SAU 6 Board, Special Meeting — October 6, 2025 | A governance briefing, a sealed hour, and no minutes

Participants

The board roster is taken from the posted agenda, which lists eleven members. Because no minutes exist and the recorded roll call is badly garbled by the transcription, attendance cannot be stated member by member; the Participation column says what the recording actually supports. Where the dialogue file's speaker label differs, the label is noted in parentheses.
Name	Role	Participation
Arlene Hawkins	SAU 6 Board Chair; Claremont School Board Member	Presided. Corrected the agenda's nonpublic-session citation before the vote; announced the clerk's absence; invited and introduced the presenter; asked him whether a board must fill a vacancy at all and whether the board could carry on with an even number; closed with future dates and the promise of an auditors' report at a later SAU meeting. 81 segments.
Will Phillips	Staff Attorney and Director of Policy Services, New Hampshire School Boards Association — invited presenter	Delivered the roles-and-responsibilities presentation that occupies almost the entire meeting, from 0:08:46 to 1:49:51, taking questions throughout. 253 of the 431 dialogue segments — 59% of the meeting's speech.
Heather Whitney	Claremont School Board Chair; SAU 6 Board Member	Moved acceptance of the amended agenda; moved entry into nonpublic session naming the exemptions; moved the five-year seal on the nonpublic minutes; asked the presenter the meeting's sharpest question — how a board is supposed to detect that the financial reports it is being handed are not true. 35 segments.
Candace Crawford	Claremont School Board Member; SAU 6 Board Member	Interjected "That's a that's a major assumption right there. Annual audit" when told to make sure the board gets one; asked what a board's recourse is when it asks for reports and does not receive them; raised the board's collective signature on the MS-25. 32 segments.
Kerry Kennedy	Interim Superintendent, SAU 6	Called the roll in the clerk's absence; announced three resignations from the central office by name and effective date; told the board she and Angell were prepared to attend the October 14 Senate hearing on the district's revolving loan fund. 8 segments.
Rocco Ruggeri	SAU 6 Board Vice Chair (per the agenda)	Audible once, answering the roll on the sealing vote: "The advice is to seal … five years per the attorney. Yes." (rendered "Mr. Ruggieri"/"Mr. Jerry"/"Roger" across the roll calls).
William "Bill" Madden	Claremont School Board Member; SAU 6 Board Member	Audible once, answering "Yes" in the sealing roll call. Recorded as voting on both roll calls.
Michael Petrin	Claremont School Board Member; SAU 6 Board Member	Named in both roll calls and recorded voting yes; no separately attributable speech (rendered "Mr. patron"/"Mr. Peterson").
Loren Howard	Claremont School Board Member; SAU 6 Board Member	Named in both roll calls and recorded voting yes; no separately attributable speech.
Darlene Ayotte	SAU 6 Board Member (per the agenda)	Not identifiable in the recording. The roll call cannot be reconstructed well enough to say whether she was present.
Shannon Popescu	SAU 6 Board Member (per the agenda)	Thanked by the chair for seconding the motion to seal — "Second. Thank you, Shannon" — so present, but no speech is separately attributed to her in the dialogue file.
Atonya Hart	SAU 6 Board Member (per the agenda)	Not identifiable in the recording.
Kristel Davis	SAU 6 Board Member (per the agenda)	Not identifiable in the recording.
Noelle Kronberg	SAU 6 School Board Clerk	Absent — on maternity leave; the chair announced the birth of her son Leo and the board's congratulations. No clerk was designated to take minutes in her place on the record.
Hope Damon	Citizens' comments — NH State Representative	Reported that the Senate Education Committee would hear the proposal to create a revolving loan fund for the Claremont School District on Tuesday, October 14 at 1:00 p.m. at Granite Place, and set out the route from there: Senate veto day October 23, House veto day December 17, then the governor. 13 segments.
Matt Angell	Senior Comptroller / Interim Business Administrator	Does not speak in the recording. Named twice — as one of the two remaining central-office occupants, and as attending the October 14 hearing with the interim superintendent. The agenda's "Financial Update - Mr. Angell" appears under future meeting items, and no financial update was given.

Agenda

Items follow the one posted agenda document, `SAU6 School Board Agenda 10.6.25`, with the corrections and amendments the chair made from the chair at the start of the meeting.
Taken up	Item	Agenda text / disposition
0:00:06	I. Call to order; pledge; roll	"I'd like to call the October 6th, 2025 saw six [SAU 6] school board meeting to order." Kennedy called the roll at the chair's request in the clerk's absence; the names in the recording are heavily garbled and no minutes exist against which to check them. The chair announced the clerk's maternity leave and the birth of her son.
0:01:27	General business — agenda amendments; minutes; manifests	One correction and two amendments from the chair: the nonpublic-session citation "reads a C and it should read L"; citizens' comments moved up to become Roman numeral two; and an added other-business item on SAU-level administrative positions for the remainder of the year. On minutes, the chair simply noted "the approval of the minutes, which we don't have." Whitney moved the amended agenda, seconded, no discussion, carried at 0:02:45. Manifests were not taken up on the recording.
0:03:53	Announcement — central office resignations not on the posted agenda	Kennedy interrupted the move into nonpublic session — the chair asked Whitney to withdraw her motion so the announcement could be made in open session — to report three resignations: HR Director Patrick O'Hearn, effective October 17 on a two-week notice given the previous Friday; an HR department staff member, effective immediately on October 1; and Assistant Superintendent Michael Koski, effective October 20. "So it does leave Mr. Angel[l] and me as the remaining doe [SAU office] occupants that are not of the administrative level."
0:05:31	II.1 Nonpublic session	"I would like to make a motion to move into nonpublic session RSA 91-A colon three. Roman numeral two, subset A, C and L." Seconded; the chair required a roll call, and one was taken. Returned to public session by motion and a second roll call at 0:06:11. Whitney then moved, "on advice of our attorney, Sarah Friedman, to seal the minutes for five years"; seconded by Popescu; carried on a roll call at 0:06:55. Nothing of the session itself is in the recording.
0:07:27	III. Roles and Responsibilities of School Boards — Will Phillips, NHSBA (Presentation/Discussion)	The chair's stated reason: "In light of some new members and some potential appointees. I thought it would be a good time to clarify for us, as well as for the public, the roles and responsibilities of school board members." Slides had been sent to members in advance. Ran from 0:08:46 to 1:49:51 — an hour and forty minutes, questions taken throughout. No vote, no decision, no action item arose from it.
1:55:07	II (as amended). Citizens' comments	Moved up the agenda by the chair, then taken here in practice. One speaker: Representative Hope Damon, on the Senate Education Committee hearing for the Claremont revolving loan fund — October 14 at 1:00 p.m. at Granite Place, "because the legislative office building is closed for the next year or so being remodeled" — and the legislative route after it. Kennedy said she and Angell would attend and "represent anything that we need to have."
1:57:54	V. Future meetings / dates; VI. Other business; VII. Adjournment	Future dates read from the agenda, which lists the Unity board on October 8, Claremont on October 15 and November 5, Unity on November 12, and the SAU 6 board on "November 13, 2023" — the year is the district's typo. The chair added that "there will be an audit report presented by the auditors at a future s a meeting to be determined … they do understand that they need to have everything up to date by June 30th." Under other business the chair referred back to the SAU-level administrative positions and left it with the superintendent to report. Motion to adjourn at 1:59:07, carried.

Discussion timeline

Chronological topics with the moment each is taken up. Timestamps link to the same moment in the Cablecast recording. Because one invited speaker holds the floor for 59% of the meeting, the entries below track the parts of his presentation and, in particular, the points at which board members interrupted it — those interruptions are where this meeting stops being generic training and becomes a record of what went wrong in Claremont. Statutes named by the presenter are his citations, spoken from a podium and transcribed by machine; they are reported here as what he said, and are not part of this page's verified citation list.

Time	Topic	What was said	Flags
0:01:27	The chair corrects the meeting's own notice	"I do have one correction and two amendments. The correction is under discussion item action items number one, nonpublic meeting session RSA 91-A32 [91-A:3, II]. It reads a C and it should read L." The posted agenda headed the item "(a, c & i)" while reproducing beneath it the text of paragraphs lettered (a), (c) and (l). The correction was made aloud, before any motion, and the motion that followed used the corrected letters.	OBSERVATION
0:03:53	The central office empties out	Kennedy: "I have two in the HR department. So I've received recently the resignation from Mr. Patrick O'Hearn, the HR director. And that would be effective October 17th. It was a two week notice when it was just given on Friday." A second HR resignation took effect immediately on October 1. "I have also just recently received the resignation of Assistant Superintendent Michael Kosk[i], and that would be effective October 20th." The chair extended the board's thanks. Five days earlier O'Hearn had called the roll and presented an agenda item to the Claremont board.	OBSERVATION POSITIVE
0:05:31	Into nonpublic, and back out in twenty-seven seconds of recording	The motion named the paragraph and the subsections; the chair stopped to require a roll call — "You need a roll call vote to go into nonpublic" — and took one. The return was also moved and roll-called. Then the seal: "on advice of our attorney, Sarah Friedman, to seal the minutes for five years," carried on a third roll call in which the vice chair restated the ground as "The advice is to seal … five years per the attorney." No statutory finding is stated on the recording, and the recording contains none of the session itself.	MEDIUM POSITIVE
0:10:45	First principle: why the board exists	Phillips, citing what the transcript renders as "RSA 1891 a paragraph one": "shall be the duty of the school board to provide a district expense, elementary and secondary education for all pupils who reside in the district. That is … why the school boards exist … And fulfilling that duty is really your only function." He noted the room contained two separate districts.
0:16:03	Second principle: the board acts only as a board — with exactly two exceptions	"what you can't delegate to an individual or even to a committee, are those things that should be determined by the board itself." He named the two statutory exceptions: student discipline hearings, which a committee of board members may hold, and the check manifest, where "the requirement is that either the board approves all payments made by the treasurer or two or more members so authorized by the board to do so." At 0:16:45: "those are the only two places where statutes say … less than a quorum of the board can take action."
0:16:45	Third principle: governance is not management	"The board's job is not to run the schools, but to see that they are run well. The board does this through policies, setting divisions [visions] and goals of the district and then fulfilling them through oversight of the administration." At 0:18:50 he called hiring and evaluating the superintendent "probably the" single most consequential thing a board does, and described evaluation as a continuous process of goals, mid-year review and year-end judgment rather than an annual form.
0:30:32	Policy, procedure, and the gap between them	Phillips: policies are the board's legislative act; administrative procedures implement them, and "there's almost no district" that has the procedures to match. Whitney at 0:34:26 asked how a board evaluates whether the policies it passes are actually being followed. His answer: have the policy committee require reports on specific policies, on a calendar. Whitney: "Internal audit, so to speak."
0:53:08	"Make sure you get an annual audit" — "That's a major assumption right there"	Phillips, listing what a board should receive: "regular monthly, quarterly, annual and other as needed … You get the annual other first, make sure you get an annual audit." Crawford, immediately: "That's a that's a major assumption right there. Annual audit." He continued that audits "are not the be all, end all, but they certainly are the only place" a board gets an independent look, and that what matters is usually the processes rather than the pennies.	POSITIVE
0:54:09	What does a board do when it asks and is not answered?	Crawford: "what if a board asks for them and doesn't receive them? What's how how does a board what's the board's responsibility in that?" Phillips: "The board then pulls out the contract and decides whether … this is a something that … requires a heavy hand." He confirmed the board's only direct employee is the superintendent, and that everything else runs through that office.
0:56:46	The question this board actually came with	Whitney: "given the reports that we do receive, how do you determine veracity? Like what are the red flags? So we struggled with inaccurate reports, meaning that we were receiving reports that was not reflective of our actual, financial situation … in time leading up to this crisis, we were getting reports. They just were not reflective of accurate data. So if not you, who could we like? … what organization is like, hey, this is like a big red flag." Crawford added the specific case at 0:59:18: "all of us sign an miss 25 [MS-25] … it takes a lot of energy and time for each of us to go back and verify that those numbers on that report are correct."	POSITIVE
1:00:04	The answer: a finance committee that is not only board members	Phillips: "the finance committee can involve people other than school board members. So if you have people [in the community with the expertise]" — and periodic aggregate reporting. Hawkins pressed that this had been "years in building" and that catching it "essentially [takes] half an accountant looking at" the reports. Phillips, at 1:01:17, on the three worst cases of his career: "Oh, you haven't had an audit in six years. And okay, there's there's problem number one." Hawkins drew the conclusion at 1:02:04: the board should "hone in on the audit."
1:22:48	What may leave a nonpublic session	"if you have taken the confidential information in your official function, then mum's the word." He warned boards to be mindful of who sits on negotiating committees, described a district where a single member's disclosure hampered the majority's will, and set out at 1:23:48 what does come out of nonpublic session — decisions, not deliberations.	MEDIUM
1:24:17	Complaints: take just enough information, then hand it on	A board member should get the complainant's name, the nature of the complaint and roughly when — and not the witnesses, not the detail — then pass it to the superintendent and point the family to the policy that governs it. Asked why gather anything at all rather than simply redirecting, Phillips answered that it stops the game of telephone and that "solving problems at the highest level is usually not the best use of resources." Hawkins asked whether deferring to the chair was appropriate; he said it was, provided the rest of the board is told separately.
1:38:04	The board cannot hire whom the superintendent has not nominated	"One thing that's, sometimes comes as a surprise is unless the superintendent has nominated that person, you cannot hire them." He distinguished tenured staff requesting a hearing, non-professional employees, and the support staff — bus drivers, food service — whom some boards vote on and others delegate, adding that a board should at minimum "know who's working for you."	POSITIVE
1:42:11	The quasi-judicial seat: why hearing one side early costs you the case	When the board sits as a hearing body — student discipline, an enrollment appeal, a dismissal — "you expect a fair and impartial judge in the room." The more a member has heard from one side beforehand, the less that holds. He gave the arbitration case that came back: a teacher dismissed, reinstated two years later, "and guess what? You have to have a hearing. Again." He drew the line at bias about people and beliefs, while noting members are not required "to remain in the dark."
1:49:51	The right-to-know slides are skipped	"I usually include right to know slides on here. It wasn't really part of the discussion. I'm happy to [go through them]" — Hawkins: "We live in right to know." Crawford agreed, and the section was passed over. It is the one part of the syllabus this board declined, on a night whose own nonpublic minutes had just been sealed for five years and whose public minutes were never produced.	MEDIUM
1:51:04	Hawkins asks about the seat the Claremont board could not fill	"At the Claremont board meeting … A member resigned and, we were going to appoint someone … Or can we continue as a even number board from your perspective? I looked for the RSA. I read the RSA." Phillips: "There's no … absolute requirement that you fill it, depending on the challenges that a district is facing. And … where you are in the budget cycle. It's not uncommon, for instance, for boards not to appoint somebody at this point in the year." He noted the countervailing cost — fewer members, more committee work — and that "the closer you get to an election and to the budget process, the easier it is to say we've got enough problems going on." Told the board was six of seven, he judged Claremont's position "a little easier" than a five-member board down to four. See the October 1 deadlock.
1:55:36	The revolving loan fund reaches the Senate	Damon: "the hearing before the Senate Education Committee on the proposal to create a revolving … loan fund for the Claremont School District is next Tuesday, the 14th at 1:00, and it is at Granite Place because the legislative office building is closed for the next year or so being remodeled." At 1:56:57: "the Senate will take it up on their veto day, which is October 23rd. If the Senate passes it, then the House will take it up on our veto day, which is December 17th." That is the instrument the Claremont board had resolved to seek five days earlier.
1:58:21	An auditors' report, at a meeting to be determined	Hawkins: "there will be an audit report presented by the auditors at a future s a meeting to be determined. But that will happen. And they do understand that they need to have everything up to date by June 30th." The agenda's "Future SAU Meeting Agenda Item: Audit Reports Provided by Auditor" carries no date, and the agenda's other future item, "Financial Update - Mr. Angell," was not reached at this meeting.	OBSERVATION

Items flagged for review

These are a reviewer's aid, not findings of violation and not legal advice. Each rule-based flag names the provision it rests on and links to the primary source; where no verified rule applies, the item is labelled an observation. Verify against the recording and the primary sources before relying on any of it.

MEDIUM No minutes exist for this meeting — and none have ever been located for any SAU 6 meeting

RSA 91-A:2, II requires the minutes of a public body's meeting to be "promptly recorded and open to public inspection not more than 5 business days after the meeting," and to record the members present, the persons appearing before the body, a brief description of the subject matter and any final decisions. Ten and a half months after this meeting, no minutes for it have been located. What was checked, on 2026-08-23: the district's Meeting Minutes share, both the 2025 and the 2026 year folders; and the SAU 6 Schoolboard Packets share, where the pattern is that each SAU 6 packet folder carries minutes for an earlier meeting rather than its own — so a later folder would be where this meeting's minutes should surface, and none does. No SAU-titled minutes for any SAU 6 meeting appear in these shares at all. The gap is not confined to the SAU board: a separate Claremont School Board meeting was noticed for 5:30 p.m. the same evening in the same building, with one action item, and it too has no minutes in the shares — though it does have its own recording, Cablecast show 16881, identified after this page was written. The absence matters more here than it usually would, because the recording is the only substitute and this recording is incomplete: it contains none of the nonpublic session, and the roll call it does contain is too garbled to establish who was present — precisely the fact RSA 91-A:2, II makes minutes responsible for. This is graded MEDIUM rather than HIGH for one reason: the statutory duty is that minutes be open to inspection, not that they be published online. The district may hold minutes at the SAU office that have never been posted. No inspection request was made or refused in the course of building this page, so what is established is that the public record is empty, not that the statutory duty was breached. A refused or unanswered inspection request would move this flag to HIGH.

Sources: RSA 91-A:2, II (minutes promptly recorded and open to public inspection within 5 business days; contents); RSA 91-A:4 (access to governmental records); 11. SAU6 10.6.25 — the meeting's entire packet, one agenda; MAP.md section 96a for the share-by-share negative.

MEDIUM Nonpublic minutes sealed for five years with no statutory finding stated on the record

RSA 91-A:3, III requires minutes of a nonpublic session to be publicly disclosed within 72 hours unless two-thirds of the members present determine, by recorded vote, that divulging them would likely affect adversely the reputation of a person other than a member of the body, or render a proposed action ineffective. The determination is the thing that authorises the seal; the vote records it. On this recording the ground offered for sealing is not that determination but the source of the advice: Whitney moved "on advice of our attorney, Sarah Friedman, to seal the minutes for five years," and the vice chair answered the roll with "The advice is to seal … five years per the attorney. Yes." No member states which statutory condition applies, and the recording ends the sequence there. Two qualifications are owed. First, counsel's advice may well have identified the correct ground — the exemptions the board had just entered under include the reputation of a non-member, which is one of the two statutory conditions — and a board is entitled to consult counsel; consultation with legal counsel is expressly outside the definition of a "meeting" under RSA 91-A:2, I. Second, a finding may have been made and minuted inside the nonpublic session itself. But that is exactly what cannot be checked: the nonpublic minutes are sealed, no public minutes exist to record the determination, and the recording contains none of the session. The combined effect is that a five-year seal rests, so far as any member of the public can see, on an unexplained instruction. Note also the length: the statute sets no maximum, but it fixes 72 hours as the default and requires the finding as the price of departing from it, and five years is a long way from 72 hours to travel without a stated reason.

Sources: RSA 91-A:3, III (nonpublic minutes disclosed within 72 hours unless sealed by a recorded two-thirds vote with a statutory determination); RSA 91-A:3, II(a) and (c) (dismissal, promotion, compensation or discipline of an employee; matters likely to adversely affect the reputation of a non-member); RSA 91-A:2, I (consultation with legal counsel excluded from the definition of "meeting").

OBSERVATION The posted notice named one nonpublic exemption and printed another; the fix was made aloud in the room

The agenda the public could read before the meeting headed its nonpublic item "RSA 91-A:3, II (a, c & i)" and then reproduced, beneath it, the text of three paragraphs lettered (a), (c) and (l) — so the heading and the body of the district's own notice disagreed about the third ground. The chair caught it and corrected it from the chair at 0:01:27, before any motion: "It reads a C and it should read L." The motion that followed used the corrected letters. This page verifies only what the two documents say; the lettering and content of paragraph (l) of RSA 91-A:3, II have not been checked against the statute for this page, and no conclusion is drawn about whether the ground itself was available. The observation is about the notice: (a) and (c) are among the verified exemptions, but a citizen reading the posted agenda in advance — which is the point of advance notice under RSA 91-A:2, II — could not have told from it which third ground the board intended to use, and the correction reached only the people already in the room. It is recorded as an observation rather than a process gap because no verified rule prescribes how precisely an agenda must cite an exemption in advance; RSA 91-A:3, I(b) attaches its requirement to the motion, and the motion here was correct.

Sources: RSA 91-A:2, II (notice not less than 24 hours in advance); RSA 91-A:3, I(b) (motion naming the specific exemption, and a roll call vote in public); SAU6 School Board Agenda 10.6.25. No verified rule was identified governing the citation of an exemption in a posted agenda as distinct from the motion.

OBSERVATION Three central-office resignations in a fortnight leave two people running the SAU, with no decision on replacements until the next fiscal year

In the announcement at 0:03:53 the interim superintendent reported the resignations of the human resources director (effective October 17, on two weeks' notice given the previous Friday), a second HR staff member (effective immediately, October 1) and the assistant superintendent for curriculum, instruction, innovation and assessment (effective October 20). Her own summary: that leaves "Mr. Angel[l] and me as the remaining doe [SAU office] occupants." The board's response was to add an other-business item and defer: no decision on SAU-level administrative positions for the remainder of the year, with the superintendent to report back. Set against what the same officers were doing five days earlier — the HR director calling the roll for the Claremont board and acting as its clerk, and Angell simultaneously rebuilding four years of books, filing overdue state reports and presenting a draft audit — the observation is one of capacity rather than legality. No verified rule sets a minimum staffing level for a school administrative unit, requires a board to fill an administrative vacancy, or was breached by deferring the question. The most concrete consequence visible in this record is the meeting's own last item: an auditors' report promised "at a future s a meeting to be determined," with the auditors understood to need "everything up to date by June 30th," and the agenda's financial update not reached.

Sources: SAU6 School Board Agenda 10.6.25 (its central-office roster names the officers who resigned); Claremont School Board, October 1, 2025 for what those officers were carrying five days earlier. No verified rule was identified governing SAU administrative staffing levels or the timing of replacements; recorded as an observation.

POSITIVE A board in crisis spent two hours being told, on camera, what it is allowed to do — and used the time to ask about its own failures

The chair's stated reason for the session was to clarify the board's role "for us, as well as for the public," and the whole of it was broadcast. What makes it worth a flag is not the training but the questions. Crawford's interjection when told to make sure the board gets an annual audit — "That's a that's a major assumption right there" — and her follow-up at 0:54:09 asking what recourse a board has when it asks for reports and does not receive them, are a public admission of what had been happening. Whitney's question at 0:56:46 is blunter still: the board had been "receiving reports that was not reflective of our actual, financial situation," and she wanted to know where a lay board turns to learn the red flags. Hawkins pushed the answer toward something actionable — a finance committee that can include non-members with the relevant expertise, and a policy committee that calls for reports on specific policies on a schedule, which Whitney restated as an "internal audit." The presentation also put on the public record two constraints this district had reason to hear: that only student discipline hearings and the check manifest may be handled by fewer than a quorum, and that a board cannot hire a person the superintendent has not nominated — the rule RSA 189:39 states. None of this was required. A board may take training privately; it may decline to name its own failures while an invited lawyer is holding the floor and the camera is running. This one did neither.

Sources: RSA 189:39 (superintendents nominate and school boards elect all teachers); RSA 91-A:2, II (public meetings and notice); SAU6 School Board Agenda 10.6.25. The presenter's own statutory citations are his, transcribed by machine, and are not verified on this page.

POSITIVE The nonpublic session was entered by the book, and the resignations were announced in open session before the door closed

RSA 91-A:3, I(b) requires that a public body enter nonpublic session only on a motion naming the specific exemption relied on, carried by a roll call vote taken in public. That is exactly what happened: Whitney's motion at 0:05:31 named the paragraph and the subsections, the chair stopped proceedings to insist on the roll — "You need a roll call vote to go into nonpublic" — and one was taken; the return to public session was likewise moved and roll-called; and the seal was put as a separate motion with its own roll call rather than being folded into the return. The chair had also corrected the agenda's mis-lettered exemption aloud before the motion was made, so the motion used the right letters. Two smaller things belong here. When Whitney first moved into nonpublic at 0:03:27, the chair asked her to withdraw it — "I made a mistake. We do have some announcements" — so that the personnel news would be delivered in the open rather than behind the door that was about to close. And what was then delivered was specific: three officers named, with their effective dates and the length of notice given, plus the superintendent's own assessment of what the office had left. A board wanting to say less had an obvious opportunity to do so, minutes away.

Sources: RSA 91-A:3, I(b) (nonpublic session requires a motion naming the specific exemption and a roll call vote in public); RSA 91-A:3, II(a) and (c) (the employee-personnel and non-member-reputation exemptions named in the motion); RSA 91-A:2, II (minutes record persons appearing and subject matter).

Appendix — source files

Official and public sources

Recording: Claremont Community TV, Cablecast show 16882 — "Special SAU #6 Board Meeting - 10/6/25"
Packet folder: 11. SAU6 10.6.25 — 1 document, in the SAU 6 Schoolboard Packets share
Agenda: SAU6 School Board Agenda 10.6.25 — the entire documentary record of this meeting. Its future-dates list gives the SAU 6 board meeting as "November 13, 2023" the wrong year is the district's, and its nonpublic item is headed "(a, c & i)" over text lettered (a), (c) and (l) the mismatch is the district's
Minutes: none. Verified 2026-08-23 against the district's Meeting Minutes share (2025 and 2026 year folders) and the SAU 6 Schoolboard Packets share, whose folders carry minutes for earlier meetings rather than their own. No SAU-titled minutes for any SAU 6 meeting were located in either share.
Same-date Claremont meeting: a separate folder, 9. CSB 10.6.25, sits in the Claremont packets share holding CSB Agenda 10.6.25. MAP.md records that whether the two agendas describe the same gathering was not determined; opening the document settles it — they are two different meetings. The Claremont agenda is for a meeting of the Claremont School Board, called for 5:30 p.m. the same evening in the same building, running to a scheduled 6:00 p.m. adjournment, with one action item: "Approval of Substitute Secretary Position (Discussion/Vote)." The SAU 6 meeting on this page begins at 6:00 p.m. That earlier meeting has no minutes in the shares, but it does have its own recording — Cablecast show 16881, Special School Board Meeting 10/6/25, identified after this page was written; this recording opens with the SAU 6 call to order.

Project files

Relative links work when this page is opened from Output/HTML/.

Output/Dialogue/16882 SAU6BoardMeeting100625.mp4.CSV — speaker-attributed dialogue, 431 rows
Input/Transcripts/16882 SAU6BoardMeeting100625.mp4.json — diarized transcript
Input/SupportingDocuments/MAP.md — meeting-to-documents map, section 96a
Companion meeting: Claremont School Board, October 1, 2025 — the deadlocked appointment Hawkins asks about here, and the resolution whose Senate hearing Representative Damon reports
No local video: this meeting predates the videos held in Input/Videos/; the recording is available only through the Cablecast link above.