Participants
Board members, administration and staff appearing in the record. Attendance and name spellings follow the draft minutes and the posted agenda; the automatic transcript's renderings are noted where they differ. Home-district labels for board members are derived by subtracting the known Claremont School Board roster from the SAU roster, not stated on the face of either document. No citizens spoke: the chair opened and closed citizens' comments with none present ("Seeing none, I'm going to close citizens comments").
| Name | Role | Participation |
|---|
| Arlene Hawkins | SAU 6 Board Chair (Claremont School Board member) | Presided; moved the reduction in force; delivered the audit update; read Jeff Small's cybersecurity-grant statement into the record (transcript renders her as "Arlene Hopkins") |
| Rocco Ruggeri | SAU 6 Vice Chair (Unity) | Present; per the draft minutes moved entry to and exit from nonpublic session, moved acceptance of the CrowdStrike grant, and moved adjournment (transcript renders him as "Rocco and Jerry") |
| Darlene Ayotte | SAU 6 Board member (Unity) | Absent (the only member recorded absent) |
| Shannon Popescu | SAU 6 Board member (Unity) | Present; seconded adjournment per the draft minutes |
| Atonya Hart | SAU 6 Board member (Unity) | Present; per the draft minutes seconded both nonpublic motions (transcript renders her as "LaTonya Hart" and "Hani hurt") |
| Kristel Davis | SAU 6 Board member (Unity) | Present (transcript renders her as "still Davis") |
| Candace Crawford | SAU 6 Treasurer; Claremont School Board member | Present; pressed for a consultant cost-versus-budget analysis and for a named official accountable for grant reimbursements; seconded the RIF and grant motions (transcript renders her as "Candice" and "Darlene Crawford") |
| Michael Petrin | SAU 6 Board member; Claremont School Board Vice Chair | Present; asked whether the curriculum-director position should be held vacant rather than cut; clarified on the record that the audit under discussion was the SAU's, not Claremont's (transcript renders him as "Michael petry") |
| Heather Whitney | SAU 6 Board member; Claremont School Board Chair | Present; per the draft minutes requested the budget impact of the consultant line items |
| William "Bill" Madden | SAU 6 Board member; Claremont School Board member | Present; per the draft minutes reported that he and Patrick O'Hearn were drafting the interim-superintendent search plan, and asked whether the cybersecurity award was a 100% grant |
| Loren Howard | SAU 6 Board member; Claremont School Board member | Present (transcript renders him as "Lauren Howard") |
| Frank Sprague | Former SAU 6 Board member | Not present and not called in either roll call. He is still printed on the board roster at the head of the draft minutes although his resignation had been announced the previous evening; the posted agenda for this meeting had already dropped him. Roster discrepancy in the district's own documents. |
| Patrick O'Hearn | Temporary Acting Superintendent / Director of Human Resources, SAU 6 | Delivered the staffing update: recent central-office resignations, the special-education and superintendent consultants, and the recommendation not to fill the curriculum director post (transcript renders him as "Mr. Ahern") |
| Michael Koski | Assistant Superintendent, SAU 6 | Present; confirmed the curriculum-director role was not currently needed and that he remains "integral in the curriculum process" (transcript renders him as "Mr. Kosky") |
| Noelle Kronberg | SAU 6 School Board Clerk | Called the attendance roll and both nonpublic roll-call votes; recorded and submitted the draft minutes (the transcript addresses her as "Mr. Holmberg" and "Mr. Cromer") |
| Matt Angell | Senior Comptroller, SAU 6 | Absent — named by the chair as the person who brought the grant forward and who "was going to come tonight in order to present this"; the board designated him responsible for grant receipts and reimbursements in his absence |
| Jeff Small | Director of Technology, SAU 6 | Absent — listed on the agenda as the presenter of the CrowdStrike item; his written statement was read aloud by the chair |
| Rick Elliot | Curriculum Director, SAU 6 (resigned) | Not present; named in the draft minutes as the curriculum director whose "abrupt and immediate resignation" prompted the reduction-in-force vote |
| Terry Gear | Special-education consultant | Not present; named by O'Hearn as the engaged special-education consultant working "up to around ten hours a week" |
Agenda
From the posted agenda (SAU6 School Board Agenda 9.4.25 (2).pdf), with dispositions from the draft minutes and the recording. The agenda prints the full statutory text of RSA 91-A:3, II(a) and (c) beneath item III.1. It numbers its sections I, II, III, then jumps to "V. 8:30 PM Adjournment" with no item IV, and it carries no "future meeting dates" item even though one was taken up. Hover over (or Tab to) a clipped entry for full text.
| Taken up | Item | Agenda text / disposition |
|---|
| 0:00:02 | I. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance | Scheduled 6:30 PM. The chair opened: "Good evening. I'd like to call the SO6 school board meeting of September 7th two" — the automatic transcript's garble of the date; the agenda and minutes both read September 4, 2025. |
| 0:00:35 | II. General Business — roll call of attendance | "Secretary Roll Call of Attendance of Board Members." Called by clerk Noelle Kronberg. Per the draft minutes, present: Candace Crawford, Kristel Davis, Atonya Hart, Loren Howard, William Madden, Michael Petrin, Shannon Popescu, Rocco Ruggeri, Heather Whitney and Arlene Hawkins; absent: Darlene Ayotte. |
| 0:00:51 | II. Agenda — amendments and final approval | "Are there any amendments to the agenda? Go to final approval." No amendments offered; no vote is audible on the recording and the draft minutes record none. Later in the meeting the chair remarked of the same document: "I haven't seen this agenda before today." |
| 0:01:27 | II. Meeting Minutes — 6/12/2025, 8/21/2025 and 8/26/2025 | Postponed. A member: "I don't have the meeting minutes… For review there. I don't know if they were sent to." The chair: "Like I said, they were sent electronically. There were no paper copies of the agenda of anything for tonight. So do you want to hold off on accepting the minutes until another meeting? We can do that." Minutes: "Postponed so members can review." The June 12 minutes were by then nearly three months old and still unapproved. |
| 0:01:27 | II. Citizens Comments | "Are there any citizens present for citizens? Comments. Seeing none, I'm going to close citizens comments." Draft minutes: "none." |
| 0:01:57 | III.1. Nonpublic session — RSA 91-A:3, II (a & c) | Motion by Rocco Ruggeri, seconded by Atonya Hart, both per the draft minutes; the motion as spoken: "I'll make a motion to move into nonpublic meeting session. Per RSA 91A32A and C." Roll call taken by the clerk, all present voting in favour; entered 6:34 p.m.; returned to public session 7:58 p.m. on a second Ruggeri/Hart motion and roll call — 84 minutes, none of it recorded. Nothing was reported out and no sealing vote appears anywhere in the record. See flag 1. |
| 0:03:02 | III.2. Staffing Update (Discussion) — Patrick O'Hearn | "We had some recent resignations. We had a resignation from our director student services. We also this week had a abrupt resignation from our curriculum director." Consultants engaged: Terry Gear for special education (~10 hours a week) and a superintendent consultant at "about one day a week of support right now." Rates could not be stated; the chair asked for consultant qualifications to be published, and O'Hearn agreed to bring "Little bio blurb certifications" to the next meeting. |
| 0:07:12 | III.3. Interim Superintendent Search (Discussion) | "We really don't have anything to report at this point." Per the draft minutes, William Madden reported that he and Patrick O'Hearn "are working on a plan for the search and that will be shared with the SAU Board": "we roughed out a draft of a plan… a rough time table, what we're looking for," plus contact with one search consultant. No document was produced to the board at this meeting. |
| 0:08:18 | III.4. Reduction in Force (RIF) (Discussion/Vote) | Motion by the chair: "what I would like to do is move that we authorize Mr.. And or Mr. Angel[l] to eliminate that position consistent with what we heard tonight as a resignation" — restated before the vote as a motion "to authorize administration to eliminate the position of curriculum director as presented with what we heard this evening." Seconded by Candace Crawford. Voice vote, all present in favour; the motion passed unanimously per the draft minutes. |
| 0:11:28 | III.5. Audit Update (Discussion) — Arlene Hawkins | "I spoke with the audit firm and they are finishing FY23. At this point, it looks like there's a very small fund balance about two. This is at the sea [SAU] level for $200,000, but all the checks haven't been balanced yet." FY24 "could probably be done in November"; the final FY26 audit "in the fall of 26… after the saw [SAU] has been dissolved as it stands now." Petrin: "this is not the Claremont audits… It's not Claremont. It's not unity. S you six [SAU 6] just for everybody watching." See flag 2. |
| 0:13:01 | III.6. The Overwatch Foundation CrowdStrike Municipal Cybersecurity and Cyber Defense Services and Critical Infrastructure Resources (Discussion/Vote) | Presenter Jeff Small was absent; the chair read his statement. Motion by Rocco Ruggeri "to accept the grant and authorize the administration to sign any and all documents related to this grant," seconded by Candace Crawford; voice vote, all present in favour, passed unanimously per the draft minutes. The dollar value of the grant was never stated — "And we don't know how much the grants for." See flag 3. |
| 0:19:09 | Future meeting dates (not on the posted agenda) | "I believe the next item on the agenda is the meeting dates. I haven't seen this agenda before today." Next regular meeting set for November, with the chair authorised by consensus to call an earlier special meeting once consultant information is available: "I think anything that pertains to the say [SAU] that would involve Unity's decision should be a meeting." September 22 was noted as a date members were available. |
| 0:20:35 | V. Adjournment | Motion by Rocco Ruggeri, seconded by Shannon Popescu per the draft minutes; voice vote, all in favour. Adjourned 8:16 p.m. The recording ends moments later. |
Discussion timeline
Times are from the dialogue transcript (Output/Dialogue/16820 SAU6-090425.mp4.CSV). Because the nonpublic session is not in the recording, recording time equals clock time only before 0:02:22. Several speakers in this recording were not identifiable by voice and appear as "a board member"; where the draft minutes name the mover or seconder, this page follows the minutes.
| Time | Topic | What was said (leading text; hover/focus for more) | Flags |
|---|
| 0:01:27 | Three sets of minutes postponed | The chair: "Accepting the minutes of June 12th, August 21st and August 26th of 2025 until our next meeting." Members had received them only electronically, the same day, with "no paper copies of the agenda of anything for tonight." All three sets were still unapproved a week later, on September 11, when they were tabled again. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:01:57 | Into nonpublic session — exemption stated, roll call taken | "I would entertain a motion to go into nonpublic session under RSA 91-A colon, three comma two A and C" — the motion as made repeated the citation, "Per RSA 91A32A and C," and the clerk called the roll rather than taking a voice vote. The posted agenda printed the full text of subsections (a) and (c). Entered 6:34 p.m. | POSITIVE |
| 0:02:34 | Out of nonpublic 84 minutes later — nothing reported out | "Make a motion to come out of non public meeting for RSA 91 A, three two A and C," second, roll call, and the board returned at 7:58 p.m. per the draft minutes. On the recording the interval is twenty seconds of dead air between 0:02:22 and 0:02:34. No announcement was made of what had been discussed, no motion to seal was offered, and no nonpublic minutes appear in any district share. | MEDIUM POSITIVE |
| 0:03:08 | Central office losing staff; consultants brought in | O'Hearn: "We had a resignation from our director student services. We also this week had a abrupt resignation from our curriculum director. And as I advised at the Claremont School Board meeting yesterday, we have engaged some, consultants. We have, a lady by the name of Terry Gear who's helping out with Sped [special education]." Her focus is "very narrow… seeing how we can reallocate to make sure we're legally, legally compliant and meeting the needs of our students." A superintendent consultant was also engaged for "about one day a week." | |
| 0:04:59 | What are the consultants being paid? Nobody could say | Chair: "What's the consulting fees hourly or how are we. How are these folks being compensated?" O'Hearn: "the yeah special ed consultant is hourly rate. And, the rate for the superintendent consulting services. I believe it's both hourly. And then if he does full day projects, there's like a per diem rate as well, which I can provide to the board." Asked whether it could be made public: "Yeah." Asked whether he had the figure: "I don't have it." | OBSERVATION |
| 0:05:38 | "roughly 150. An hour." — then "115 an hour" | O'Hearn offered a figure across two transcript rows: "And roughly 150." … "An hour." The chair immediately restated it as "115 an hour" and moved on. The two numbers are irreconcilable on the recording, the draft minutes record neither, and no consultant agreement appears in the packet. Later in the meeting Crawford asked "Is it possible for us to amend the minutes to put in the consultant fees?" | OBSERVATION |
| 0:06:02 | Crawford: are the consultants cheaper than the vacancies? | "With the abrupt resignation of the just cost analysis of how many hours we would be budget. Yeah. Budget negative instead of budget positive… How many hours are we, are we going to actually put ourselves in a, in what we would have considered budget negative if we had kept our" the incumbent. O'Hearn agreed to compare the special-education and curriculum-director vacancies against the contract costs. Per the draft minutes, Heather Whitney also requested the budget impact for the consultant line items. No such analysis was produced at this meeting. | OBSERVATION POSITIVE |
| 0:08:18 | Curriculum director eliminated, not just left vacant | The chair moved to authorise administration "to eliminate that position consistent with what we heard tonight as a resignation"; Crawford seconded. A member asked "what would be the difference between just not filling the position or cutting"; O'Hearn: "materially if you cut it you didn't have to build it back into the budget next year." Petrin's concern was the opposite one — "I wouldn't want someone… to come in because the position is there." The chair's answer was that eliminating it forces a return to the board: "We have. To come before the board in order to reinstate it. And it may look different." | |
| 0:09:51 | Unity's exit is already driving staffing decisions | A member: "We know that, Mr. Kosky [Koski], the unity is leaving the saw [SAU]. And your plan was to leave at the end of the year. So we're at the end of this year. We're going to lose that curriculum person that we have in Mr. Kosky right now." The chair: "what I'm thinking in relation to what you're talking about with Unity and Claremont being the only one, is we may have to reconfigure what a position would look like." | OBSERVATION |
| 0:11:21 | The RIF vote | "All those in favor opposed? Abstentions." No count was announced on the recording; the draft minutes record a voice vote with all present voting in favour and the motion passing unanimously. | |
| 0:11:28 | SAU audits: FY23 still open, FY26 due after the SAU no longer exists | "they are finishing FY23… there's a very small fund balance about two. This is at the sea [SAU] level for $200,000, but all the checks haven't been balanced yet." Then: "FY 24 could probably be done in November. And they are they're feeling confident that the final FY26 will be completed in the spring of now, in the fall of 26… That will be after the saw has been dissolved as it stands now. But we may come together just to review that final audit." A November presentation of the FY24 results was promised. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:12:43 | Petrin draws the line between the SAU's books and Claremont's | "I just want to repeat to make it very clear this is not the Claremont audits… This is an SO6 audit, which is the Sussex [SAU's] budget, which is a very relatively small budget of C [SAU] employees… so it's not Claremont. It's not unity. S you six just for everybody watching." The chair: "It's superintendent services at the sea [SAU] level." Claremont's own deficit and unfinished FY22 audit were before the Claremont board the previous evening, not this one. | POSITIVE |
| 0:13:20 | The chair's statutory basis for accepting the grant | "There is an RSA for unanticipated funds. It's RSA 198 colon 20 dash. Be that any grant has to be presented to the board to authorize the spending of the money that the grant brings into the district. So this is a grant." The number is reproduced as spoken. It is not among the provisions this project has verified, so this page neither confirms nor applies it. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:13:40 | What the CrowdStrike grant actually is | Reading Jeff Small's statement: "Ken Weekes, New Hampshire chief Information security officer, has been working on funding for helping schools to help tighten their cybersecurity footprint. There is a grant called To Cybersecurity in a box, which is a grant through the state Local Cybersecurity Grant program run by the State of New Hampshire Department of IT, in partnership with the Overwatch Foundation." Phase one is "CrowdStrike Falcon Complete managed EDR with continuous real time threat monitoring, detection and response… funded for three years"; then "a modern firewall, which will include implementation and training"; then migration to a New Hampshire .gov email domain with Cloudflare filtering. | |
| 0:15:29 | Crawford: who is accountable for getting the money back? | "who is going to be responsible for submitting the receipts for reimbursement of this grant?" — asked four times before it was answered. O'Hearn: "it's a two step process. Whoever's managing the grant submits it for reimbursement. But then that runs through the business office, which then sends out the invoice to the to the state for reimbursement." Crawford: "I don't care who it is. I just want a physician [position] who is responsible." O'Hearn: "I would say business administrator would be responsible." The draft minutes record the outcome: "It was discussed and decided that Matt Angell would be in charge of the receipts and reimbursements." | OBSERVATION POSITIVE |
| 0:17:06 | A reimbursement grant during a cash-flow crisis | Crawford: "we have to disperse the funds first. Correct. And if we have a cash flow problem right now." … "That is always that is the problem. You have to spend the money first and submit the receipts. And you have to make sure somebody is responsible for making sure the receipts get submitted." … "And we don't know how much the grants for." The district had heard a $4,000,000 revenue anticipation note approved by the Claremont board the previous evening. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:18:52 | The grant vote | "Do you want the motion reread?" … "So all in favor? Opposed? Abstentions. Okay." Again no count is announced on the recording; the draft minutes record a voice vote, all present in favour, passing unanimously. | |
| 0:19:44 | Crawford asks that the consultant fees be written into the minutes | "Is it possible for us to amend the minutes to put in the consultant fees?" The chair redirected to the question of whether to hold a special meeting. The approved-form draft minutes as posted do not contain any consultant rate; they record only that O'Hearn "will provide financial and a bio information for the next meeting." | OBSERVATION |
Items flagged for review
Flags are a reviewer's aid generated by comparing the discussion against current state and federal law. They are not findings of violation, and nothing here is legal advice. Each flag cites the rule it rests on; where no verified rule reaches an item it is labelled an observation and says so.
MEDIUM An 84-minute nonpublic session with no sealing vote in the record and no nonpublic minutes located
The board entered nonpublic session at 6:34 p.m. and returned at 7:58 p.m. — 84 of the meeting's roughly 105 minutes. Under RSA 91-A:3, III, minutes of a nonpublic session must record the actions taken and be publicly disclosed within 72 hours unless two-thirds of the members present vote, on a recorded vote, to seal them and find that disclosure would render the proposed action ineffective, or would affect adversely the reputation of a non-member, or would pertain to preparation for or carrying out of an emergency function. Neither the recording (0:02:22 to 0:02:34, where the tape resumes with the exit motion) nor the posted draft minutes shows any motion to seal, any two-thirds vote, or any of those findings — and no nonpublic minutes for this meeting appear anywhere in the district's public shares as of 2026-08-25. On this record the nonpublic minutes were therefore required to be publicly available. That they are not posted is not by itself proof they were withheld from a requester — RSA 91-A:4 governs availability on request, and inspection at the SAU office would satisfy disclosure — which is why this is flagged as a documentation gap rather than a confirmed violation. In mitigation, nothing about the entry or exit procedure was irregular: see flag 6.
Sources: RSA 91-A:3, III (nonpublic minutes; 72 hours; sealing requires a recorded 2/3 vote and a statutory finding); RSA 91-A:2 (minutes promptly recorded, open within 5 business days); RSA 91-A:4 (availability of governmental records); 9.4.25 draft SAU 6 minutes.
OBSERVATION The SAU's own audits run two to three years behind, and the last one lands after the SAU is gone
The chair reported FY23 still being finished in September 2025, FY24 "could probably be done in November," and the final FY26 audit "in the fall of 26… after the saw [SAU] has been dissolved as it stands now," with the board expecting to "come together just to review that final audit." Unity's withdrawal takes effect July 1, 2026, so the entity that would receive, act on and be accountable for that last report will have ceased to exist in its current form; the withdrawal process itself is governed by RSA 194-C:2, IV. New Hampshire requires audits of public bodies by independent public accountants under RSA 21-J:19, and RSA 21-J:34 sets a September 1 annual-financial-report deadline for school districts; this page does not assert which of those deadlines binds a school administrative unit as distinct from its member districts, because that question is outside the set of provisions this project has verified. Michael Petrin's on-the-record clarification that this is "not the Claremont audits" is correct and important: Claremont's separate FY22 audit backlog and deficit were before a different board.
Sources: RSA 21-J:19 (audits by independent public accountants); RSA 194-C:2, IV (SAU withdrawal); RSA 21-J:34 (annual financial report; September 1 — school districts).
OBSERVATION A grant of unknown value accepted on a statute this project has not verified, with reimbursement risk during a cash-flow crisis
The board voted to accept the Overwatch Foundation / CrowdStrike award and to "authorize the administration to sign any and all documents related to this grant" without knowing its dollar value — "And we don't know how much the grants for" — and with the applying official, Jeff Small, and the comptroller, Matt Angell, both absent. The chair grounded the vote in "an RSA for unanticipated funds… RSA 198 colon 20 dash. Be"; that number is reproduced exactly as spoken and is not among the provisions this project has verified, so no legal conclusion is drawn from it here. The substantive risk the board itself identified is a real one: this is a reimbursement award — "You have to spend the money first and submit the receipts" — accepted by a district in a cash-flow crisis, with administration authorised in advance to "sign any and all documents related to this grant" before the board knew what the grant was worth. What the board did do was refuse to vote until an accountable official was named, settling on Matt Angell for receipts and reimbursements; that is the control that keeps this an observation rather than a finding.
Sources: the recording at 0:13:20 and 0:17:06; 9.4.25 draft SAU 6 minutes; SAU 6 CrowdStrike … Agreement (packet PDF). No verified rule on this project's citation list reaches the acceptance of an unanticipated-funds grant, and none is asserted.
OBSERVATION Consultant compensation could not be stated, was stated two different ways, and never reached the minutes
Asked directly what the SAU's newly engaged special-education and superintendent consultants are paid, the Temporary Acting Superintendent answered "I don't have it." The only figures on the record are irreconcilable: O'Hearn's "And roughly 150." / "An hour." and the chair's immediate restatement, "115 an hour." The posted draft minutes carry neither number, recording only that O'Hearn "will provide financial and a bio information for the next meeting." Candace Crawford's later request — "Is it possible for us to amend the minutes to put in the consultant fees?" — was not acted on in the posted draft. No consultant agreement appears in this meeting's two-document packet. No verified rule on this project's citation list requires a public body to state a contractor's rate at the meeting where the contract is discussed, so this is an observation about the completeness of the public record, not an alleged violation; RSA 91-A:2 does require the minutes to carry a brief description of the subject matter discussed, and the fee discussion is the one substantive element of that item missing from them.
Sources: RSA 91-A:2 (contents of minutes); the recording at 0:04:59, 0:05:38 and 0:19:44; 9.4.25 draft SAU 6 minutes.
OBSERVATION Three sets of minutes unapproved, distributed the same day, with no paper copies — and a chair who had not seen the agenda
Minutes for June 12, August 21 and August 26 were all still unapproved on September 4 and were postponed again because members had not been able to review them: "they were sent electronically. There were no paper copies of the agenda of anything for tonight." A week later, on September 11, the same three sets plus this meeting's were tabled once more, the chair reporting she could open only one of the files. Separately, of the posted agenda itself the chair said "I haven't seen this agenda before today." RSA 91-A:2 requires minutes to be "promptly recorded and open to public inspection not more than 5 business days after the meeting," and a draft satisfies that duty — drafts of all three meetings do exist and were later posted in the SAU packet folders, so the statutory recording duty appears to have been met. The statute sets no deadline for a board to approve its minutes, which is why this is an observation: the gap here is in the board's own working practice and in the readability of what it circulates, not in a rule this page can cite against it.
Sources: RSA 91-A:2 (minutes promptly recorded; open within 5 business days); the recording at 0:01:27 and 0:19:09; the same items on the September 11, 2025 SAU 6 page.
POSITIVE The nonpublic motions did what RSA 91-A:3, I(b) requires — on the way in and on the way out
Both the entry motion ("I'll make a motion to move into nonpublic meeting session. Per RSA 91A32A and C") and the exit motion ("Make a motion to come out of non public meeting for RSA 91 A, three two A and C") named the specific statutory exemption on the face of the motion, and both were decided by roll call taken by the board clerk rather than by voice — the two things RSA 91-A:3, I(b) demands. The posted agenda went further than the statute requires by printing the full text of subsections (a) and (c) beneath the item, so a member of the public reading the agenda in advance could see exactly what was being claimed. Every decision of the evening — the reduction in force and the grant acceptance — was moved, debated and voted in open session after the board returned. The gap identified in flag 1 is about what happened to the nonpublic minutes afterwards, not about how the session was entered.
Sources: RSA 91-A:3, I(b) (motion must state the specific exemption; vote by roll call), II(a), II(c); SAU6 School Board Agenda 9.4.25 (2).pdf.
POSITIVE Board members held the vote open until accountability questions were answered
Two members used this short meeting to force specifics that administration had not brought. Candace Crawford would not let the grant motion proceed until someone was named responsible for submitting receipts and chasing the reimbursement — "I don't care who it is. I just want a physician [position] who is responsible" — and the draft minutes record the result, that Matt Angell would own receipts and reimbursements. She and Heather Whitney also asked for the consultant contracts to be set against the vacated salary lines so the board could see whether it was "budget negative instead of budget positive." Michael Petrin interrupted the audit item to make sure the public watching did not confuse the SAU's small audit with Claremont's. And the chair asked for consultant qualifications to be published because "we heard loud and clear from the public and the community was to have the qualifications of consultants made available." None of this is required by statute; all of it improves the record.
Sources: the recording at 0:06:02, 0:12:43 and 0:15:29; 9.4.25 draft SAU 6 minutes.
Appendix — source files
Official and public sources
Packet documents (exact Drive file names)
Project files (relative links work when this page is opened from Output/HTML/)
Laws and rules cited on this page
- RSA 91-A:2 (definition of meeting; notice; minutes promptly recorded and open within 5 business days); RSA 91-A:3 (nonpublic sessions — I(b) specific exemption stated and roll call; II(a) employee dismissal, promotion, compensation or discipline; II(c) reputation of a non-member; III nonpublic minutes, 72 hours, sealing by recorded 2/3 vote with a statutory finding); RSA 91-A:4 (availability of governmental records)
- RSA 21-J:19 (audits by independent public accountants); RSA 21-J:34 (annual financial report to the DRA; September 1 for school districts)
- RSA 194-C:2, IV (school administrative unit withdrawal process)
- Cited by a speaker, not verified here: "RSA 198 colon 20 dash. Be" (unanticipated funds), quoted as spoken at 0:13:20 and deliberately not linked, because it is outside the set of provisions this project has verified.