Does Arizona Statute 15-1444 mean that the cost of dozens of events put on primarily for enjoyment of retirees in Prescott area must fully reimburse the Community College for their use of the PAC including maintenance and other indirect costs? Or, can the College continue to subsidize them in some form, using taxpayer funds, if necessary?
The Performing Arts Center (PAC) on the Prescott Campus is home to dozens of performances that are enjoyed primarily by retirees in the Prescott area. These include dance, movies, music, comedy, and theatre by touring groups and individuals. (Click here for information about upcoming events.) It is also used by the College for several of its programs.
It is estimated that the annual maintenance fee for the Performing Arts Center is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Possibly as much as $450,000, the figure used during the retreat. However, it is now known that the performances do not pay anything toward the maintenance—the College shoulders the entire burden. The College is also a backstop and may provide a subsidy for direct expenses should ticket sales for the noncollege events not cover the contract costs of the performers.
Representative Paul Chevalier
A concern was raised by representative Paul Chevalier during Tuesday’s retreat about the meaning of an Arizona statute, 15-1444. That statute outlines the general powers and duties of the Community College Board. In part its reads that a Governing Board “Shall . . . (2) Adopt policies in a public forum to offer programs that meet the educational needs of the population served by the community college.” (emphasis added)
The concern is that the dozens of programs, primarily for the entertainment of the Prescott area retirees, fails to come within the educational mandate of the state statute. In other words, not a penny of taxpayer money can be used in support of them.
Mr. Chevalier outlined his concern as follows:
“The Governing Board authority is set forth in Arizona revised Statute 15-1444. The language is clear and detailed. There is no provision in this law allowing the Governing Board to approve money for cultural venues, i.e. the Performing Arts Center. Our Board’s mandate is to provide education.
“In addition to the illegality, it is a serious misuse of the taxpayers money to spend millions of dollars on venues like the Performing Arts Center in Prescott whose use, in fact, is limited to the affluent people of Prescott City and nearby. The vast majority of our taxpayers are not affluent. Over 30% are poor. Most live a fair distance from Prescott. They cannot afford the money or the time to go to events at the performing arts center even if they wanted to. They, no doubt, would prefer the Board eliminate this perk for the affluent of Prescott and nearby and everyone’s taxes be reduced proportionally.”
It appeared during the retreat the Board attorney, Ms. Lynne Adams, considered the issue raised by Mr. Chevalier to be serious enough to trigger a possible opinion from her law firm. However, during the discussion, Representative Pat McCarver asked Mr. Chevalier to withdraw his request (or claim). She expressed a fear that if the matter were litigated, the outcome would be problematic.” Mr. Chavlier agreed to tentatively withdraw the issue until the group met again in a few weeks.
However, as Chair Ray Sigafoos observed, Mr. Chavlier may have opened “a can of worms.”