About everything that can be done to discourage citizen attendance at District Governing Board meetings is being done by the College and the Board, which explains apathy and disinterest

Editor: Robert E. Oliphant

OPINION:  During the March meeting of the Yavapai Community College District Governing Board, Chair Deb McCasland rightfully pointed out the sparse attendance of local residents at these gatherings. Her observation sheds light on a prevalent issue in contemporary society: the apathy of citizens towards civic engagement. However, several factors contribute to this phenomenon, especially when it comes to the Community College District Governing Board.

Lack of Media Notice for Board Meetings: One significant factor contributing to apathy is the lack of media notice regarding Board meetings. Unlike some governmental bodies in Yavapai County, the Board does not publish its agenda in local newspapers in advance of its meetings. Nor does it announce its agenda and any issues of importance that will be discussed on local radio stations. Citizens discover agenda items only when the agenda is posted on the Board website, which is usually one day before the meeting. This notice failure deprives citizens of crucial information about important issues to be discussed before a meeting, resulting in County residents being uninformed and disengaged.

 Abandonment of Local Television Coverage: Another example is how local television coverage of Board meetings has been abandoned. Prior to 2020-2021, Verde Valley Broadcasting televised Board meetings. Those meetings were shown on local television channels later in the week. However, without explanation, this practice was discontinued.

Reluctance Regarding Televised Board Meetings: A notable factor contributing to the apathy of citizens toward the Yavapai Community College District Governing Board is the apparent reluctance of College President Dr. Lisa Rhine to provide County residents with information about the College’s activities via televised Board meetings. In an unexpected twist for a higher education institution, Rhine expressed opposition to live-streaming coverage of Board meetings in January 2024. Her perspective was that the videos primarily served to assist staff in preparing accurate minutes. However, she believed that if made public, they could potentially be used to defame the College. Consequently, she advocated keeping them under cover. Despite Rhine’s stance, as of February 2024, the Board voted in favor of and has implemented live streaming of its meetings—a significant step toward transparency.

 Reluctance of College PR department to answer resident questions:  The Community College has a fairly large public relations department.  However, it has adopted a practice of not answering questions put to it by some residents or by avoiding direct answers in other instances.  This aids the College in keeping the public in the dark about its operations, thus fostering apathy.

 Lack of Interaction Between the Board and the Public: Another contributing factor to citizen apathy regarding the Governing Board lies in the limited interaction between Board members and the public. Some Board representatives have candidly admitted feeling ill-informed about the College, which prevents them from effectively discussing the College with their constituents. The lack of information  may explain why elected representatives rarely engage with civic groups and organizations to discuss matters related to the College, which only adds to apathy.

 Barriers to Public Discussion by Elected Representatives: Most residents are probably unaware of the absolute barrier existing for elected Governing Board members when it comes to discussing College operations. The College has strongly advocated strict limitations on Board representatives discussing “operations.” Operations make up about 95% of what the College does.  The representatives  fell for the College advocacy and adopted a policy preventing them from discussing any Community College action deemed an “operation.”  As a result of this restrictive policy, the elected representatives have tied their hands in terms of what they can say to the public. (So much for the First Amendment.) This no doubt contributes in a big way to the prevailing apathy surrounding the District Governing Board meetings. 

Lack of detailed monthly reports from the Community College president: A major failure on the part of the Governing Board is to request a detailed monthly report from the President regarding operations at each campus and center.  If the Board were concerned about reducing apathy and providing constituents with information, such reporting would be at the top of its agenda.  Residents in Prescott Valley, Chino Valley, Sedona, Cottonwood, and other areas remain largely uninformed about the operations of the Community College at their local centers or campuses. The Board’s failure to ensure transparent communication on a regular basis about operations leaves citizens in the dark. Why should they not know what is unfolding in their educational community?

Perhaps the Board members are grappling with distinguishing between requesting monthly operations reports and interfering with day-to-day activities. It is crucial to recognize that regular reporting does not equate to micromanagement. Instead, it empowers the community by providing insight into College operations.

Presently, the only available operations information stems from data accompanying proposed budgets. However, this falls short of the comprehensive understanding needed for informed decision-making.  By advocating for detailed monthly reports from each campus and center, the Board can bridge the information gap, foster transparency, and actively engage residents in the College’s vital affairs.

Limited access to Board representatives: Constituents in Yavapai County have limited access to their elected Governing Board members, as they lack local offices and staff. Communication is primarily through the Board website, where emails often go unanswered. This detachment from local communities throughout the County fosters a sense of disconnection and alienation among citizens, further reducing their motivation to participate in Governing Board meetings.

Does College prefer apathy? Interestingly, it may be that the Community College executives  may actually  prefer citizen apathy when it comes to the Verde Valley and other more rural areas of the County. Citizen apathy may serve as a convenient means of maintaining the status quo and preserving the College’s control over what it wants to do without outside resident interference of any kind. By discouraging active citizen engagement, the Community College operates with less scrutiny and accountability, advancing its agendas without significant opposition or oversight. Therefore, the College’s behavior  may subtly perpetuate conditions conducive to citizen apathy, such as limited media coverage, minimal community involvement, lack of reporting, and uninspiring civic programs outside Prescott.

In conclusion, there are major barriers that have been erected by the College and the District Governing Board to allow the free and open transmission of information to the public.  Unless these issues are addressed, apathy will remain high and citizen knowledge about the College will remain low. Maybe that is just what the College and the Governing Board want. If so, their behavior is a self-fulfilling prophecy when it comes to apathy.

So, the Blog has provided what may have avoided them in their education in the following short opinion essay followed by a short series of questions to test their understanding of the role of a free press in a democracy.

Editor: Robert E. Oliphant

OPINION:  It has become clear that some members of the Yavapai Community College District Governing Board and Community College President Dr. Lisa Rhine may have forgotten (or never knew) the basic reasons a free press functions in a free society. At least that is what one gleans from their recent behavior.

For example, in January one Board member referred to  the Blog and the Redrock News as the “enemy” with the apparent agreement of another. Also in January, Community College president  Dr. Lisa Rhine was working behind the scenes to prevent any video record of a Board meeting being easily made accessible to the public. The Community College’s press department has refused on occasion to either reply or to answer questions put to it by the Blog. Both recent Third District Yavapai Community College Governing Board members (Mr. Chevalier, former member, and Mr. Payne, present representative) have had to resort to the Arizona Public Records law to get information from the College. The College has refused to answer questions put to it by the Red Rock News. One Board member has suggested the press has lied about him but has produced no public evidence in support of that claim.

So, the Blog offers this short essay, prepared by Blog editor Robert Oliphant,  explaining the vital role of the Blog and the Red Rock News (and other news outlets)  in reporting on the Tax-Supported 100 Million dollar Yavapai Community College.

Introduction: In the fabric of democratic societies, the press, including local newspapers and the Blog, serve as a cornerstone, with their  role extending beyond mere dissemination of information to actively shaping public discourse and holding Yavapai Community College accountable. Tax-supported educational entities, like the Community College, hold a unique position. The local press plays a crucial role in accurately reporting on its  activities, ensuring transparency, accountability, and the maintenance of democratic values. This essay explores the significance of the local press and the Blog in reporting on Yavapai Community College and explains why their role is indispensable to the sustenance of democracy.

First: First and foremost, tax-supported educational entities like Yavapai Community College, owe  their reliance on public funds and carry an overwhelming responsibility to serve the public interest. The residents of Yavapai County have entrusted the Community College with nurturing intellect, advancing knowledge, and fostering critical thinking, all of which are vital for the functioning of a democratic society. However, without effective oversight, there exists a risk of mismanagement, corruption, or deviation from its core mission. Herein lies the critical role of the local newspapers and the Blog. Through investigative journalism and impartial reporting, the Red Rock News (and other media) and the Blog  serve as watchdogs, scrutinizing the operations of the College  and bringing any discrepancies to light. By exposing instances of financial impropriety, academic misconduct, or administrative malpractice, the Red Rock News  (and other media) and the Blog act as a catalyst for accountability, ensuring that tax dollars are utilized efficiently and ethically.

Second: Moreover, the local press plays a pivotal role in promoting transparency within this  tax-supported educational entity. Transparency is indispensable for maintaining public trust and facilitating informed decision-making. When the Community College and its Governing Board  operate behind closed doors, shielded from public scrutiny, it erodes the very foundation of democracy. By actively engaging in investigative reporting, the Red Rock News (and other media) and the Blog  shed light on the inner workings of the Community College, unveiling hidden agendas, conflicts of interest, and decision-making processes. Through access to information laws and investigative journalism, the press holds the Community College accountable for its actions, and in turn foster a culture of openness and accountability.

Third: Furthermore, the Red Rock News and the Blog (and other local media) serve as a conduit for amplifying diverse voices within the educational landscape in the County. Yavapai Community College  is not a monolithic entity; it  encompasses a myriad of perspectives, ideologies, and interests. However, without robust media coverage, certain voices may be marginalized or silenced. The press plays a crucial role in amplifying diverse perspectives, shedding light on issues such as academic freedom, diversity, equity, and inclusion. By providing a platform for dissenting voices and marginalized communities, the goal is to  enrich public discourse and foster a more inclusive educational environment.

Fourth: Beyond the confines of Yavapai Community College, the role of the press in reporting on the tax-supported Yavapai Community College  extends to its broader implications for democracy. An informed citizenry is the bedrock of democracy, and access to accurate information is essential for citizen participation and engagement. When the Red Rock News or the Blog (or other media) fail to hold educational institutions accountable or neglect to report on issues of public concern, it undermines the democratic process. Conversely, when the local press fulfills its role as a watchdog, it empowers local citizens to make informed decisions and to  hold elected District Governing Board officials accountable.

Conclusion: In conclusion, the Red Rock News (and other local media) and the Blog  play a vital role in accurately reporting on the activities of Yavapai Community College. By serving as a watchdog, promoting transparency, amplifying diverse voices, and empowering citizens, we  uphold democratic values and ensure accountability within the Community College. In an era marked by increasing scrutiny of public institutions and growing demands for transparency, the role of the Red Rock News (other media) and the Blog  in safeguarding democracy has never been more critical. As guardians of the public interest, the news media must continue to fulfill their duty with diligence, integrity, and unwavering commitment to truth.

SELF TEST: Having read the essay, you may now test your understanding of the role of the free press in Yavapai County by answer the following questions:

• What is the role of the press, including local newspapers and blogs, in democratic societies, particularly concerning tax-supported educational entities like Yavapai Community College?

• Why is it important for tax-supported educational institutions to be transparent in their operations?

• How do local newspapers and blogs act as watchdogs over Yavapai Community College?

• What potential risks are associated with tax-supported educational entities operating without effective oversight?

• How do journalists promote transparency within Yavapai Community College?

• Why is amplifying diverse voices within the educational landscape considered crucial, and how do local newspapers and blogs contribute to this goal?· What broader implications does the role of the press in reporting on tax-supported educational entities have for democracy?

Does the current appointive process lend itself to a preference that the Board function more like an exclusive club rather than a diverse and representative body that accurately represents the interests of all County residents?

Editor: Robert Oliphant

OPINION: When applying to fill the vacant Third District Yavapai Community College District Governing Board seat, it is important for the applicant to be mindful of the potential veto power held by individual Board members. This is because Tim Carter, who makes the final appointment, will be formally asking for each member’s views about a candidate prior to the final selection.  If a Board member expresses strong negative views regarding a candidate, it may, and most likely will, impact that candidate’s  chance of being appointed.

Why should a west-county Board member have this kind of potential ex officio veto power over a prospective candidate from the Third District? After all,  not a single current Board member  lives in Sedona or the Verde Valley. Moreover, Mr. Carter already has an independent committee that will make recommendations to him made up of people who, it is assumed, reflect the values and views of most in the Verde Valley.

Observers who have closely monitored the Board’s proceedings over the years may recall instances where members from the west county expressed notably negative opinions towards Paul Chevalier, particularly during his active advocacy for Sedona and the Verde Valley. Despite this, Mr. Chevalier, a lawyer, had the courage to stand his ground. Throughout his four years on the Board, he  remained a dedicated and well-informed watchdog for Sedona and the Verde Valley  in matters related to the Community College.

It is suspected that some of the current Board members will aim to prevent the selection of a candidate who possesses characteristics similar to those of Mr. Chevalier.  For these members, the ideal new representative will be someone who will strictly and silently abide by all of the Governing Board formal and informal rules. That representative will also avoid at all costs publicly expressing concerns about underfunding or underdevelopment in Sedona and the Verde Valley. Furthermore, the new representative must fit the mold of avoiding asking challenging questions regarding the distribution of limited resources, which have disproportionately favored the Prescott side of Mingus Mountain for over five decades.

The County Education District’s statement regarding the formal involvement of non-resident Board members in the appointment of a Third District Representative provides evidence to suggest that they may possess significant ex officio veto power in the selection process. Here is what that portion of the announcement says regarding the process and Governing Board input:

Prior to making the final selection, the Superintendent will meet separately with each of the currently seated Yavapai College Board Members for their input on the finalists. Members of the public from District 3, will also have an opportunity to email their views of the candidates to Mr. Carter or to meet personally with him for a 10-minute meeting from noon to 4 pm on Thursday, March 9th at the Sedona Campus of Yavapai College after the finalists have been announced.

Anyone can, of course, provide Mr. Carter with his or her views on any candidate.   The problem here is that using a formal process of precisely seeking out the views of Board members prior to the final appointment has the appearance of providing them with too much ex officio veto power in the overall process. That, is seems to me, is a concern.