In a County the size of Israel with faculty, students, thousands of elderly, disabled and others working full time having an interest in the tax supported College Board decisions, it has suspended live video streaming of its meetings. The Board Chair says wait for video to be posted in the future  and that’s enough|  The May video, for example, was posted four months later at the end of September and that’s apparently ok

Yavapai County covers 8,125 square miles and compares in size with Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island and New Jersey.  It is about the size of the nation of Israel. It is only slightly smaller than Maricopa, County, Arizona. Maricopa covers 9,224 square miles and is the fourth largest county in the United States.

The County is divided by the Black Hills mountain range that runs west and east with Mingus mountain creating a natural physical barrier between the two sides of the County. There are few roads connecting the concentrated population centers in the west region of the County with the more rural areas in the east. For many, the most direct route in the east region to the west region is a single-lane alternate highway 89-A. It somewhat perilously crawls over Mingus Mountain at 7,815 feet.

During the winter, passage using highway 89A over the mountain range can be dangerous because of ice and snow packed roads. There is no public or private transportation between the east and west sides of the County.

The College has invested thousands of dollars on expensive television equipment, renovating the Rock House in part specifically for tv,  and has asked for thousands more to create a tv facility on the Prescott Campus.  Despite the taxpayer investment, purchase of equipment, and availability of easy live broadcasting on the College’s YouTube channel of its handful of yearly meeting, the District Governing Board, according to its Chair, has decided to no longer live-stream the events. That leaves  faculty, students, interested residents, and especially those with disabilities in the dark waiting until  the video is eventually posted at a time when memories may have faded and important actions taken without resident knowledge have been made.

In some cases, such as the May 2022 budget meeting, the video of the Board meeting was not posted to the website until four months after the meeting in late September. Think of that!

Late posting allows the College Board and the College itself to spread and sculpture their views of what transpired at a Board meeting.  The Board can rely on declining interest in a topic over time to accommodate their lag in producing the video or posting detailed minutes for public review.

 If you are in the know about how to eventually find a Board video before it is actually posted to the website, and only a few in the County are, the College will send you a link to the video a few days after it was held. But you must wait. You also must know that your request needs to be sent to the College President’s administrative assistant.  Of course, this information is kept from the public because nowhere on the Board website or anywhere else is the public informed of how to obtain a link to the video.  

District Governing Board Chair Deb McCasland

Third District Governing Board Representative Paul Chevalier, who is concerned that matters not be so easily covered up from residents by the College and Board, recently asked the Board Chair the reason the live streaming had ceased.  The Chair replied: “With our meetings open to the public now that there are no Covid restrictions, we are not live streaming our meetings on uTube. UTube was a Covid accommodation for the Open Meeting Law.  The meetings are still being recorded and can be requested through Yvonne or view it on the college website as we have done for many years.”

The Chair may not realize that the Videos are not promptly posted after a meeting, but are posted on the Board website only after minutes are approved.  This may be months following a meeting. The Chair may also not realize that there is no information posted on the Board website so that members of the public, faculty or students  know to whom and how to request a link to the video. The Chair may not realize that the videos are not available until three business days after the meeting has passed, even if you know where to find them.

Mr. Chevalier’s initial request that the College live stream the handful of Board meetings  was turned down by the Chair. He wrote in an email to the Chair asking for reconsideration and saying that:

Third District Representative Paul Chevalier

“People find it quicker and more convenient than waiting for and getting into our videos. . . .  I am aware of City Councils in our county that regularly stream their meetings through YouTube. Is that difficult or expensive for us to do? If not, I believe it would be a good service to the interested public we serve. Please reconsider.”

The Chair indicated there would not be reconsideration.

Mr. Chevalier noted in his emails to the Chair that the County can expect “more covid cases this winter,” which apparently had no effect.  

In the end, the District Governing Board continues to draw a curtain of semi-secrecy about its proceedings.  Unlike in the past, agendas are posted to the Governing Board website without attachments; they are as short as possible. PowerPoint slides, once always posted to the Board website prior to Board meetings, are no longer posted.  Minutes of the meetings themselves are summary and do not contain important comments from various Board members.  Videos that are being produced with sometimes defective sound, poor lighting, interviews with the public without aueio, and overall poor video production.  PowerPoint slides being used by a speaker may not appear anywhere on video (or in draft minutes). 

It’s hard to believe that a Governing Board of a Community College has yet to recognize it’s the 21 century. And, that it is regressing to the 19^th century in record keeping and accountability.

Or, is the College and this Governing Board  simply trying to run from accountability to students, faculty, and the residents of Yavapai County?

Majority says video of Board minutes is sufficient record of what members say as ironically mikes fail to pick up members speaking during parts of meeting;  efficiency wins out over  “man hours” and producing more detailed paper record of Board minutes

The Governing Board’s long agenda and overworked administrative staff have caused the minutes of Board meetings to be shorter  and more succinct than in the past.  They no longer, for example,  contain brief summaries of positions taken by Board members. This has been a concern of Representative Ray Sigafoos. 

Ray Sigafoos

Representative Sigafoos urged the Board to adopt a policy that would require the minutes to contain in brief summary fashion relevant comments and positions taken by Board members during a Board meeting. He viewed a paper record as a more reliable historical record of various decisions made by the Governing Board.

Representative Chevalier agreed with Mr. Sigafoos regarding adding relevant comments and  in addition argued he was concerned with equality as  some Board member comments were included in the minutes but  some of his comments were not.  (See video tape link in re this discussion.)

A majority (Ms. McCasland, Mr. Padilla, Mr. Kuknyo) disagreed.  Mr. Padilla argued that a video recording of the meeting was sufficient for historical purposes.  When he weighed the number of hours it might take for an administrator to properly prepare minutes that included relevant summaries of positions taken by Board members against the availability of a video record, he came out on the side of the video record and administrative efficiency.  His arguments carried the day.

On the question of treating comments of Board members equally, the majority decided to remove comments from a May 17 meeting made by Mr. Sigafoos rather than include the comments of Mr. Chevalier made at the same meeting.

You may view the video of the meeting and discussion on this issue with audio missing in part because of microphone failure by clicking here.

No one filed for the District 2 seat in the upcoming November election other than McCasland

Yavapai Community College District Governing Board Chair Deb McCasland will remain on the Board for another six year term, beginning in January 2023.  McCasland’s current term ends this year. 

Board Chair Deb McCasland

Because no one other than McCasland filed for the District 2 Governing Board seat, she will remain on the Board for the next six years.

McCasland’s Yavapai County District (precinct) includes:  Aqua Fria, Beaver Creek, Camp Verde 1 and 2, Canyon, Cherry Creek, Cordes Lakes, Cornville, Crown King, Humboldt, Mayer, Middle Verde, Montezuma, Prescott Country Club, Stoneridge, Sugarloaf and Verde Lakes.

Of the five members on the Governing Board, McCasland’s seat was the only one up for election this year.  

Will become Justice of the Peace for the Prescott District in 2023, which makes him no longer eligible to hold a seat on the Board

Attorney Mitch Padilla will be leaving the Yavapai Community College District Governing Board at the end of this year.   He was sworn in to become a Board member on January 13, 2021. 

Mitch Padilla

Padilla won the primary election August 2 as a Republican against two other Republican candidates.  Because there was  no Democrat primary opponent, there will be no contest in the November general election. Padilla will take the seat as Justice of the Peace in January.

 Padilla served two years of a six year term on the District Board.  He represents District 5, which consists of Castle, Diamond Valley, Glassford, Granville, Groom Creek, Horseshoe, Lynx Creek, Mountain View, Prescott Valley 1/Navajo, Prescott Valley 2, Pronghorn View, Roundup, Superstition, and Yavapai Hills.

It is anticipated that the County Superintendent of Schools will appoint someone from District 5 to serve out the remainder of Padilla’s term.

Board Chair says items Chevalier wanted discussed based on March open call public comments were not appropriate Board matters but issues for President;  Chevalier asks that those matters not within President’s ambit be discussed at May  Board meeting

It’s sometimes tough, if not impossible,  to get an agenda item placed on the Governing Board agenda for discussion.  It’s even tougher to find a public way of getting a response from the Administration to concerns raised by citizens at various Board meetings if they are not discussed at a Board meeting.  Citizens are left pretty much in the dark without a public response from anyone.

Third District Representative Paul Chevalier

The difficulty of getting a particular item publicly discussed by the Community College Governing Board was illustrated  by the recent actions of Third District Community College Representative Paul Chevalier.

At the March 2022 Governing Board meeting in Sedona several citizens raised  a number of issues during the Open Call to the public. There was, of course, no response from the Governing Board to them at that time because they weren’t on an agenda.

Also at the March meeting, immediately following the citizen comments, Mr. Chevalier specifically requested that an agenda item be added to the April agenda so several of the citizen comments, 27 of them,  could be addressed by the Board. (Click here to view a video clip of Mr. Chevalier making the March request.)

Prior to  the April meeting, Mr. Chevalier spoke with the Governing Board Chair. She explained that “our agenda was full with Board matters. I had a conversation with you that we only discuss Board business and that is why it’s not on this agenda.” When Chevalier asked if the Chair would put the item on the next agenda, the Chair replied: “I think I told you that a lot of your request was not Board business.”  Chevalier then responded that he once again was formally requested that those items that were raised by the public at the March meeting that are Board matters be placed on the May agenda.  (Click here to view a video clip of Mr. Chevalier making the April request.)  

The Board meeting then moved on without further discussion. 

Exercising his right under Board policy, Chevalier asked Board Chair to place on the agenda for the next meeting discussion and possible action regarding statements and requests made by the public at the March 22 meeting | Published agenda for April does not clearly show such an item was placed there and will be discussed

Third District Paul Chevalier made an unusual request at the March 22 Governing Board meeting in Sedona.  He asked that the Governing Board Chair, Deb McCasland, pursuant to Board policy 34.33, place on the “next” agenda an item for discussion and possible action that focuses on the statements and requests made by the public during open call at the Sedona meeting. (See video clip below.)

Chevalier commented that “when members of the public come to speak to the Governing Board during open call, that the Board members should carefully consider what they said. After all,” he continued, “the public took the time” to attend the Board meeting and “what they say should not be ignored” by the Board.

An examination of the summary agenda posted by the Governing Board for the April meeting does not appear to include this item.  Possibly, it will be raised at a later time, or the agenda will be altered prior to Tuesday’s meeting to allow discussion and possible action on Mr. Chevalier’s request.

A short video clip of Mr. Chevalier’s request appears below.