Another project not openly discussed at Board meetings used for construction rather than scholarships, improved educational programming or increased staff and faculty salaries
Commentary by Bob Oliphant
The almost complete renovation of the Community College Rock House on the Prescott Campus meeting building may come as a surprise if you attend a monthly Board meeting there. During this summer, the Rock House was completely remodeled at a cost of thousands of dollars to County taxpayers.
Having attended almost every Board meeting over the past six years at the Rock House, the Blog found the facility was in good condition before the newest renovation began. Furthermore, the Blog cannot recall the need for the complete renovation of this building being publicly discussed with the Governing Board at a public Governing Board meeting.
Finally, the Blog cannot locate the estimated cost of the project in the budget submitted to the Board in May. Apparently, it does not exist in a form that the public can understand.
There certainly was no critical need to pour thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of dollars of County property taxes into the facility. This is a huge waste of taxpayer money that could be better used for scholarships, improved educational programs, or to increase staff and faculty salaries.
It is, however, another of the many examples vividly showing how the Governing Board fails in its financial oversight obligation and current President plows millions of taxpayer dollars into unnecessary but nice construction projects. Meanwhile, while spending $75 million or more the last few years, taxpayers have seen enrollment plunge by 5,000 students by actual headcount. That’s around one-third fewer students on campus. Does this construction spending spree make any sense to anyone?
The renovation included design costs, installation of a sophisticated electronic lighting, new state-of-the art built-in video recording system, plush carpet, new mechanical work, etc.
Back in 2009 the Rock House was completely renovated, and the cost associated with it to be recouped, at least in part, by renting the facility to outside organizations. The College did not supply the Governing Board or the public with any indication of the success or failure of the business plan adopted in 2009.
What most County citizens don’t know is that the College administration does not need to justify to County voters or seek their approval for the massive construction/renovation projects it is using their primary property tax revenue to pay for. In the distant past, the College had to seek General Obligation Bond approval from voters before embarking on capital projects. When seeking the bonds, the Administration had to justify the expenditure of the millions of dollars and imposition of a secondary property tax to pay for them. Because of the budgetary scheme the Administration created, that kind of accountability to voters no longer exists. (All the Administration needs is to persuade the highly political Governing Board three west county representatives to vote for the annual budget and the spending spree continues. This group has approved every request from the College since at least 2012.) 
