The Yavapai Community College convened yet another of its frequent secret (legal) executive meetings on Tuesday, February 13, to deliberate on acquiring additional property in Prescott. However, customary of such proceedings, the Community College has once again chosen to withhold any specifics regarding the purchase post-meeting.
County taxpayers will possibly be informed about the purchase only upon its finalization. The deliberate delay in disclosure is likely aimed at preempting any inquiries about the utilization of taxpayer funds—an aspect that neither the Governing Board nor the Community College executives seem eager to address preemptively.
OPINION. The phrase “democracy dies in darkness” is a powerful reminder of the vital role transparency plays in maintaining a healthy democratic system. In the context of the Yavapai Community College’s District Governing Board, this saying takes on a particularly poignant meaning. By shrouding their actions in secrecy and limiting public access to information, the Board is not just deviating from its previous commitment to transparency but is also demonstrating a troubling disregard for the principles of democracy.
Democracy thrives on informed citizenry, where decisions are made in the light of public scrutiny and with the involvement of those affected by these decisions. When a governing body like the Yavapai Community College’s District Governing Board starts to limit access to information, such as meeting minutes or video recordings, it impedes the community’s ability to stay informed and hold their leaders accountable. This lack of transparency can lead to a lack of trust in the institution, as residents may start to suspect that decisions are being made without their best interests in mind or in a manner that is not reflective of their collective will.
Furthermore, the Board’s actions could be seen as setting a dangerous precedent. If a public educational institution, which ideally should stand as a beacon of knowledge and enlightenment, starts to operate as an autocracy, it encourages similar practices in other public bodies. This erosion of openness and accountability can have a cascading effect, weakening the very foundations of democratic governance.
In Yavapai County, where the residents rely on their elected officials and public institutions to act in their best interest, the Board’s shift away from transparency is particularly alarming. It not only affects the immediate functioning of the College but also reflects on the broader health of democratic practices in the region. The residents of Yavapai County are thus being shown, perhaps unwillingly, the truth of the statement that “democracy dies in darkness,” as they witness the diminishing transparency of Yavapai Community College. This situation serves as a stark reminder of the constant vigilance required to safeguard democratic values and processes against the encroaching shadows of secrecy and unaccountability.
Below is the letter from the College telling the Blog it must make a formal statutory request using the College’s form if it wants to see a draft of the minutes (while ignoring the request for the videotape made by the Blog).
The book is free, political, and historical. It argues that for a half century there was economic educational discrimination practiced by the West Side of Yavapai County against the East side when creating and then developing Yavapai County Community College programs and facilities. There are those who no doubt will disagree. The book is now free and ready for you to download in pdf format. You should form your own opinion.
Please click on the link below and the complete 300 plus book will open. It can be read on-line or copied to your computer by right-clicking on the PDF file and then downloaded. (Please email the author any suggestions for corrections and if possible include links to any authority you may have found on the internet that support your suggestions.) Note, while the book is free, it is copyrighted.
It is now over a week (Thursday, January 25, 2024, noon) and the District Governing Board has yet to provide the public with a draft of the minutes of its January 16 workshop. Neither a written draft nor the video of the meeting has been posted.
It is noteworthy that the video of the workshop wasn’t released shortly after the meeting, which is a deviation from the standard practice established over the last decade. The publication of the video of a meeting was put in place to comply with Arizona’s Open Meeting Law three-day posting rule.
Speculations arose shortly after the January 16 meeting, fueled by unsubstantiated rumors about certain conversations that allegedly occurred during the meeting, which the Board might prefer to keep from the county residents. These rumors were compounded by the unusual decision not to post the unedited video of the meeting.
The validity of these rumors remains uncertain. There are questions about whether the Board and the College are apprehensive about what the residents might learn from the video. The absence of an unedited, uncut version of the meeting video leaves a great deal of room for speculation.