0range . . 2
$20-Seminole . . 2
$10-0sceola 0 1
Total Schools I I I I I I I I I 5
City I II I I I I I I I I I
$20-0rlando I x I x I 2
$10-Altamonte * 1
$10-Kissimme # 1
$10-Sanford + 1
$10-W. Park Z 1
Total Mid Size 4
$5-Apopka Q 1
$5-0coee V 1
$5-0viedo ^ 1
$5-W. SprinQs @ 1
Total Small I I I I I I I I I 4
Total Inclusions I 8 I 7 6 I 21
.
5" ~~
() ~.:J
C G> ~CD"
~. -I..., (Jl ...,
00 III
::J -::J
(Jl~a. w
~2
- -.
OW
3
....(fl
~
CD
~
'(15
W
~ -.
(])
0 0
N 3
::J
C
eD
.(fl
-I
:T
C
~ Ul
> a.
0 W
<.
W (fl
K8l
CD
0
0
lJ
s:
....
w
@ ....
~ (9
en ~
0 W
0 G)
0 01
Page 37
-en
::J c
g.o-
(Jl-l .g>:E .g>:E .g>:E
-'0
0_ ~
::J III S' :i" ..., -- ..., -.
S'::J --::J
(Jl- c5CD"
ce- ce- ll-
(Jl ~ (Jl ~ (Jl ..., 'It
3:
'" 0
~~
'" ..
::T
W > > > '" 20
~ 3: en (I) -.
Ol 0 o9:~
~
~ .. OC'o
... ::T OC-.,
t.J --
'. oci':E
5' w CD
(!) (}l
N W m ~ -.
0 ""0 (!) .:::::s
.g (3 (3 co :t>r+
W n -('I)
0 3: -. - ..,
S -. -"'tJcn
3 W 0
(Jl ;! 3 ~ GiO-c
..
(fl O~ ::T
~ (1) (1) to) .... CC :!.
:b ~ :::SN miil:::::s
CD CD~ ~3(Q
-~ i -(I)Ul
0 ~-
W > ~O >en:::s >-wJ:!;;;
3 0 ~S 00 3:
-. :::s 3 =:3..:
::J :::s 5 (1) ~. 2- 0
~(1) ~r- ~
CD n ..
.(Jl .... ~ 5' eD :b '" ::T
-. "..
-10 . (1) .(fl_
E":::S ~ T13~
CD :::!.'U Ol
..., 0 a. a.:::s
~:::s ::J W 'U
:- < CD
(fl (fl n ~
a.
W
(Jl- <D 0; 3:
(!) 0 0
~ 0 ~
w ..
0 en "U iO ::T @
"U s: tJI :~..,
s: 3 '"
0
~
'" 3:
'" 0
~
..
'" ::T
w 0)
'"
..
0') N N N ~O)
~ -(,jItolllo ~,r:..
.... ,!')oIlIo ~
N g@ t(9 gce '<
....
G) G)
-,
,
Central Florida Alliance Network
Page 38
For SEMINOLE GOVERNMENT TV
WMFE's digital television station - WMFE-OT - is now telecasting four standard definition
(SO) channels during the day (lam to 8pm) and one high definition (HO) and two SO
channels during evening primetime hours (8-12 midnight).
One of WMFE-OTs standard definition channels, WMFE Central Florida Alliance Network
(CFAN), has been established exclusively to accommodate local programming from WMFE
as well as from a number of other sources. Those other sources may include programming
from local government access channels such as Seminole Government TV, or
programming provided directly from an alliance member.
WMFE recognizes that the City of Winter Springs and other local government entities in
Seminole County have invested in Seminole Government TV and that SGTV is producing
many programs of local significance to Seminole County residents and, often, of interest to
residents in other counties in the Central Florida region.
At the same time, WMFE and many TV viewers in Seminole County recognize that SGTV's
program distribution is limited only to those Seminole County residents who subscribe to
cable, thus restricting a more wide-spread viewership of SGTV.
As an extension of WMFE's electronic public service media mission and in an initiative to
further collaborate with Seminole County Government and other local governments, WMFE
will provide blocks of broadcast time on CFAN for the purpose of re-transmitting selected
programming from those local government entities via SGTV or directly as an alliance
member.
This alliance membership is offered at part of WMFE's Vision for the Future Campaign.
When fully funded this Vision will give WMFE the capacity to significantly enhance its local
programming and outreach initiatives among other elements the Vision will advance.
As an added value to each local government entity in Central Florida who fund multi-year
"capacity" grants in partial support of WMFE's Vision, WMFE will provide - with out
charQe - a block of broadcast time every week as illustrated by the notional schedule on
the followinQ paQe. Each ally's block of proQramminQ will be repeated durinQ each of the
allocated broadcast days, with one block beinQ telecast once within primetime.
Note: Each ally will select its own programming and be responsible for delivery of the program to WMFE
according to technical specifications WMFE will stipulate. Programming content must adhere to the Federal
Communications Commission's and WMFE's standards and policies. WMFE will retain the right of refusal for
any programming not meeting such standards or policies. All programs must be copyright cleared for
broadcast and closed captioned for the hearing impaired. WMFE will be allowed to maintain its CFAN brand
and logo on the screen at all times. Each ally must indemnify WMFE against any libel or slander contained
within their programs. WMFE must approve the style and content by which each ally promotes its programs
on CFAN.
,
.
~
en
~
;3;
<>
r
Q.
"0
co
3
m
iD
3
0.
o
C)
Page 39
cnC/)OOO)>)>
(\)(\)...,...,;::;:00
3311)11)'<00
_. _::J::J 0 (\) (\)
::J::lcoco_mm
Q.oCDCDOmm
(\)lD-l-l...,OO
G>(j)<<iil~~
~ 0 '0'0 ~ (\) (\)
(\)<-l-l0Q.Q.
...,(\)<<_1ll11)
::J 3--0--
33--;0)>)>
~(\)QQ.cgg
:'ia~8 110'0'
<-4551'\);;;;;
-<0-000
C/) _ -'< ::J. =s' C
G> C/) O'CO co 0 ::J
-l (j) g ~ S' Q.~
< -l ""'0. (\) ~ O'co
~< ""=s'00
O'-,,::J 011) <
""Ol'\)~~a.~
~ ... 0 ::J m " ::J
=s'O ::J.-0'~3
0- 0 co II"" (\)
o C -. 0 -0 ::J
-::l::JWII)...,_
O'.:t ~ Q g.cQ: "
~ co :r cZS' III ::J I'\)
""oo_.mlllo
a. C::J--...,
II < Cil ~ w=s'cO'
(\) _Ill _.
.........O'=s'-.=;;::J
03::l003=s'~
..., II)C(\)o
-. (\) a. Cil m C =s'
<9. ::l 0 -0"" 0
~lil"IllO'CDO'5:;
- !!to""om
=s'1I1'\)1l)~1l)C'
o N_o.(\) 0.0
cO-.oCDo^,
..., 3 III ""II) '"
C'~CDm+ma.
...,CCf/l.... ...0
0- AI'\)I'\)Ill
1I)::l-o_~_!!t
a. m (\) -. ..... -.
0-...,3031'\)
1ll::T~(\)OCD=:
!!tOCDm""m3
I'\) C CD-o ~-o CD
_iii",,(\)O'(\)m
-. +...,......, -0
3 0' '" ~ 0 ~ CD
(\) ... ,..... CD III CD ...,
m g Q:CD g.(\) s:
-0 a.0""Ill ""dJ
(\)go+m+(\)
~(II~I'\).(if......""
(\)_CDQ:OQ:+
(\)wg'o::JOI'\)
""cr.OOCDO
+ 3'Ill ""-""C'
0....,::J...,0
I'\)(\) 0 CD-oCD 0
Q:"'81g'::J.g'""
0'tJ-m030...,
OCD. IllCDIll(\)
"""og..!.g.g'
CD~::J1I)3I1)g
O'(\)(\)!!tCD!!to.
.....CD-.m .0
o ;II;'::J - 0 II)
~+-oo ::Jm
o N::J.::J CD (if
II) 3 CD _.-
mO'(\)-' ::Jo
-o.!.::J 'tJ::J
.m (') -. 'tJ ::J. CD
o "" 3::J. 3-.
::J..CD3 CD::J
CD CD CD .!. 'tJ
-.c- ' -....,
::J.. =: 33'
-00 3 CD CD
::J. ma. CD .!.
3 -'
CD 0 3
, m (\)
~CIl
3lil"
CD -
o
::l
CD
::l
'tJ
..
3'
CD
I
d:
3
CD
OJ
g
""
~
g (j) (j) " -; ~ -; s: ~ III
c Q) :J. ::F C 0
3 :J r+ C CD CD '5" O::!!
CD '"' a. :J ~~ ~i
::J il i;o
-
(II mo 0 8~ om ~ -I. -3
I OJ~ ;0 QQ ~!t
r- ~
mo 0 00 OUl ~
OJ~ ;0 Q~ QQ
r- ~ III
00 UIUI (0)0 0)> ~
Q~ lDQ ~ G>Q
~ i' z
0 0
:::!:
en)> 00 0 nUl (jjUl ... ... 0
OJQ Q~ ;0 QQ lDQ iii"'? "T1 ::J
r- <! <! 0 D)
.., -
8~ 0 OUl 0 ... ... en "1:J
N... ~ ..,
;0 QQ ;0 ::JI l8
r- ~ r-
~g~ Al
8~ m~ om 8~ 0 to"j;j 3
QQ ;0
~ r- ~ fA
.... ~i3
n
::r
8~ m~ OUl m~ otn ... O~ ~ CD
QQ q,Q N C.
~ 'H~ ~ ~~~ C
-
CD
-..- 0-
8~ m~ 8~ m~ OUl N ~~.~
Co');[e !tJ ...
.... i~ !l! ;~ At
0
0 m~ 8~ 00 o~ ~ "-f a: ~ ::J
;0 Q<! G>_ <l CD
r-
.... .... .... :E
~~
0 8~ 8~ 8~ t- el) CD
CD
;0 1Jl C') ';1("
r- ~ ~
"1:J
~
8~ 00 0 i I~
G>~ ;0
r-
oo 8~ 0 '1l
G>~ ;0 -..j
r- ~
00 <n)> 00 .~
Q~ OlQ G>~
& 0 ~ ~ 0 )>
Gl ;0 0
I . . <! r "
8~ 8~ Q) K' 0 . " " )>
~ a 0 lJ) 0 0 U
e ;;; .::t
~ .. " .
:3. 'Ii a
If Gl " 0 Q
0 0 <! "-
a. Ii ii" .. ~
Gl " 0
0 2~ mo ~ ~ 3 a.
OJ~ 3 ~ 0 if
;0 .g co co
r- ." ~ 3
m 3
co
I ~
0 m~ ~ ....... <!
;0 s:: i:'?
r- ."
m
~
~
.
Page - 40
mmn~
~
o Promise, Pride & Potential IiIIi11
0- REPURPOSING LOCAL PROGRAMMING
"." "' -.- (..'~-')
, ,.~... ,
I._'('!_.." ;
The manner in which these local programs will be produced for broadcast favors the
practice of "repurposing," a technique of re-using the content of each program for other
purposes once the original broadcast has concluded.
Rebroadcasting, reversioning, podcasting, video on demand (VOD), and audio
streaming will be such repurposing programming techniques WMFE will apply to each
local program when practical. Such an application will measurably increase the numbers of
viewers and listeners to each program and extend the opportunity for the public service
media characteristic of WMFE to work collaboratively with many organizations in Central
Florida to whom WMFE may also provide access to the material.
Rebroadcasting:
Each local TV program will be rebroadcast in its initial unrepurposed-form on WMFE's main
analog and digital channels, some within 24 hours or less of the original telecast, others
over the weekend. Additionally, each local TV program will be scheduled for extensive play
on WMFE CFAN, the Central Florida Alliance Network.
This rebroadcasting technique doubles and sometimes quadruples the number of
"eyeballs" watching the program as a result of the program being more readily available
throughout day-parts more varied and frequent than the original telecast day and time.
On the Line (OTL), to be broadcast each Wednesday at 6pm on 90.7 WMFE-FM, will not
be rebroadcast, per se. Rather it will be repurposed for immediate use the following
morning and throughout the next several days as dictated by the relevance of OTL's news
and information content.
Repurposinq (also known as "excerptinq"):
Repurposing many of the programs is made more effective by the format in which the
original program is constructed and produced for its initial broadcast.
Because most full length programs of this nature are formatted to be produced in
segments, those segments (if worthy) may easily be "lifted" out of the body of the program
and used by WMFE for another purpose once the full length program is produced.
Using On the Line as an example, portions of this radio program will immediately be
"excerpted" for use the following morning during the local news cutaways in NPR's Morning
Edition from 6 to 9 a.m., or in the top-of-the-hour newscast. The broadcast of this OTL
'0
.
Page - 41
excerpt is played-back preceded and followed by a 90.7 FM reporter voicing a set-up
and a doser for the piece. The reporter establishes the pieces' newsworthiness and
relevance to the listener in addition to providing context. The typical length of such a piece
is between 90 seconds and 4 minutes depending on many variables, the most important of
which is the literal news-worthiness of the newsmaker's sound bite. Appropriately used, this
technique is a powerful tool to extend the value of OTL and its newsmaker guests to a
listener who may not have heard OTL in its entirety at the time of the initial program
broadcast the night before.
A similar excerpting of the audio track from WMFE-TV's Central Florida Almanac, Business
Watch, The Arts Connection on TV, and WMFE: In-Depth will also be considered for reuse
on 90.7 WMFE FM the morning or afternoon following the full length TV broadcast.
PodcastinQ: PODCAsrO
All this "excerpting" and "segmenting" easily lends itself to Podcasting!
Podcasting is a relatively new technology that allows WMFE's producers to store the audio
from the repurposed pieces described above on the Internet, allowing users to download
the piece for immediate or future listening and for sharing with others. The full length radio
program will also be stored and made available for podcasting.
Visitors to WMFE's Web site may schedule when they want to download the segments, and
listen to them on their own schedule either on their computer or personal listening device,
such as an iPod or MP3 player.
WMFE-FM is currently podcasting The Arts Connection and the weekly movie review with
the Orlando Sentinel movie critic.
Podcasting will be widely promoted within all programs produced as part of this Vision, and
a special website will be created to serve as the "home" for WMFE podcasting.
Video on Demand (VOD):
f\...\~.
~.rf~
,. ,.,.Ii;:. ....,'" \_~ L I; i):'
Video on Demand (VOD) allows viewers to watch programs when they
want to watch them by downloading in real time a program that has
been stored digitally either at WMFE or at a local cable provider.
While the technology exists today, WMFE will be acquiring the needed
resources to store and deliver its programs "on demand."
In the interim, WMFE is informally discussing with several local cable TV providers the
possibility of one of them serving as the cable "home" for these local programs and as the
conduit for VOD. As a public service of their cable provider, the cable subscriber will be
able to order the program at no cost via their cable menu and watch programs when they
want to watch them.
As part of WMFE's Vision, WMFE will archive and make available all of its Vision related
programs for VOD. This service will be widely promoted within all programs produced as
part of this Vision, and WMFE will work with the cable provider to create unique promotion
opportunities for this service.
..
Page - 42
Audio Streaming:
WMFE-FM has been streaming its off-air signal for the past five
years, making 90.7 available to Internet users around the wand.
Listeners can gain access at no cost by simply logging on to
wmfe.org and clicking on "Listen Now." Listeners can use a
number of media players, like Real Audio or Media Player, to
listen to 90.7 FM live or listen to various archived segments
produced by WMFE's news team.
Radio programs produced as part of the WMFE Vision will be "automatically" streamed as
they are broadcast on 90.7 FM, and will also be archived for on-demand streaming by
listeners on wmfe.org.
Soon, WMFE will have the technology in place to provide for live video streaming of WMFE
CFAN, where viewers from their home or office computers will be able to view WMFE
CFAN via the Internet from their desktop. Besides live streaming of this channel, archived
local television programs will also be able to be streamed on-demand from wmfe.org.
This valuable service will also be promoted within the programs produced for this Vision,
and will have a specially designed web page to serve as the home for audio and video
streaming.
10-D Repurposing Prgrn Elern.doc
Page - 43
mD~
w
G Promise. Pride & Potential _
E - AUDIENCE DATA
~o
At a Glance
All Day Weekly Households:
Primetime Weekly Households:
485,000 homes (2.3 persons per home)
253,000 homes (2.3 persons per home)
County Data (source: A C. Neilsen Research)
Weekly All Day Cume Adult Viewers
Osceola 24,323
Seminole 28,172
Orange 104,296
Table # 1
City Data (source: Scarborough Research)
Table # 2
Total Weekly All Day
Adult Viewers
Altamonte Springs 1,304
Apopka 1,832
Ocoee 4,519
Sanford 5,422
Winter Springs 6,280
Winter Park 7,531
Oviedo 10,115
Kissimmee 13,236
Orlando 54,721
Demographic Information (source: Media Audit)
WMFE-TV viewers are 11% more likely to vote in local, state and national elections than the average
viewer in Central Florida.
WMFE-TV viewers are 40% more likely to have an advance colleQe deQree than the typical viewer in
Central Florida.
WMFE-TVviewers are 61% more likely to have lived in Central Florida for 20 or more years than the
typical viewer.
WMFE-TV viewers are 17% more likely to own a home than the average viewer in Central Florida.
".
Page - 44
Audience Data
9O-7WMFE-FM
At a Glance (Spring 2005, Man - Sun 6 AM - 12 M)
Total Weekly Audience:
Average Quarter Hour:
Average Time Spent Listening:
180,700 listeners
9,500 listeners
6.6 hours per listener, per day
County Data (source: Arbitron Research Bureau)
County Weekly Listeners Listeners/Quarter Hour
Osceola 8,700 800
Seminole 33,100 1,600
Oranoe 72,600 3,500
Table # 3
City Data (source: Arbitron Research Bureau)
CItY Listeners Per Week
Kissimmee 1,200
Ocoee 2,300
Sanford 2,900
Winter Sprinos 3,400
Oviedo 3,800
Altamonte Sorings 5,100
Winter Park 7,400
Apopka 9,400
Orlando 30,1 00
Table # 4
Demoqraphic Information (source: Media Audit)
WMFE-FM listeners are 80% more likely to be known as opinion leaders than the typical listener in Central
Florida.
WMFE-FM listeners are 32<<'10 more likely to ~ in local, state and national elections than the average
listener in Central Florida.
WMFE-FM listeners are 195% more likely to have an advance colleQe deoree than the typical listener in
Central Florida.
WMFE-FM listeners are 31% more likely to own a home than the average listener in Central Florida.
11-E Audience Data. doc
'.
Page - 45
mmn~
w
o Promise. Pride & Potential _
F - THE DIFFERENCE: WMFE- TV vs. GOVERNMENT CABLE CHANNELS
[It,
,",,'
...l....'.....
~.~ ","
",.,.,
l2mim
o
;'.'~,.~.'.....
~-
" .'
1> .~'
, '"
/~ ""
._i:~~\,..._.,
. "'. ',' .' . ii
---~~-,..:._..:.'--_!)
How is the local programming within WMFE's Vision initiative different than the local
programming produced by the government cable channels programmed by county
government?
There are three ongoing differences between WMFE's local programming -- as setout in
WMFE's Vision Campaign - and the local programming county governments are producing
for their cable channels.
Those three differences are: signal delivery, point-of-view, and cost effectiveness.
Background:
There are 3 primary government cable channels in Central Florida - Orange TV - OTV
(programmed by Orange County Government), Seminole Government Television - SGTV
(programmed by Seminole County Government) and Access Osceola (programmed by the
City of Kissimmee in collaboration with Osceola County Government, the Osceola County
School Board and others in the county,
As a matter of public policy and as a condition of maintaining their regulated and renewable
franchise to do business in the county, cable companies make available one or more cable
channels to that local government which issues the franchise. Often, this is the county
government, although some franchises are issued by cities as well, and may result in the
same channel-gifting to the city government. Historically, in-kind equipment grants often
come to the county with the cable channel from the cable operator. Sometimes an outright
monetary grant is made to the county government from the cable operator,
With such channels and grants, coupled with additional operating and capital budgets
provide by the county each year, the government cable channel is often populated with
considerable programming, some of it locally produced.
Government channels have been increasingly active in Central Florida for the past 10 years
or more, with Orange County programming more than one channel and Seminole County is
considering activating a second channel in the future.
Any community is enriched - as is certainly the case in Central Florida - by the presence
and use of both programming services - public television or cable government
programming!
..
.
Page - 46
Difference # 1 - Signal Delivery
The public television stations of WMFE are free and accessible to all because they are
broadcast stations, delivering their signal over the air via powerful transmitters, allowing
anyone in a 6 county area to view WMFE with a television receiver and, sometimes, an off-
air antenna. Cable is not needed to receive WMFE, although WMFE- TV is available on all
cable systems.
Government cable channels, on the other hand, are by definition available only to cable
subscribers and then only to those subscribers within the narrow geographic borders of the
county. In other words, Orange County's Orange TV is only available to Orange County
cable subscribers who reside within Orange County and who also subscribe to Bright
House Network. OTV is not available as a cable service in any other adjacent counties.
And in some cities in Orange County OTV is not available on a regular basis.
The same geographic and subscription characteristics are generally true for Seminole and
Osceola counties and their respective government cable channels.
The difference, then, between broadcast and cable (in this instance) is its geography and
its economic accessibility. WMFE is available to more than 1.6 million people and is "free."
A government cable channel is, by franchise stipulations, considerably restricted to a much
smaller geographic area (parts or the entire county) and can only be viewed as a cable-cast
if the viewer subscribes to that cable franchise which offers the government cable service.
Difference # 2 - Point of View Programming
Though admittedly oversimplified, yet philosophically important, the biggest difference in
the local programming produced by either WMFE or government cable channels is the
program's perceived or actual "point of view" regarding the content within the program.
Local news and issues programming on WMFE -- which is the single largest genre of
programming WMFE will produce if donors financially support its "capacity" campaign - has
multiple points of view on issues which confront our citizens and taxpayers. And WMFE's
local programming is frequently populated by multiple spokespersons representing
profoundly different points of view on the issue.
Government cable channels - to the extent they locally produce any similar news or issue
programming - are often perceived not to produce such issue programming in a manner
that substantially advances points of view other than the government's, or seldom if at all
populate a program's participants with those in the community who articulately differ with
the point of view being advanced.
Government cable channels provide an immensely important "camera of record" role,
particularty in their gavel to gavel coverage of public meetings. Their "infonnation" and
"promotional" programming showcasing the services of the county, and their how to
"navigate" in and around public government is dearty a distinct public service.
.
.
Yet, controversial or complex multisided issue programming - where WMFE's
programming will mostly concentrate -- seems not to be an area where viewers, particularly
the discerning and civically robust public television viewers by contrast, find single point of
view presentations of the government cable channels particularly convincing.
Page - 47
At the end of the day, both media serve a role - and a role not necessarily higher or better
than the other; yet in terms of assuring a consistent and varyingly substantial point of view,
some even constructively contrary, broadcast television and oft-times publiC television
seems to maintain that distinction.
WMFE's coverage of the issues will be deep and sometimes controversial, WMFE will look
at all sides of the issues and how the issues affect the entire Central Florida area. For a
number of reasons discussed here, government cable channels do not, if at all, follow that
form of programming.
Difference # 3 - Cost Effectiveness
Though WMFE has not asked to see the expense budgets of government cable channels-
a request the stations are sure would be appropriately honored - WMFE holds that the per-
program-cost to produce the Vision-related local programming for which WMFE is seeking
"capacity" grants to cover, is considerably less expensive than the same that could be
produced by government cable.
This is not because WMFE budget managers are necessarily any more astute than
government cable mangers. It is because other WMFE donors also support the local
program expenses of the anticipated Vision programming by giving major sums to this end.
Government cable must rely exclusively on tax funds to operate, while WMFE does not.
The private-public aspect of WMFE's monetary support system clearly makes WMFE more
cost-effective by comparison. And, by extension, makes granting funds to WMFE an
effective return on investment.
12 -F Difference doc
mmn~
w
o Promise. Pride & Pattmbal _
Page - 48
G - PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF PUBLIC BROADCASTING
Any mention of media elicits perceptions of bias and distrust. Any mention of public
broadcasting and government funding in the same sentence, draws a raised eyebrow!
WMFE realizes this galvanizing, lighting-rod like issue often rests just under the radar
screen, particularly when both institutions are thrust together, even when each may be
trying to strengthen the other. This seems all the more the case when funding requests ask
for the use of tax dollars to support an element of public broadcasting.
To that end, to help put proper focus on media in general and public service media like
WMFE, PBS and NPR in particular, WMFE raises the issue of the public perception of PBS
and NPR.. .and, by extension, WMFE.
Perhaps raising it as objectively as possible will help put the potential friction and
skittishness to rest or will at least encourage thoughtful assessment grounded in as much
fact and objectivity as possible.
Pages that follow contain two surveys. Each attempt to measure and quantify the
perception of and the value gained from public broadcasting and its role in our lives as
citizens in this country.
The first survey - PBS is # 1 in Public Trust - was commissioned in 2006 by PBS and
conducted by the globally respected Roper Public Affairs & Media unit headquartered in
New York City. This survey is found on pages 49-56.
PBS - the Public Broadcasting Service -- is a non-profit media enterprise owned and
operated by WMFE and the nation's 347 public television stations. PBS uses the power of
noncommercial television, the Internet and other media to enrich the lives of all Americans
through quality programs and education services that inform, inspire and delight. Available
to 99 percent of American homes with televisions and to an increasing number of digital
multimedia households, PBS serves nearly 90 million people each week. PBS' poll was for
its member-stations.
The other survey - Public Perceptions of Public Broadcasting - was commissioned in
2003 by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and conducted by The Tarrance Group.
CPB's poll is required for its annual report to the President of the United States. This survey
is found on pages 57-60.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is a private, non-profit corporation that was
created by Congress in 1967 to distribute federal funds to qualified public radio and TV
stations like WMFE. This year, the annual appropriation from Congress to CPB is $396
million dollars. WMFE receives approximately $300,000 for TV and 100,000 for Radio,
about 10% of its current year budget.
The CPB Board is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the U. S.
Senate. The Corporation is not a government agency.
13-G Pub Percept doc
:
Page - 49
#
IS
in Public
.
Results of a 2006 Roper Public Affairs & Media Survey
Comparing Public Service Institutions
.
.
Page - 50
",For the third consecutive year, the
~.l11erican public gave PBS the top rank-
;~fJpgin trustworthiness and declared PBS
~:rexcellent use of tax dollars, second
')ily to military defense. This third
annual national survey was released
by the non-partisan, international
research company Roper Public Affairs
& Media in February 2006.
The report captures the results of a
national opinion survey that included
1,000 participants across the country
and measured how American adults
ages 25 to 75 rated PBS in comparison
with other public institutions, including
television broadcast and cable networks.
The following graphs highlight the main points
of this survey. The full Roper™ report is
available at pbs.org/roperpoIl2006.
About
Roper Public Mfairs & Media
Headquartered in New York, Roper Public Affairs &
Media specializes in public opinion polling. communications
research, and corporate reputation measurement - in the US
and globally. Roper also offers two important syndicated
services - Roper Reports and Roper Reports Worldwide - which
track consumer values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors in the US
and 30 other countries. Roper is part ofThe GtK Group. With home
offices in Nuremberg, Germany, The GtK Group is among the
top-five market research organizations in the world. Its activities
cover five business divisions: Custom Research, Retail and
Technology, Consumer Tracking, Media and Healthcare.
The GfK Group has more than 130 subsidiaries
and affiliates in 61 countries.
&tru
How much do you trust each organization?
Graph indicates pt!7"cerJtage qfrespondmts who armvt!rt!d 'a great dt!ar on a jOUl"-point scale.
PBS, public television
Courts of law
Commercial broadcast television networks, such as ABC, CBS, NBC
Federal government
Newspaper publishing companies
Cable television networks
Congress
o
10
20
30
40
50
.
.
Page - 52
The federal government provides many services that are funded with tax dollars. For each of the following
services the federal government provides using tax dollars, please rate the value that you receive.
Percent who answered "excellent value for tax dollars" for each item on a four-point scale.
Country's military defense
PBS, public television
NPR, public radio
Space program
Police/law enforcement agencies
Medical/Technological/Other research
Overseeing safety of food products
o
5
10
Is the money that is given to PBS stations
govenunents, corporations and individuals
100
80
60
40
20
o
Yes
No
Not sure
~
Who provides PBS most of its money?
Individuals
Foundations
Corporations
Federal Government
State Governments
Don't Know
o 5 10 15 20 25 30
Public broadcasting receives 15% of its funding from the federal government.
This translates to about one dollar per person per year of government support.
Do you believe this amount is "about right," "too little" or "too much"?
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Too About
little
. Too
much
No
opinion
Page - 53
Page - 54
PBS &TVNetworks
How much do you trust the news and public affairs programs that networks broadcast?
Percent that trust 'a great deal" on a four-point scale (a great deal, somewhat, not too much, not at all).
PBS, public television I-
I
391
CBS
, ' 261
I "",' - , 261
, ,,-,:, ',>-,' ;', ' , " "", 211
, , 1 !:II
, 1Q I
,,' ',' 111 I
I I I I I
CNN
Fox News Channe
NPR
NBC
ABC
MSNBC
o
10
20
30
40
50
In your opinion, how important is it that
we have public television / commercial broadcast
television / cable television?
On the whole, are you satisfied with the current
public television / commercial broadcast television /
cable television programming?
Percrmt who answered "veil important"for each question
on a four-point scale.
Percent who answered "very satisfied>>for each question
on a four-point scale.
70
40
60
50
30
40
20
30
20
10
10
o
o
PBS,
public
television
Commercial
broadcast
television
Cable
television
PBS,
public
television
Cable
television
Commercial
broadcast
television
I
.
\
PBS & Fairness
Page - 55
When it comes to news coverage, investigations, and discussions of major issues, would you say these networks' programs
are strongly liberal, moderately liberal, moderately conservative, strongly conservative, or are they mosdy fair?
Liberal
PBS, public television
NBC
ABC
CNN
NPR
CBS
Fox News Channel
MSNBC
o
30
40
10
20
Mostly Fair
Conservative
36
50
60
70
80
90
100
PBS & Important Issues
How well do PBS programs - for both children and adults - address these items?
Percent saying "very well" on a 4-point scale (very, moderately, not too, and not at all well).
Provide people access to arts and culture
Promote an understanding of American history
Improve literacy
Promote an understanding of science and technology
Inform people of America's ethnic and cultural diversity
Inform people of important political and social issues
Inform people about health issues
o
10
20
60
70
30
40
50
,
Page - 56
)
Page - 57
Attachment 2
THE TARRANCE GROUP
~ Lake. Snell. Perry
JIt. ~"""cims.I"c
Public perceptions of public broadcasting
- December 2003 -
· The Tarrance Group and Lake Snell Perry & Associates have conducted two nationwide
public opinion surveys on behalf of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting [CPB] during
the last 12 months - one in July of this year and the other in November 2002.i The
foremost objective of these research studies was to accurately measure the extent to
which the American public believes there is bias embedded in the news and information
programming on public television and public radio.
· Upon completing the most recent survey, CPB commissioned both firms to conduct four
focus groupsii to further explore the issue of bias, what exactly people perceive as bias,
and whether or not bias is a significant concern.
· The major findings from this latest survey are listed below in bold, with additional
evidence outlined in the bulleted sub-points. When applicable, findings from the focus
groups are referenced.
· Both surveys confirm the same thing: The majority of the U.S. adult population
does not believe that the news and information programming on public
broadcasting is biased. The plurality of Americans indicate that there is no
apparent bias one way or the other, while approximately one-in-five detect a liberal
bias and approximately one-in-ten detect a conservative bias.
o In the latest survey, 21 % of respondents indicate that PBS news and information
programming has a liberal bias, while 220/0 say the same thing for NPR.
· Comparatively, the November. 2002 survey revealed that no less than 31 % of
Americans indicate that the news and information programming on each of the
major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) and CNN has a liberal bias.
· The focus group research helped confirm a common hypothesis: There is a core
segment of the population that will always contend that .ill! news media is biased
no matter what. In other words, many people are simply "jumping on the
bandwagon" and saying PBS and/or NPR are biased only because they believe
all news media are biased and they do not distinguish between specific news
organizations and the news media in general.
o Among those individuals who are "consumers" of news and information programming
on PBS and/or NPR, only 22% feel there is a liberal bias in PBS's programming while
26% feel there is a liberal bias in NPR's programming.
)
Page - 58
· The most recent survey finds that 41 % of the adult population is a "consumer" of
PBS news and information programming (defined as people who watch these
programs at least once or twice a month). Only 7% of Americans say that they
watch news and information programming on PBS every day. In contrast, 34%
of the population can be categorized as a "consumer" of NPR news and
information programming, with 12% indicating that they listen every day.
o The sharpest bifurcation is between Republicans and Democrats. Approximately
one-in-three Republicans (35%) indicate that PBS news and information
programming has a liberal bias, while among Democrats this figure drops to 11 %.
NPR garners roughly the same numbers between these two groups.
· Fifty-three percent (53%) of Republicans are "consumers" of PBS and/or NPR
news and information programming as compared to 65% among Democrats.
However, taking news and information programming out of the equation and
looking at all areas of public broadcasting (e.g. educational programming,
children's programming, etc.), this latest survey finds that public broadcasting
usage levels between Republicans and Democrats are virtually identical (85%
and 87%, respectively).
o A small handful of Americans believe that the news and information programming on
public broadcasting has a conservative bias (12% for PBS and 9% for NPR).
o The plurality of the population feels that there is no apparent bias one way or the
other on PBS and NPR (48% and 38%, respectively), and then there is yet another
groups of individuals who simply say they are unsure when it comes to this issue.
o The war in Iraq (and public broadcasting's coverage of the war) did not have a major
impact on the public's perceptions of PBS and NPR. The "liberal bias" response for
PBS stood three percentage points higher in the November 2002 survey (24% then
as compared to 21 % now), and for NPR the "liberal bias" response is the same now
as it was in the pre-war survey (22%).
· Fewer than 15% of Americans say that PBS and NPR coverage of the war andlor
the Bush Administration is slanted.
o The reality is that most people do not feel that they have enough insight on this
matter to form an opinion.
o Even among "consumers" of news and information programming on public
broadcasting, anywhere from 43% to 58% of these "informed" individuals indicate
that they have no opinion on whether PBS and NPR coverage of the war in Iraq
and/or the Bush Administration is fair and balanced or slanted in one direction.
o The bottom line is that there is only a small percentage of the adult population that
believes PBS and NPR unfairly report about the war and the administration.
· People trust public television to deliver honest and in-depth news and information
programming.Hi
o Over 50% of Americans say that the news and information programming on PBS is
more trustworthy than the news and information programming from other sources,
.
Page - 59
like network television, Fox News Channel, and CNN. Fewer than 15% say that PBS
news and information programming is less trustworthy.
o Similar results are observed when respondents are asked if PBS news and
information programming is more in-depth and analytical than the news and
information programming on network television, Fox News Channel, and CNN.
· PBS and NPR score high marks on a wide variety of performance indicators that
stretch beyond news and information programming.
o Despite whatever perceptions people may have regarding news and information
programming on public broadcasting, the results from this latest survey would
suggest that most adults in this country generally approve of the work PBS and NPR
are doing. For example, 90% of respondents indicate that PBS provides high quality
programming and 92% say that PBS is a safe place for children to watch television.
o Survey respondents were presented with several different statements about PBS and
NPR and then asked whether they agreed or disagreed with each statement. The
following table highlights the results from this series and illustrates the strong
performance ratings that both organizations garner. The "agree" ratings for NPR are
consistently lower than those for PBS; however, this is because many people simply
say they are "unsure" - not because they disagree. This disparity can be attributed
to the fact that there are far more adults who never listen to NPR than there are
adults who never watch PBS, and therefore a larger percentage of people who have
no basis to form an opinion about NPR.
Do you agree or disagree with each of the PBS NPR
following statements about PBS I NPR? Aaree Disagree Agree Disaaree
PBS is a safe place for children to watch television because
of its non-violent, educational, commercial-free 92% 4% N/A N/A
proqramminq,
rPBS/NPRj provides hiqh quality proqrammina 90% 6% 61% 9%
rPBS/NPRj is a valuable cultural resource 89% 7% 62% 11%
[PBS/NPR] programs reflect the diversity and character of 80% 12% 54% 15%
America
rPBS/NPRl proqramminq is fair and balanced 80% 12% 55% 13%
It is important for the federal government to support
[PBS1NPR] financially so that it can be offered to local 78% 17% 70% 17%
communities free of charqe to its
· Public broadcasting is something that most Americans feel good about and value.
o The overwhelming majority of adults in this country (80%) say that they have a
favorable impression of PBS and NPR as a whole.
o Additionally, there are several indicators throughout the survey that demonstrate the
extent to which the public values public broadcasting. For example, only one-in-ten
Americans (10%) would say that a per capita expenditure of $1.30 in taxpayer funds
is "too much" for the government to be spending on public broadcasting. Nearly half
(48%) say the amount is "too little" and roughly one-third (35%) say the amount is
"about right."
I
~
.
Page - 60
.
Even among those who believe that that PBS and/or NPR news and information
programming has a liberal bias, a clear majority of this subgroup of the
population (65% - 67%) still concedes that the current taxpayer expenditure on
public broadcasting is "too little" or "about right."
.
Fewer than 20% of Republicans say that the amount of government funds that
goes to public broadcasting is "too much," and among Democrats this figures
stands at only 2%.
# # #
These key findings are drawn from two different surveys, each consisting of telephone interviews with N=1 ,000 adults
18+ throughaut the United States. The margin af errar assaciated with a sample of this type is :t 3.1 %. The mast recent
survey was conducted June 29 - July 2, 2003. When applicable, results from this most recent survey are sometimes
compared to a similar survey that was conducted last year (November 11-14, 2002).
ii. Two focus groups were conducted in Louisville, KY on September 15, 2003 and two. focus groups were conducted in Salt
Lake Crty, UT on September 16,2003. To qualify for the focus groups, all participants believed that news and
information programming on PBS and/or NPR had a liberal bias. The groups contained a mix of regular 'consumers'
public broadcasting news and information programming as well as 'non-consumers.'
iii. Similar types of questians were nat asked abaut NPR.
~ I. :,
Page - 61
Internal Revenue Service
Date: September 30, 2005
Department of the Treasury
P. O. Box 2508
Cincinnati, OH 45201
COMMUNITY COMMUNICATIONS INC
11510 E COLONIAL DR
ORLANDO FL 32817-4605
Person to Contact:
Jamie Bowling 31-08346
Customer Service Representative
Toll Free Telephone Number:
877 -829-5500
Fax Number:
513-263-3756
Federal Identification Number:
59-6155012
Dear Sir or Madam:
This is in response to your request of September 30, 2005, regarding your organization's
tax-exempt status.
In November 1964 we issued a determination letter that recognized your organization as
exempt from federal income tax. Our records indicate that your organization is currently
exempt under section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Our records indicate that your organization is also classified as a public charity under
section 509(a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Our records indicate that contributions to your organization are deductible under section
170 of the Code, and that you are qualified to receive tax deductible bequests, devises,
transfers or gifts under section 2055, 2106 or 2522 of the Internal Revenue Code.
If you have any questions, please call us at the telephone number shown in the heading of
this letter.
Sincerely,
~'K J&fw
Janna K. Skufca, Director, TE/GE
Customer Account Services
V,. \.
~n:mmmrn
~umu~
2006
WMFE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Page - 62
CHAIR
Joy Barrett Sabol*
Vice President, Communications
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control
VICE CHAIR
Bill Sublette*
Partner
Law Offices of Sublette, Sanders & Sanders
Judy Albertson
Owner
Albertson-Peterson Art Consultants
David A. Auerbach, M.D.*
Medical Director, Neonatal Intensive & Newborn Services
Arnold Palmer Hospital
Andrew G. Davis
Sr. Charitable Advisor & Vice President
Wachovia Bank, NA
Judith M. Duda*
Raymond Gilley, President & CEO
Metro Orlando Economic Development Commission
Ted Hassen
Beat Kahli
PresidenUCEO, Avalon Associates
Martha Kessler
Bud Kirk, Partner
Rumberger, Kirk and Caldwell, P.A.
Arthur N. Litowitz, D.M.D., Managing Member
Central Florida Orthodontic Specialists
Joe D. Matheny
Attorney at Law
Jennifer Mooney
Group VP - Public Relations & Government Affairs
Bright House Networks
Ramon A. Ojeda
President
Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Metro Orlando
Tammy Paycer, Senior Vice PresidenU
Regional Sales & Marketing Consultant
SunTrust Bank of Central Florida
Paul C. Perkins, Jr.
Attorney
The Nation Law Firm
John Shearer, Executive Vice President
PBS&J
Bob Showalter* I Chairman
Showalter Flying Service
David Smuckler, M.D.
Internal Medicine Group
Stephen McKenney Steck*
Chief Executive Officer, WMFE
Ana Tangel-Rodriguez*, Attorney at Law/Owner
TangeJ-Rodriguez & Assoc.
Marjorie Bekaert Thomas., President
Ivanhoe Broadcast News, Inc.
D. Gary Williams, Managing Broker
Coldwell Banker Residential Real Estate Inc.
Areej Zufari, Chaplain
Adjunct Professor, Valencia Community College
*Member of WMFE Executive Committee
WMFE STAFF OFFICERS
Jose A. Fajardo
President & General Manager
Michael Crane
Vice President for Programming
Stephen McKenney Steck
Chief Executive Officer
Aida Vivona, SecretarylTreasurer and
Sr. Vice President for Administration & Technology
Catherine McManus
Vice President for Membership
Bethany Matt
Vice President for Marketing
16-H BOT Roster.doc