I’ve been told that it’s “ridiculous” to suggest that the Arts Council board members over the past year or two be fingerprinted in order to clear them of any suspicion of the vandalism that occurred there on election night, so let me clarify:
The purpose of fingerprinting Board members is to clear them, and to avoid any appearance of impropriety. That’s it. That’s all. I think a joint effort to step up looks good and makes a positive statement of solidarity.
I don’t believe board members should be forced to comply; I think they ought to just step up, and I’m certainly willing to do so. My suggesting that course of action in my previous post was apparently not well-taken, but it’s not exactly the first time my talking about the VAAC or what I as a member think should happen there has got people upset with me.
There have been some information updates to that original post in the comments section with the help of at least one current board member, so that correct information about what happened that night can be distributed throughout the community.
I think the membership and community should know about the break-in, in case anyone saw anything that night. The membership certainly ought to know that their property has been damaged, but thusfar there’s nothing on the VAAC website about it.
The property damaged belongs to the membership. We all have a stake in it, and we shouldn’t have to rely on third-person reports (including mine) to know what’s going on.
Luckily, the damage that occurred on Tuesday evening isn’t irreparable, and now that the police have gathered the information they need, it sounds like the current board has already been at work cleaning up.
The thought among those I’ve heard from on the board is that a “troubled youth” may have committed this crime, and there is hope that the culprit, if identified, would be assigned to community servce in order to transfer their anger into positive action instead.
So far, that’s all I know. I’ll post again on the matter if I hear anything new.