| 0:00:45 | A non-meeting before the meeting | Whitney: "Before we move on to our first order of business, there has been a request from our legal counsel to have a non meeting before the meeting. Progressive. So unfortunately, we'll have to ask you folks to just be patient with us and till we finish our business and be back." No statute was cited on the record and none is quoted in the minutes. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:01:46 | By-laws to consent; two-thirds to amend | Whitney: "That said, if anybody had a desire to amend the bylaws, that would require two thirds vote… We've been we've been bumping that along because our meetings have been so full." She then moved by-law approval into the consent agenda "and keep the meeting probably within the two hour limit tonight." The by-laws (Exhibits D and E) were adopted by consent without discussion on the record. | |
| 0:06:01 | A second donation "over $1,000" | Simoneau: "The one donation that we received from the anonymous donor is over $1,000, and that needs school board approval. Okay. From what we've heard." Whitney: "Got it in the consent agenda, which we're going to get." The consent agenda and the minutes itemize only the $4,000 Byrnes gift; the anonymous donation and a Cornish Fair donation appear in the minutes' narrative but in no motion. The board then discovered mid-discussion that it had said the $4,000 donors' names aloud despite their request for anonymity — Whitney: "Bleach in our ears and pretend it never happened?" The names appear in the approved public minutes. | MEDIUM |
| 0:19:21 | Henry opens: "this current administration was not here during this time" | Henry, by Zoom: "So I want to start off by saying, when I came on board here two years ago, I was tasked with getting our audits caught up in the more financials organized, putting in places, procedures and things of that nature. The things I'm going to talk about, though, I want to make sure everybody understands this current administration was not here during this time." | |
| 0:19:46 | FY2020: the money that went back | Henry: "to move on fiscal year 20, we have run into an issue with opposites [deficits] in fiscal year 20 and 21 because of the money that had been returned to taxpayers and error. In fiscal year 20, we should have had $966,213 in the surplus. Instead, we sent back 1.7 million $31 and 1.7 million $31,546 [$1,731,546]. So that left our actual deficit of seven $765,333." She attributed it at 0:20:29 to "our DOF 25 [DOE-25] and the miss 25 [MS-25] that goes forward and goes to the to set the tax rate." | MEDIUM |
| 0:20:54 | FY2021 and the two-year total | Henry: "We gave back to much the next year in 21. We had $133,150 in surplus. And we gave back 1.4 million $56,960 [$1,456,968]. So this actually puts us in an overall deficit for those two years of $2,000,089 and $160,089,152 [$2,089,152]. I just want everybody to understand that procedures have been put in place for this not to happen again." The clean figures are the minutes'; the spoken figures garble badly and are quoted here as spoken. | MEDIUM |
| 0:21:43 | Grants spent but never claimed | Henry: "I don't want to say made errors, but that's what's happened. We've had grant monies that were spent but never claimed. And of course, grants flows out in a certain period of time. So if you don't claim them within that certain period of time, they have to be written off to your general budget, which is the budget that returns." At 0:26:13 Pratt: the money "came out of the local budget, when it should have been… allocated to a… grant". Henry, minutes and transcript agreeing: when she started the district was "18 months behind on some of our grants on claims." | MEDIUM |
| 0:22:27 | Audit timetable, and this year's trust withdrawals | Henry: "We hope to have all our audits completed by the October or November of this year, with the exception of 24, but we're getting there slowly but surely. And again, this is adding to our deficit. We have this year, which we had just taken some money out of our, our trust funds to cover that." That reference is to the trust and capital-reserve withdrawals voted at the May 7, 2025 meeting; this page does not re-examine them. | HIGH |
| 0:27:08 | Why the board's statements looked healthy | Henry: "Well, I'm going to be honest with you, Heather. Our, a book we're not kept well, meaning that we weren't updated. Transactions were updated. I do want to say this. I don't believe there is any foul play here at all." At 0:27:28: "if you, for instance, why are your bond payment but don't enter it into the system. There's no record of it until you do that. So when I came on board, we were going back 3 or 4 years to record transactions". Her fix, at 0:27:51: "in our system this year, the first year that I was here for 23, 24, we now scan everything into the system. Transactions are done immediately." At 0:28:15: "we have not had good starting numbers for our liabilities, our cash accounts and things like that." | MEDIUM |
| 0:28:54 | Counsel: "a structural deficit" | Upton: "This is what I refer to as a structural deficit. It's it's a deficit that really only impacts cash flow at the present time. And it's something that I think we can address over a period of, two, three, four, even as long as five years if we need be." At 0:29:23: "But we need to address it because, because it does impact cash flow." | |
| 0:29:32 | The deficit-reduction expendable trust | Upton: "What I'm going to recommend that the board consider is for your annual meeting in March of 2026 that we establish a deficit reduction, expendable trust and that we appropriate money into that trust. And we do that over a period of time to retire the structural deficit." At 0:30:30: "recommend that you appropriate $400,000 in March of 2026 into that expendable trust that will help to ease some of the cash flow issues that you have now… In an effort to reduce that deficit with the least impact to the taxpayers." He also noted at 0:30:03 that "because of special ed costs, you're likely not to come out of this year with any kind of a surplus". An expendable trust of this kind is created by a vote of the district; no vote was taken at this meeting. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:31:25 | Campo: "I've been working on this audit since 2016" | Campo: "I've been working on this audit since 2016. In that time frame, I think I've worked with ever written down here, at least for five, 86 different people in the finance department, some that were there longer than others. I've gone through financial superintendents as well, and I know that we've had a lot of turn over in terms of the building, with the renovations and records going to places that weren't located after the fact." At 0:32:04: "To say this has been a challenging audit process would be putting it lightly." | HIGH |
| 0:32:27 | The auditor confirms the over-return | Campo: "If you're really difficult for me to speak from a place of knowledge because I'm in fiscal year 22, everything they're saying here to be reasonable. I can verify that the school district has returned more fun [fund] balance than they had, which ends up being a relief on the taxpayer for that year that they came to received." | MEDIUM |
| 0:32:55 | The November and March 31 targets | Campo: "My intention would be that by the November deadline that we do have all the audits, with the exception of this current year that we're in already completed. And I believe we had talked to the board and said for the March 31st, headline [deadline] for the federal clearinghouse is a goal that was shooting four for the 25 audit." Minutes: all audits but the current fiscal year by November; FY25 goal March 31. | HIGH |
| 0:36:09 | The auditor: "you were not getting audit reports on an annual basis" | Answering Hawkins, Campo: "So, so to to I guess along with an answer is you were not getting audit reports on an annual basis, and it had a lot to do with the the quality of the records and the at the time, the finance department as a whole, there was some improvement and we had some some traction. But then there was another change." Earlier, at 0:35:14, he offered 2016 as an example: "you didn't see a report in 2016 for the 2016 because of the difficul[ties]". At 0:35:40 he described bringing "a team of five others" to Claremont and being "unable to really accomplish much that day because the centerpiece of the finance department was unavailable." | HIGH |
| 0:37:42 | Sprague: "We received detailed records. They just weren't right." | Sprague: "We received detailed records. They just weren't right." Whitney: "They're not accurate." Sprague at 0:37:48: "We operated on what we were given. And the fact that you're giving given information that shows there's a surplus, we ha[d]…" Henry asked whether those reports "were in a Excel form, or were they in a report form from the system"; Sprague: "Everything was in Excel." Henry: "that's why I give you the reports out of the system… I can't guarantee the accuracy of the numbers that were given to you." | MEDIUM |
| 0:39:21 | The auditor says he warned them | Campo: "I will also share that I had conversations with management at the time for 20 and 21, with concerns with not knowing what being years behind that, not knowing where fund balance was, was at to please be conservative with their or I advised them. I can't tell them to do independent, but to be conservative with what they returned in terms of use of fund balance." The minutes render the same statement as advice "to be cautious with what was returned to taxpayers since the audit was not complete". | MEDIUM |
| 0:41:18 | Hawkins: "it sounds like we didn't even apply for g[rants]" | Hawkins: "in my opinion, based on what I'm hearing and what you're saying, it sounds like we didn't even apply for g[rants]…" Upton, at 0:41:37: "Can't speak to the competency of anybody. But I can say that I think there was a lot of inefficiency, to be fair." He described Extraordinary Grant money distributed statewide, reimbursement difficulties across districts, and — asked whether he had written clarification letters for Claremont as he had for other clients — answered at 0:43:03: "It was never asked." | MEDIUM |
| 0:43:05 | Henry on grant discipline and the state's review | Henry: "you should not be spending money unless you have an activity that's be[en approved]…" — the minutes render it "money should not be spent unless it is on an activity that has been approved by the state; ESSER is the only one that could be retroactively approved." At 0:44:21: "The state actually came in and auditing us and said that they're happy with the way we're doing it, because we're keepin[g]…" | POSITIVE |
| 0:45:14 | "Why isn't this a criminal act?" | Whitney: "Why isn't this a criminal act?" Upton: "Normally when you're talking about criminal acts, you're talking about activity that benefits an individual, like stealing. This was no indication from what Mary has indicated. Or Mr. Campos indicated that there was any criminal activity. It was just I think that there were revenues that were, accounted for that were never received, creating a compounding structural deficit." This is counsel's characterization on the record; no investigation or referral was described at this meeting. | |
| 0:47:26 | Madden: "I wouldn't be doing my job if I went forward on verbal assurances" | Madden: "I have to wonder if verbal assurances weren't given in 2011, 12, 13, 14, on and on and on. I wouldn't be doing my job if I went forward on verbal assurances. I've asked other board members, have you ever seen any of these procedures? No." At 0:47:53: "So I think we got a boat with a lot of holes in it, and we're being told, roll faster to get out to deeper water. We haven't even quantified how bad things are. We're using trick names, structural deficits. It's a shortfall. It's a lack of money… We're still asking the taxpayer to suck it up." And at 0:49:37: "We're putting it on a credit score card, and we're asking daddy to pay the bill." | OBSERVATION |
| 0:49:50 | Henry: "I strongly disagree on this" | Henry: "I strongly disagree on this, and I disagree on it for a couple of reasons. We're using terminology. That is exactly what it is. We did get the money to begin with. The errors were made when it went back to the taxpayers. So honestly, the taxpayers already raised this money. The difference is it went back to them and it shouldn't have." At 0:50:12: "So to say we're we're putting the tax burden back on them is not true… we're $2 million short and we can't manage cash flow if we don't have that money… I've been here two years, and I value my reputation as a business administrator, and that's why I'm here to fix this." Madden replied at 0:51:58: "I'm not treating you like anything. I think you're great. I think you're extremely hard working." | |
| 0:53:16 | Whitney: the board will ask for the procedures | Whitney described the Finance Committee's work; Madden asked at 0:53:37, "Do we get to see those procedures?" Whitney: "We will ask for the procedures. I can assure you. We will ask for those procedures. That is part of the commitment of our…". She added at 0:54:26 that "the board members back in 2016, 2011, they might have not even known what they should have been looki[ng at]". Nothing in the minutes records a date by which the written procedures are due. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:56:56 | Hawkins: "trust but verify" | Hawkins: "I think if anything, we have learned that the, you know, the expression trust but verify. I think that it's incumbent not that's not the right word. It is important for every board to take the responsibility to get a third party." At 0:57:25: "they need an annual audit on a regular basis. And they will they should not go forward until they get it. And they should all resign if they don't get it." She reported at 0:57:50 that "the audit policy is being reviewed". | POSITIVE |
| 0:58:49 | The JBAB motion — and which read was waived | Howard, from his notes: "I make a motion to accept Jabez [JBAB] as revised and to raise or to waive the first read, for meeting approval." Whitney: "Mr. Madden second it". Howard then corrected himself at 0:59:12: "Frank whispered to me, waive the second read." The approved minutes record the motion as "to accept the policy JBAB as revised and to waive the second read for immediate approval". The transcript renders the policy code as "Jabez", "JB" and "jab" throughout. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:59:16 | Why JBAB was accelerated | Howard: "a few months ago, voted as a board to put JB back to policy committee to be revised to fit within, new laws, new federal. Executive orders… originally planned to present it at the first meeting in June to, you know, do a first read and have a second read June 16th." At 0:59:46: "because of the general assurances that are on our agenda tonight, which require us to sign that we're in compliance with a variety of different anti discriminatory laws. We, under the advice of legal counsel, want to make sure that we're going to be able to get our funding." Pratt at 1:01:47: "the reason why it was pushed up? Because we go[t]…" — the minutes add that "they previously did not know about the deadline for general assurances." | OBSERVATION |
| 1:00:40 | "We are suspending our rules for tonight" | Hawkins: "basically what we do when we're developing, revising or withdrawing policies, as you know, we have the two readings which we are suspending and and we we are revising now. I'm sorry. We are suspending our rules for tonight. It does not mean that it's. But we need to move on in order to be able to not continue to be in the financial situation we have found ourselves in." The minutes put it as avoiding "not receiving grants as happened previously". The vote followed at 1:02:56: "All in favor of adopting the revised JB policy, say I… The revised policy has been adopted", with the website manual to be updated "within 24 to 48 hours". | OBSERVATION |
| 1:04:03 | What the general assurances are | Pratt: "it's a 16 page document, but in that 16 page document, it's it's pretty much as we, we have to compl[y]…"; at 1:05:30: "the board has to, the vote on given superintendent permissi[on]…" and "That we will comply with these insurances [assurances]. And I sign off on the board signs off that we are in compliance with everythi[ng]". Asked how much money was at stake, at 1:06:14: "In the past has been over 2 million. So they'll be releasing what the allocations are hoping this week". Minutes: "usually over $2,000,000 and includes some Title grants and others; the exact grant funds are not known yet." | MEDIUM |
| 1:07:19 | Counsel's cover letter | Upton: "I've also provided the board with a version of cover letter that we're recommending our clients send with the signed general assurances that basically recognizes that there are a number of lawsuits that are in, in courts right now that may influence our future actions and to just notify the authorities that we're mindful of those and that will we may or may not have to comply with those lawsuits in the future and whatever rulings come down." At 1:08:19: "I just suggest that you send the cover letter version two." | POSITIVE |
| 1:08:37 | The general-assurances motion and vote | Sprague: "I'd like to make a motion that we approve the general assurances for Mr. Pratt to to sign and include the letter that Mr.. Upton has recommended." Restated by him at 1:12:02 as: "I like to move that we approved these assurances. Give Mr. Pratt the and Miss Whitney the ability to sign off on these and include a letter." The minutes record Petrin as the seconder and the motion as approval "for them to be signed by Superintendent Pratt". Crawford at 1:09:55: "it's only the inclusion of this letter that I could support voting for this general assurance." Vote at 1:12:22: "All in favor? Aye. Oppose. Seeing none. Motion passes." | POSITIVE |
| 1:12:50 | Finance Subcommittee purpose statement | Sprague: "the finance committee has developed a, purpose statement. And along with our cadence meeting cadence. So that's in your backup. I would ask for a, a motion to approve this." Petrin moved, Hawkins seconded per the minutes, and it carried; Whitney added it "will go on attach to our subcommittee on the website so that the public also knows what we're going to be accountable for." Exhibit F is in the packet. Two June meetings scheduled — the 13th and the 23rd — the second on state fiscal monitoring. | POSITIVE |
| 1:16:15 | SRVRTC: purpose statement not in the packet | Crawford: "we had a meeting on May 14th with Mr. Howard, Mr. Putin [Petrin] and I with. We met with the assistant director, Michelle Ha[rrington]. A copy of the minutes of that meeting in your packet. We also, adopted or recommended to put forth, A purpose statement and a schedule of meetings and that is not in your packet." Deferred to the next agenda. The SRVRTC subcommittee minutes she describes are not among the ten documents in the posted 5.21.25 packet folder either. | OBSERVATION |
| 1:17:05 | The nonpublic session is waived | Whitney: "Item number six is a public meeting. We're going to waive this nonpublic meeting as a topic that we were going to discuss is no longer relevant." No motion was made and no roll call taken, because no nonpublic session was entered. The agenda had noticed it under RSA 91-A:3, II(a) with the statutory text quoted in full. | POSITIVE |
| 1:17:21 | Other business: forum, time capsule, signage | Howard on the ad hoc community-forum committee and NH Listens: "there's a cost associated… So we're going to do a little more research on what costs associated would like be". He suggested at 1:18:21 "a pretty short lifespan"; formation was put on the next agenda. Sprague relayed the Masons' inquiry about a time capsule in the district's newly purchased building; Pratt: "we know we know exactly where it is…" and "We want to make sure that that's it's not going to be touched on mess with". Crawford reported teacher-appreciation costs and the tech-center students' meeting signage. | |