While the analogy comparing University of Idaho Extension programs and its clientele to dead, stinking deer carcasses was an attention grabber (see "A smell test for funding" July 31, Cd'A Press), local citizens deserve to know the whole story so they can make informed decisions.

It is true that Extension is not a legislatively mandated service. Instead, it is a cooperatively funded, three-way partnership between Federal, State and County entities. Cooperative Extension Service is not only a county department. But it is a vital segment of Idaho's land grant institution, the University of Idaho. It is from this forged partnership that educational research based information, programs, and activities utilize federal, state, and county funding. Programs are designed to meet the needs of local citizens to help enhance their quality of life.

The most recent fiscal year data shows Kootenai County contribution is $161,090 plus office space and utilities contributions. Budget determination is more than just one set of numbers. The County Clerk and Commissioners should consider the dollar multiplier effect for return of investment along with the social goods to citizens through volunteer master gardeners and 4-H leaders. The University of Idaho reports for each dollar Kootenai County invested in Extension there is a return of $2.88. When the value of volunteer hours is factored in, return per dollar is considerably increased.

For simplicity of discussion, prior to the proposed funding cuts, each partner has been contributing one third of the Extension budget. However, our newly elected County Clerk Cliff Hayes initially proposed withdrawing all County partnership contributions, but announced in a July 29 Coeur d'Alene Press article that he had amended his position to providing $130,000 - due to citizen feedback. However, his comments in "On Second Thought" (July 29 edition), makes it clear his long-term goal is to eliminate local Extension funding. Ironically, Mr. Hayes believes the University of Idaho should continue to provide these programs even though the local partner is no longer willing to pay their fair share. Let's think this through.

Imagine you and two other partners were in business together. Suddenly one partner no longer wanted to contribute anything yet still wanted to garner a vast majority of all benefits derived from that partnership. Would you and your other paying partner honestly bankroll this other non-paying partner indefinitely and provide them with most of the partnership proceeds? I doubt you would - yet our County Clerk thinks the University of Idaho should. This logic defies common sense.

So what do the residents of Kootenai County actually lose if Mr. Hayes ultimately gets his way? Educational programs helping thousands of low-income individuals/families plus senior citizens, improve physical and nutritional health; affordable training for a growing diabetic population to maintain personal well-being. Research shows that such preventative, self-management education reduces health care costs $8.76 for each dollar invested. Apparently our County Clerk believes it is fiscally responsible to eliminate preventative, non-mandated Extension programs so that we taxpayers can potentially pay eight times as much for County Assistance and Indigent care, simply because those services are mandated.

Despite Mr. Hayes' and Coeur d'Alene Press's editorial staff perceptions, if Extension in Kootenai County no longer exists, neither does 4-H. What these individuals fail to understand is that 4-H is the youth development component within Extension. The name and emblem is just one of three that are protected under Federal law (along with the presidential seal and Olympic rings).

I seriously doubt the University of Idaho Extension would authorize use of the 4-H name and emblem to a county that has eliminated a partnership that has spanned nearly 95 years. Extensive research studies have shown that youth involved in 4-H programs were 50 percent less likely to engage in at-risk, destructive personal behaviors (drinking, drugs, smoking, criminal actions, etc.) than their peers - yes, even those in other fine youth organizations. 4-H members gain valuable leadership, citizenship, communication and related life-skills enabling them to be active, contributing members of their respective communities. As local juvenile justice numbers and costs continue to rise, does it really make sense to cut one non-mandated program that has significantly positive results so we taxpayers can pay much more in juvenile related costs - just because they are mandated?

Similar impacts can likely be identified within our local Extension office's other educational program offerings. Recognizing that the Extension budget accounts for less than one-quarter of one percent (0.22 percent) of the entire County budget, it is one of the best deals that local citizens could ask for. As for the debate regarding mandated vs. non-mandated, I find it interesting that mandated services are typically those which citizens are forced to comply with. In contrast, most non-mandated services are those which we personally value and choose to participate in of our own free will - not because some law was passed requiring us to do so. Do we really need government telling us everything that's best for us - or can good old common sense lead the way?

I certainly hope that our County Commissioners can see the tremendous benefit local Extension programs provide to homeowners and professional community. Really we are talking about seeing long-term economic savings that Extension provides to each of us as taxpayers. If so, then they will have the courage to fully restore Extension's funding. As Benjamin Franklin stated "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." I for one would prefer paying a few taxes and receive beneficial results for my community by investing in non-mandated Extension programs than paying 4 to 8 times more in other county mandated services.

The Cd'A Press analogy about foul smelling items served to raise readers' awareness there are consequences. Often unintended happenings occur by not asking the "what if questions" in the decision making process.

Ivan Archer, a former Cooperative Extension Service Youth Specialist and Extension Administrator, now lives in Post Falls. He can be reached at [email protected]