Data Quality Report

TIER 1 A1.1 · The phantom RSA chapter 92-A, in agendas, minutes and aloud

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A2 · html-briefing A1 · legal-anchors A1, N7

There is no RSA chapter 92-A: Title VI runs 91-A, 91-B, 91-C, 92, 93-A, 93-B, 98-A, 99-A, 100-A, 101-A, 101-B, 102, 103, and chapter 92 is "Tenure and Oath of Office in Certain Cases". Three SAU 6 agendas carry the citation (12/14/23, 1/11/24, 2/15/24), two sets of SAU 6 minutes repeat it (1/11, 2/15) — including a sentence the clerk composed, "motioned to move into non-public under RSA 92-A:3,II" — and on show 15580 at 0:02:37 the chair speaks it aloud, corrects herself once, and lands on the wrong chapter both times. It stops in SAU 6 paperwork after 15 February 2024; from the 4/11/24 agenda ("Non public meeting session RSA 91-A:3, II (a)") the SAU 6 nonpublic citations are right, but that clearance covers SAU 6 nonpublic-session citations only. The standing instruction is to report it as a defective citation in the document, never to repair it silently to 91-A and never to assume the body meant 91-A:3, II "even though it plainly did" — a helpful repair would manufacture a Right-to-Know holding the agenda never invoked.

Primary source: the 12/14/23, 1/11/24 and 2/15/24 SAU 6 agendas; the 1/11 and 2/15 minutes; show 15580 at 0:02:37; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/NHTOC/NHTOC-VI.htm (verified 2026-08-29).

TIER 1 A1.2 · Claremont by-laws Appendix D counts the nonpublic grounds four different ways

Tier 1 · one-off document, standing effect · Sources: briefing A3 · html-briefing A8 · legal-anchors A12

Appendix D of the by-laws adopted 5 June 2024 says RSA 91-A:3 "sets forth eight grounds" in prose, then enumerates nine, then calls them "the nine statutory bases" two paragraphs later, then letters only six (a)–(f) in its compliance checklist — fusing II(d), II(e) and II(g) into one item and continuing the same letter series g–o for procedural steps. The statute runs (a) through (m): thirteen lettered subparagraphs with (f) repealed, so twelve live grounds (2023, 189:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023). A page adopting the document's count would understate the available grounds and could flag a validly-cited ground as outside the statute. Appendix D also states the 72-hour rule and a nine-item minimum-content list for nonpublic minutes, citing policy BEDG, and its miscounting propagates into the board's own citations (see A1.3).

Primary source: by-laws Appendix D, adopted 5 June 2024; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 A1.3 · The 7 August 2024 Claremont minutes cite "RSA 91-A:3, I & II (1)"

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A4 · html-briefing A9 · legal-anchors C39, N33

Paragraph I of RSA 91-A:3 contains no exemptions at all — it is the procedural entry provision, and I(b) requires the motion to "state on its face the specific exemption under paragraph II", by roll call, majority of members present. "II (1)" is the by-laws' own invented numbering rather than the statute's lettering. A motion or set of minutes citing 91-A:3, I for a subject-matter ground has stated no valid exemption at all. This record is why §20's "the paperwork is right from April 2024" clearance covers SAU 6 only and must never be read across to Claremont: check both bodies separately.

Primary source: the 7 August 2024 Claremont minutes; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 A1.4 · The 14 November 2024 Claremont nonpublic session — mislettered, truncated, unsealed and undisclosed

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A5 · html-briefing A28 · legal-anchors A10

The draft minutes (Drive 1h9fxbyMjj9OxwkICoO6wAaA5B_chW1k2, filed in 8. CSB 11.20.24) cite the entry as "RSA 91-A: 3, II (a & d)" and print "(b)" against the text of II(d) — but II(b) is "The hiring of any person as a public employee" and II(d) is the real-property ground, so a reader takes a property discussion for a hiring exemption. They also print II(d) truncated, dropping its operative condition, "which, if discussed in public, would likely benefit a party or parties" — a trailing clause the file records as routinely dropped by district paperwork and the very clause that decides whether the exemption was available. The session ran 8:19–8:59 p.m. with no motion to seal, so RSA 91-A:3, III required disclosure within 72 hours, and no nonpublic minutes exist. Both provisions are 2023, 189:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023.

Primary source: draft minutes Drive 1h9fxbyMjj9OxwkICoO6wAaA5B_chW1k2; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 A1.5 · Policy BBBH-S §E cites RSA 194:4 for the duty to provide superintendent services

Tier 1 · one-off, member of a systemic set · Sources: briefing A6 · html-briefing A2 · legal-anchors A2, N17

RSA 194:4 is "Notes of Districts" — district borrowing, notes authenticated by the treasurer and school board (1909, 138:1 · PL 119:4 · RL 138:4). It says nothing about superintendent services. The policy was adopted by SAU 6 on 12 September 2024 and is carried in pending_legal_anchors.md as a negative anchor; a page treating the citation as good law would have described a borrowing statute as the source of SAU service authority. The correct route is RSA 194-C:5, II(a) → RSA 194-C:4. It is one of the six misdirected district citations enumerated at html-briefing §29f.

Primary source: SAU 6 policy BBBH-S §E, adopted 12 September 2024; RSA 194-C:4 at https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-4.htm.

TIER 1 A1.6 · Policy DIE attributes an NHDOE filing requirement to RSA 671:5

Tier 1 · one-off, member of a systemic set · Sources: briefing A7 · html-briefing A3 · legal-anchors A3, N18

RSA 671:5 contains no NHDOE filing requirement and never mentions the department — it is the election of district auditors at each district election (1979, 321:1; 2010, 262:2, eff. Sept. 4, 2010). Adopted by SAU 6 on 12 September 2024 and filed as a negative anchor. A page repeating the policy would have asserted a state filing obligation that no statute imposes, and might then have flagged non-filing as a violation. Second of the two wrong statutes in the 12 September 2024 SAU 6 policies, and a member of the §29f set of six.

Primary source: SAU 6 policy DIE, adopted 12 September 2024.

TIER 1 A1.7 · By-law 4.03 grounds the clerk's minutes, notice and posting duties in "RSA 671:20 and RSA 671:25"

Tier 1 · one-off, member of a systemic set · Sources: briefing A8 · html-briefing A4 · legal-anchors A4, N23

RSA 671:20 ¶I is ballot preparation by the district clerk (1979, 321:1); ¶II — cost-per-pupil and proficiency scores on the ballot — was added 2025, 281:1, eff. Sept. 30, 2025. RSA 671:25 is ballot preparation and delivery to the town moderator (1979, 321:1; 1997, 176:7). Neither says anything about minutes, notice or posting, and a page adopting the by-law's citation would have located the minutes duty in the wrong chapter entirely and missed RSA 91-A:2, II, which actually carries it. The defective citation sits on an otherwise load-bearing rule: 4.03(d) makes posting agenda materials with the agenda a clerk's duty, and is the right anchor for a missing exhibit.

Primary source: Claremont School Board by-law 4.03; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LXIII/671/671-20.htm.

TIER 1 A1.8 · By-law 1.11 cites "RSA 91-A:II" — a chapter and a paragraph with no section

Tier 1 · one-off, member of a systemic set · Sources: briefing A9 · html-briefing A6

The citation is malformed on its face: it names a chapter and a paragraph but omits the section, so it resolves to nothing. It matters because by-laws 1.05(c)–(d) and 1.11 are the rules that send every subcommittee notice and every set of subcommittee minutes to the SAU 6 website — the defective citation is attached to the subcommittee-publication duty itself (see A2.22). Sixth and last member of the §29f set: phantom RSA 92-A; RSA 194:4 (BBBH-S §E); RSA 671:5 (DIE); by-law 4.03's RSA 671:20/671:25; policy JLCK's Ed 306.04(b)(15)/(b)(23); by-law 1.11's RSA 91-A:II.

Primary source: Claremont School Board by-law 1.11.

TIER 1 A1.9 · Policy JLCK misdescribes two Ed 306.04(b) subparagraphs

Tier 1 · one-off, member of a systemic set · Sources: briefing A10 · html-briefing A5 · legal-anchors A5

Claremont policy JLCK as adopted 4 February 2026 gives Ed 306.04(b)(15) as "Behavior Management and Intervention for Students" and (b)(23) as "Meeting the Special Physical Health Needs of Students." Under readoption Doc. #14150, eff. 12-13-24, (b)(15) is "Supporting the physical and emotional health needs of students…" and (b)(23) is "Developmentally appropriate daily physical activity pursuant to Ed 310." Both are wrong, and a page quoting the policy's captions as the rule's text would have attributed two non-existent requirements to the State Board. The briefing inventory records only its membership in the set of six; the legal-anchors file supplies the adoption date and the actual rule captions.

Primary source: Claremont policy JLCK as adopted 4 Feb 2026; https://gc.nh.gov/rules/state_agencies/ed300.html.

TIER 1 A1.10 · A district policy cites 42 U.S.C. §218d, which does not exist

Tier 1 · one-off, easily propagated · Sources: briefing A11 · html-briefing A7 · legal-anchors A11, N13

The PUMP Act is 29 U.S.C. §218d (Pub. L. 117-328, div. KK, §102(a)(2), 136 Stat. 6093, in force 29 December 2022); 42 U.S.C. §218 is the National Advisory Council on Migrant Health. Copying the policy's citation would have pointed readers at a public-health advisory body as the source of a lactation-break duty. The briefing flags it as "easy to copy" — a citation a page could propagate. It is not counted among the §29f six, which are the RSA and Ed-rule citations. Related negative: 29 U.S.C. §218d(b) does not require compensation for break time, so a board that pays hourly nursing periods exceeds the federal floor and is not thereby irregular.

Primary source: the district policy identified in the February–March 2024 wave; "NEGATIVE ANCHOR — there is no 42 U.S.C. §218d."

TIER 1 A1.11 · Claremont by-laws Appendix A misstates Ed 303.01(f)

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A6, F15

Appendix A presents the State Board rule as requiring board meetings "at least once a month (except the month of July)." Ed 303.01(f) says "at least once in 2 months" and requires the attendance of the superintendent or designee (New #8583 eff. 3-15-06; ss by #10649 eff. 7-26-14). The by-law is stricter, so no violation turns on it, but it is offered as the State Board's text and is not — a page quoting Appendix A as the rule would have created a monthly-meeting mandate that does not exist. The defect is the misattribution, not an under-meeting; and the rule's pre-12-13-24 vintage is unresolved, so the file directs that it not be flagged until the earlier Ed 300 text is recovered (see D2.24).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rules/state_agencies/ed300.html.

TIER 1 A1.12 · SAU 6 policy BBBH-S §D lets a single board member demand a weighted vote

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A7

RSA 194-C:8 provides that weighted votes "shall only be used upon the demand of a majority of the members of any board present and voting" (1996, 298:3, eff. Aug. 9, 1996). Policy BBBH-S §D lets "a board member" demand one. The file records this as "a real conflict with the statute, adopted on counsel's advice that the sentence was needed 'to be in compliance'." A page taking the policy at face value would have treated a single-member demand as lawful and missed the conflict.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-8.htm.

TIER 1 A1.13 · The district's nonpublic-minutes form carries the repealed subparagraph (f)

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A13

7.21.26 Non-Public Meeting Session Minutes.docx (Drive 198DxPDMeugFuROP2VygIl9qxjWwmAojJ) is the district's nonpublic-minutes form, listing all thirteen lettered grounds with tick boxes, and its (f) entry is the repealed adult-parole-board ground. A board ticking (f) would have stated a ground that no longer exists; a page treating the form as authoritative would have reported a live exemption where none remains. The file notes that by July 2026 the board uses a proper instrument, and that for most of the corpus no such document is reachable at all.

Primary source: Google Drive 198DxPDMeugFuROP2VygIl9qxjWwmAojJ.

TIER 1 A1.14 · Claremont's Rules of Procedure misstate the voter's remedy for a doubted vote

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A16 · html-briefing A17 · legal-anchors A8

The sheet tells voters that "any voter who doubts the accuracy of any non-counted vote may require the Moderator to determine a vote by a counted show of hands or counted standing vote." Neither statute says that: RSA 40:4-a (2006, 117:1, eff. July 9, 2006) requires 5 voters in writing before a vote; RSA 40:4-b (1971, 524:1; never amended) requires 7 or more immediately after; and in both the remedy is a secret "yes-no" ballot, not a counted show of hands. The same sheet omits RSA 40:13, IV(a) and IV(c) entirely. It appears in 2023 and 2024, is expected in 2025 and 2026, and governs deliberative sessions where the body is the voters rather than the board — so it is the participants' operating instructions, and a page relying on it would describe the wrong threshold and the wrong remedy.

Primary source: Claremont's published Rules of Procedure sheet, 2023 and 2024 editions; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-4-a.htm ; /40-4-b.htm.

TIER 1 A1.15 · Claremont's published default-budget worksheets truncate RSA 40:13, IX(b)

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A15 · html-briefing A18 · legal-anchors A9

The 2023 and FY25 worksheets quote the default-budget definition with the eliminated-positions clause cut off — stopping before "…and by salaries and benefits of positions that have been eliminated in the proposed budget," and before the exclusion for "vacant positions under recruitment or positions redefined in the proposed operating budget." Independently confirmed from the tape: Mary Henry read the definition aloud almost verbatim and stopped at the same place — in the very year the district eliminated PreK (~$500,000 / 23 identified students, per the 7 January minutes). A page repeating the worksheet would state the formula without the reduction most likely to be contested, and would describe the district's own calculation as complete when the statute requires more. No default-budget form exists in the December packet or in the 15 January hearing packet at all.

Primary source: Claremont's published default-budget worksheets; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-13.htm ; 2023 codification at law.justia.com.

TIER 1 A1.16 · "Interim moderator" is not a New Hampshire office, and none was lawfully designated on 3 February 2024

Tier 1 · one-off, flagged HIGH · Sources: briefing A17 · html-briefing A19 · legal-anchors N9

All four district documents for 2/3/2024 — agenda, Rules of Procedure, draft and approved minutes — style Charlene Lovett "interim moderator", a title with no statutory basis. RSA 197:26 expressly bars a school board from filling a moderator vacancy ("except that of moderator"; unamended since RL 139:25), and its power over other district offices runs only "until the next annual meeting". The two lawful branches are the clerk presiding (RSA 197:20; RSA 671:33, III) or a moderator pro tempore chosen by the meeting or appointed by the district clerk — neither happened. Elected moderator Tracy Pope is absent from the entire record: not on tape, not in either set of minutes. This is the page's HIGH flag, and the file directs agents to expect the same title elsewhere in the corpus and check it.

Primary source: the 2/3/24 deliberative-session record read against RSA 197:26, RSA 197:20 and RSA 671:33, III.

TIER 1 A1.17 · A chair defeated a postponement by misstating RSA 198:4-b

Tier 1 · one-off, recorded as a general trap · Sources: briefing A14 · html-briefing A10

¶I of RSA 198:4-b is the contingency fund — a separate warrant article, limited to unanticipated expenses. ¶II is retained year-end unassigned fund balance (≤5% of net assessment, prior public hearing, 7 days' newspaper notice) and states no purpose limitation at all. On 6 March 2024 a chair told the board that ¶I's "unanticipated expenses" limitation reached ¶II money and used that to defeat a postponement. The paragraph distinction is recorded as a research trap that nearly produced a wrong finding in the other direction as well (see C1.26).

Primary source: the 3/6/24 board recording, against the text of RSA 198:4-b ¶¶I–II.

TIER 1 A1.18 · By-law 2.04 narrows RSA 189:74 and policy BEDH by meeting type

Tier 1 · one-off by-law, systemic in effect · Sources: html-briefing A15 · legal-anchors A14

By-law 2.04 confines public comment to "each regular meeting". RSA 189:74 (2022, 333:1, eff. Sept. 6, 2022; never amended) has only two exceptions — ¶II emergency meetings and ¶III meetings held solely for a nonpublic session — and does not distinguish regular from special meetings, which is what defeats the by-law. Policy BEDH (Drive Doc 1fcf5-e0lKvMTRlW7e6NjpCZ6OFQPC-wymYBu0ydf1CE, first read 17 May 2023, adopted 6 September 2023) likewise requires comment at "all Board meetings", a "minimum of thirty minutes in total", and at §B.3 the chair's "vocal invitation" to the audience. By-law 2.15 subordinates the by-laws to state law, so BEDH governs; every Claremont agenda hyperlinks it at its foot. A page applying by-law 2.04 would conclude no comment period was owed at a special meeting when the statute owes one.

Primary source: policy BEDH, Drive Doc 1fcf5-e0lKvMTRlW7e6NjpCZ6OFQPC-wymYBu0ydf1CE, read against by-laws 2.04 and 2.15 and https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/xv/189/189-74.htm.

TIER 1 A1.19 · Policy BEDH is internally contradictory on public comment

Tier 1 · one-off, standing · Sources: briefing A22 · html-briefing A15 · legal-anchors N50

Adopted 6 September 2023 (first read 17 May 2023), BEDH requires comment at "all Board meetings" with a "minimum of thirty minutes in total" in §B, against a procedures clause saying the chair "will close the public comment period after there is no response". Read together with the statutory question at D2.27 — whether the 30 minutes is a floor on the opportunity or on elapsed time — this is why a short comment period cannot be flagged as a violation where nobody was turned away. The countervailing reading is recorded too: B.2 expressly locates the first comment period on non-agenda topics and B.5 requires the chair to open "Board Discussion Regarding Citizens Comments" after closing it, so a chair restricting the first period to non-agenda business is following policy, not narrowing it.

Primary source: Claremont policy BEDH, adopted 6 September 2023; by-law 2.04.

TIER 1 A1.20 · 9/4/24 Exhibit D states the wrong statutory basis for SAU cost apportionment, uncorrected

Tier 1 · one-off with downstream effect · Sources: briefing A12

The exhibit reads "Current percentages are based on student population per district", where RSA 194-C:9, I is ½ average daily membership + ½ equalized valuation. Mary Henry corrected it aloud at the table; the document was not changed and the minutes do not record the correction. The board then sent it to Unity characterised as "It's fact. It's data.", and it landed badly at the SAU 6 meeting of 12 September 2024. Two clauses of ¶I that the project's own catalogue had not recorded bear on it: the equalized valuation is that "of each district as of June 30 of the preceding school year", and a new service requires "a majority of the school districts … representing not less than 60 percent of the total pupils" (2003, 279:1, in force from 16 Sept 2003).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16, "Document defects worth carrying"; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-9.htm.

TIER 1 A1.21 · The $420,000 released under RSA 198:4-b, II(a) was re-described as roof money and the minutes adopted the wrong version

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A13, C29

The 6 March 2024 release was confined by the clerk's own read-back to "unintentional, unanticipated special education costs". Mary Henry corrected the roof attribution twice on tape, at 0:31:43 and 0:31:45; a member restated it anyway and the approved minutes adopted his version. The project inherited the district's error: briefing Addendum 8's "$400,000 from reserves for the Stevens roof" is therefore unsupported (see C1.73). The ASR compounds it — for $20,000 in the clerk's read-back is $420,000 (see B1.3).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16 §3; the approved 3/6/24 minutes against the recording at 0:31:43–0:31:45.

TIER 1 A1.22 · A petition cites RSA 32:5-b to create a school district budget cap

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A15, N26

RSA 32:5-b is the LOCAL TAX CAP, a municipal provision (2011, 234:6 … 2025, 170:1 and 183:1, eff. Sept. 13, 2025). The school district budget cap is RSA 32:5-e / 32:5-f (2024, 353:2, eff. Oct. 1, 2024; 2025, 183:5–7, eff. Sept. 13, 2025). A petition citing 32:5-b while purporting to create a school budget cap has cited the wrong section, and a page validating it would have applied municipal tax-cap mechanics to a school warrant article.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-5-b.htm ; /32-5-e.htm ; /32-5-f.htm.

TIER 1 A1.23 · A statement on the 6 May 2026 recording that RSA 198:4-d allows an extension

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A16, N30

RSA 198:4-d provides that the report "shall be submitted on or before September 1 of each year" and contains no extension provision (source note ends 2025, 141:401, eff. July 1, 2025). The assertion made on the 6 May 2026 recording is contrary to the section, and a page repeating the speaker's claim would have excused a late DOE-25 on a statutory basis that does not exist. Only the September 1 filing date is safe to rely on for meetings before July 2025 (see C1 vintage records).

Primary source: legal-anchors entry "RSA 198:4-d — and a negative."

TIER 1 A1.24 · A board member's floor claim that RSA 194-C:5 "fixes salaries and benefits"

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A17

The full ¶III reads that the SAU board "shall fix the salaries of all school administrative unit personnel, shall apportion the expense of the salaries and benefits among the several districts…" — "and benefits" sits in the apportionment clause, not the fixing clause (1996, 298:3, eff. Aug. 9, 1996; never amended). The floor claim is therefore inexact, and a page adopting it would have credited the SAU board with a benefits-setting power the section does not grant.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-5.htm.

TIER 1 A1.25 · "The State covers 75%" of CTE construction — a funding practice recited as statute

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors A18, N14

RSA 188-E:3 fixes no percentage: ¶I says the commissioner "shall make grants available to designated regional centers for construction… or renovation, expansion, or replacement"; ¶II is site work. The 75% figure heard repeatedly across this corpus is a funding practice, not a statutory share — the SRVRTC director says as much himself. A page treating 75% as a statutory entitlement would have reported a shortfall against a legal standard that does not exist. Vintage: the section's source note now ends 2025, 190:1, eff. July 1, 2025; use the 2021, 210:2 text for 2023–24 (see C1 vintage records).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/188-E/188-E-3.htm.

TIER 1 A1.26 · "Supposed to fund up to 90%" — catastrophic aid, 11/19/24 finance meeting

Tier 1 · one-off statement, systemic consequence · Sources: legal-anchors A19

No 90% figure appears anywhere in RSA 186-C:18 — the file confirms this expressly. The paragraph's two real 80 percents are the department's share of costs above the 3½× threshold up to 10× (2023, 79:141, 142, eff. July 1, 2023) and the 2025 HB 2 §137 entitlement floor. The 11/19/24 statement is a misstatement of the governing rate, and repeating it would have measured FY2025's 67.5% reimbursement against a nonexistent 90% legal benchmark.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/186-C/186-C-18.htm ; 2023/2024 Justia codifications.

TIER 1 A1.27 · The Claremont/Unity tuition agreement names two different approving bodies

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors A20

RSA 194:22 provides that "If the contract is approved by the state board the school with which it is made shall be deemed a high school maintained by the district" (note ends RL 138:21; never amended). The file records it as a LIVE TRAP: the approving body is the STATE BOARD, not the Department of Education, and the Claremont/Unity agreement names both, in different clauses. A page following the agreement's Department clause would have described approval by a body with no approval role, and could have flagged a properly approved contract as defective, or the reverse.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry under "RSA 194:2, 194:22, 194:23-b."

TIER 1 A1.28 · The adopted strategic plan assigns oversight to "the Board of Education," a body NH statute does not create at district level

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A19

Inside the same adopted plan: the Appendix defines chronic absenteeism as "10 or more unexcused absences in a school year" while the presenter said "10% or more of the school year" (0:15:14) and the adopted measure carries neither; the Fast Facts page classifies SRVRTC as "1 Alternative Program"; and one measurable goal is "Decrease the number of bullying and harassment investigations" — a count of the district's own responses to reports. A reader relying on the plan takes its governance structure, its absenteeism definition and its programme classification from a document that is internally inconsistent on all three.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 18; the adopted plan p. 5 and Appendix.

TIER 1 A1.29 · The SAU 6 board had no statutory secretary through 2023 and no treasurer through 2024–25

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A20 · legal-anchors N39

RSA 194-C:5, I requires the board to "organize by choosing a chairperson, a secretary, and a treasurer" — and note that vice chair is not one of the three statutory offices, so a reorganization flag over an unfilled vice-chair seat cites nothing. Both 2023 mastheads print only Chair and Vice Chair while the agenda line still reads "Secretary Roll Call of Attendance", and the vacancy runs at least through 17 August 2023. The treasurer vacancy surfaces only when auditor Michael Campo tells the board "the treasurer should review the check register": the 4/10/25 minutes record Hawkins noting "the SAU Board currently has no treasurer", after which Candace Crawford was elected treasurer plus two voucher signers. The 11 April 2024 reorganization had elected only chair and vice chair.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 11 (corrections, part 2) and 18; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-5.htm.

TIER 1 A1.30 · No secretary was elected at the 20 March 2024 organizational meeting, though policy BDB requires three officers

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A21

Policy BDB, adopted 2 January 2019, requires chair, vice-chair and secretary, one-year terms. On 20 March 2024 only chair and vice chair were elected, both by uncounted voice vote taken before the roll call. Note the countervailing anchor: under RSA 194-C:8 weighted votes are used only on the demand of a majority present and voting, so an uncounted voice vote is not by itself irregular (see C1 negative-anchor records) — the defect here is the missing office and the sequence, not the voice vote.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 14; the approved 3/20/24 minutes; policy BDB read from the live policy index.

TIER 1 A1.31 · Votes recorded without tallies, movers or seconders

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A53 · html-briefing A35

Across the corpus almost every vote is a voice vote with no announced tally: the 1/11/24 termination and the Pratt appointment both 10–1–1 with no tally announced and no reason stated by anyone; the 4/11/24 SAU 6 reorganization with no tally for any vote that night; 12/12/24's "Opposed? One. And any abstentions" — one dissent counted, ayes uncounted, no name and no minutes, so the dissenter cannot be identified by anyone; the 3/20/24 officer elections by uncounted voice vote; six subcommittee assignments disposed of by "no objection" with no votes. RSA 91-A:2, II's mover/seconder clause has been in force since 2018, 244:1, eff. 1 January 2019 — re-verified three times against the 2017 and 2019 codifications — so every meeting in this corpus is inside it and the omissions are real defects, not compliance the law did not yet require (see C1.1).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 18; RSA 91-A:2, II as codified 2018, 244:1.

TIER 1 A1.32 · Sealed nonpublic minutes with no announced tally and no RSA 91-A:3, III determination

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A54 · html-briefing A28

The 1/11/2024 nonpublic minutes were sealed 30 years with no announced tally and no RSA 91-A:3, III determination on the record; the 12/7/23 nonpublic was sealed 99 years with Hawkins voting No, Erickson abstaining, and no tally announced; the 22 May 2024 nonpublic was sealed 10 years; the 14 November 2024 Claremont nonpublic had no motion to seal at all. ¶III's sealing sentence requires a "recorded vote of 2/3 of the members present taken in public session" — those last four words sit inside the operative clause and are the test for a defective seal (2023, 189:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 5, 6; html-briefing §23b, §25d; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 A1.33 · The 14 November 2024 unsealing omitted the one 2024 seal whose term had lapsed

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A55

The board unsealed eight sets in public session — 13 Jul 2018, 14 Jun 2018, 10 May 2018, 17 Jul 2018, 13 Apr 2023, 11 May 2023, 31 Jul 2023, 17 Aug 2023 — with the chair saying "These minutes will be posted within 72 hours on the website." Nothing from 2024 is on the list, and the 11 April 2024 six-month seal, whose term lapsed 11 October 2024, is missing — 34 days earlier. Item IV.4 was itself added by amendment at 6:31 p.m. and is not on the posted agenda.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 17; the 14 November 2024 record.

TIER 1 A1.34 · The superintendent's contract was transacted off-agenda and no executed instrument exists in any share

Tier 1 · one-off, eleven-month thread · Sources: briefing A57

Opened 11 January 2024, when terms were "expressly delegated" to the chair and counsel "for subsequent approval". The whole November 2024 trace is one sentence — the chair at 0:29:39, "We also have to go over the superintendent's contract, which we did not have a chance to discuss tonight" — and neither the 3 December nor the 12 December SAU 6 agenda carries a contract item. It was transacted anyway at the 12 December budget hearing, 43 seconds after the nonpublic session: the chair moved "the 3% salary increase for the superintendent", Whitney seconded, Crawford added the term, restated as "for a two year contract? So for this year, it's 3% increase. And to renew your contract for two years." Voice vote, no count. Still no executed instrument in any share; Exhibit G's December line ("Review Superintendent Contract for renewal every 2 - 3 years(due next in 2025)") is the first document implying a term and was never read aloud. A reader working from the agendas would conclude no contract action occurred.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 17 and 18; the 12 December 2024 recording.

TIER 1 A1.35 · The Assistant Tech Center Director was hired before the board approved the position

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A59

On 21 August 2024, on tape: Miles — "we've already hired someone for a position that we have not approved"; Pratt — "this is a time sensitive thing, and I had to make the decision", because a prior meeting had failed for want of a quorum (the meeting recorded at A2.1). He apologises on the record.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 8; the 21 August 2024 recording.

TIER 1 A1.36 · A ten-cent-per-meal written agreement was signed by the former business administrator without board approval

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A60

Recorded in the 10/15/25 draft minutes, described by the briefing as an unmined source that also carries Henry's unpaid disciplinary suspension, Weatherford as acting HR manager, Jennifer O'Neil as interim CMS principal, and tax-rate options of 9.18% / 6.08%. Note the federal ceiling that bounds the subject: 7 CFR 210.14(e), last amended 89 FR 32073, 25 April 2024, provides that "The maximum annual average price increase required under this paragraph shall not exceed ten cents."

Primary source: briefing Addendum 19; the 10/15/25 draft minutes.

TIER 1 A1.37 · Exhibit G proposes finalising board business "through electronic means" in place of a June meeting

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A32

The proposed pre-populated agenda's June line reads: "NOTE: No June meeting; bulleted items to be finalized through electronic means" — with "Review of Superintendent Evaluation Results" among the bullets. The briefing flags it against RSA 91-A:2-a, which has been in force from 2008, 303:4, eff. 1 July 2008, never amended, and binds the whole corpus: "Communications outside a meeting, including, but not limited to, sequential communications … shall not be used to circumvent the spirit and purpose of this chapter."

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16; the 9/12/24 packet Exhibit G; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2-a.htm.

TIER 1 A1.38 · 21 November 2024 SAU 6 — no quorum at 6:30, business before the gavel, citizens' comment minuted as "none" but never called

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A31

There was no quorum at 6:30; the DMGroup strategic-plan presentation ran before the gavel; the board was called to order at 0:44:57 and adjourned at 0:50:40 — five minutes fifty seconds of meeting after forty-five minutes of business. Citizens' comment, noticed on the agenda and recorded in the minutes as "none", was never called, while members of the public were in the room and had been speaking. A reader taking the minutes at face value concludes no one wished to speak. (The same documents' header-date error is recorded separately at A3.3.)

Primary source: briefing Addendum 18; the 21 November 2024 recording and minutes.

TIER 1 A1.39 · The 10/18/23 approved minutes account for only five of seven members

Tier 1 · one-off, with an internal source conflict · Sources: briefing A48, C20

The approved minutes read Absent: Jennifer Gallagher, four present, one absent — Bonnie Miles and Whitney Skillen appear in neither column. The briefing set is internally inconsistent here and says so: Addendum 5 states the minutes "wrongly recorded her present", and the Addendum 11 correction of 2026-08-29 states flatly that "the second half is FALSE", confirmed independently by two agents against the document. The likelier reading is that Miles was a second, unrecorded absentee — the 11/1 minutes attribute the minutes-correction request to Bonnie Miles, and the chair's on-tape reply "You're documented as being on there" only fits a member the 10/18 minutes did not list as absent; Miles never speaks on the 10/18 recording while Skillen speaks nineteen times. This is disagreement 1 of the five carried forward at the foot of this file, and it is the premise whose collapse leaves the 15357 Speaker-4 cluster unresolved (C1.65).

Primary source: the approved 10/18/23 minutes; the 11/1/23 minutes; briefing Addendum 5 against Addendum 11.

TIER 1 A1.40 · The 17 January 2024 minutes conflict with the recording on the mover, on a question's author and on a tax figure

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A49

The minutes read "Whitney Skillen amended the motion… Jennifer Gallagher seconded", while the recording has the chair addressing the mover as Jennifer/Jen three times and the second is unattributable. Skillen and Miles are recorded present and are never heard or named — zero occurrences of either surname or any variant. The minutes give the benchmark question to Bonnie Miles; the CSV gives it to Arlene Hawkins. The minutes print $69.33 per $100,000 where Henry says $69.39, twice. And the approved minutes are the draft word for word, so nothing was corrected between them.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 13; the 1/17/24 draft and approved minutes against the recording and the dialogue CSV.

TIER 1 A1.41 · The 5 June 2024 approved minutes credit two incompatible speakers

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A50

They credit the Alex Herzog tribute to Patrick O'Hearn and the by-laws motion to Mike Petrin, but the diarizer places both inside the same four-utterance cluster. Both cannot be right, and the instruction is to report rather than resolve it.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 15; the approved 6.5.24 minutes against the dialogue CSV.

TIER 1 A1.42 · The 15 May 2024 recording and that meeting's own minutes give different Capital Improvements membership

Tier 1 · one-off, resolved as a project artefact · Sources: briefing A51 · html-briefing §23c

The recording appeared to yield "Whitney + Sprague + Crawford"; the approved 5/15 minutes and the 4/17 minutes give the chair as Miles. The apparent conflict dissolved: the recording reading was itself a CSV-label artefact (B1.13), and the surviving point is that briefing Addendum 7's "later readings drift" needs that qualification (C1.70). Recorded here because on its face it presented as a district-record contradiction and was carried as one.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 14; html-briefing §23c.

TIER 1 A1.43 · The 2 October 2024 minutes erase the meeting's only ESSER mention

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A52

At 0:09:13 school counsellor Amelia Rhines says "this was the last summer of the summer school staff funding coming from Esser funds. So starting next year will have to be in the Stevens High School budget…" No board member takes it up. The minutes render it as "summer school is funded by a grant" and contain no occurrence of the word ESSER. The 18 September minutes, approved by consent that same night, had promised "Mary Henry will share a summary report of ESSER funding and where the FY24 budget stands in October" — and on 2 October there was no finance item, no superintendent's report item at all, Henry absent, and none of the four Finance Subcommittee dates printed on that agenda falls in October (12 Nov – 18 Dec).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 17; the approved 10.2.24 minutes against the recording at 0:09:13.

TIER 1 A1.44 · The 21 August 2024 approved minutes contradict themselves within four lines

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A25

The amendment titles the post "acting assistant CTE director" while the main motion four lines later says "with the amendment in the title to 'assistant'". The same passage carries the typo Voten taken. The vote counts on those two motions were themselves mis-recorded by the project and corrected: the title/amendment vote was 5–2, not 6–1 (C1.71).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16; approved CSB minutes 8.21.24, item IV.4.

TIER 1 A1.45 · The 7 August 2024 minutes style Matthew Upton "Claremont District Attorney"

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A18

New Hampshire has county attorneys; there is no district attorney. Upton is the district's counsel, not a prosecutor, and a reader taking the minutes at face value concludes a prosecutor addressed the board.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16, "Document defects worth carrying"; the 7 August 2024 minutes.

TIER 1 A1.46 · The by-laws were adopted on a bare quorum, and the adopted text is not the noticed draft

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: html-briefing A16

On 5 June 2024, "Mike Petrin made a motion to approve the by-laws as presented, Bonnie Miles seconded; voice vote taken, all present voting in favor", corroborated on show 15786 at 0:41:52 — with four of seven members present, the bare quorum, and the member who had dissected the draft on 20 March absent. The text adopted is not the 20 March draft: the chair reported "all SAU and Unity portions have been taken out." From 5 June 2024 onward these by-laws are a governing document every Claremont page must be checked against.

Primary source: the 6/5/24 minutes and show 15786 at 0:41:52.

TIER 1 A1.47 · The 9/4/24 approved minutes state 0.05% where the arithmetic gives 0.508%

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A35

$193,000 ÷ $38,000,000 = 0.508% — ten times the figure printed — and the wrong figure carried the characterisation "It's minuscule."

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16; the approved 9.4.24 minutes.

TIER 1 A1.48 · The FY25 retention ceiling is published $2,335.57 above the maximum the business administrator stated

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A36

Henry states the statutory maximum as $466,664.43; within four minutes everyone in the room says "469", the approved 16 October minutes publish "$469,000", and the board twice discussed retaining "the full 469". The board actually voted "to retain up to $350,000 with the stipulation that it be used to offset the 25/26 tax rate" — so a page saying the board retained $469,000 would be wrong. That $350,000 was earmarked for FY2025–26 and is never mentioned in the budget built on 13 December.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 17 and 19; the approved 16 October 2024 minutes.

TIER 1 A1.49 · The FY24 close was never reconciled, and the worksheet that would settle it is missing from the packet

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A37

Three figures are in play — $544,145.29, $648,931.76 and $583,931.76 — and on 16 October nobody speaks any of them; the entire reconciliation is Petrin's "Does this say these numbers take into account the roofs that we were doing?" answered "Yes. They're all done." The board works from $497,000 with no bridge to September's figure. Exhibit B — cited on the agenda and in the minutes — is absent from the eight-document packet. And $544,145.29 is an exhibit figure, never a minuted one: the approved 18 September minutes print only "At about $540,000", "Down about $60,000 after roof projects", "a revenue surplus at about $210,000". The project's own transposition of these figures is corrected at C1.72, which leaves a ~$584,000 ambiguity the board never resolved.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 17 and 19; the 16 October 2024 packet and minutes.

TIER 1 A1.50 · The Capital Improvements minutes of 10 December 2024 price one roof item twice

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A38

"SHS Roof Replacement, final section $96,000" and, two paragraphs later, "the third phase of the SHS Roof Repair at $98,000" — against 16 October's "Yes. They're all done." Capital Improvements Reserve Fund balance $150,000.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 19; the 10 December 2024 Capital Improvements minutes.

TIER 1 A1.51 · The SAU 6 FY26 budget sheet advertises a decrease on an appropriation that rises

Tier 1 · one-off, three documents · Sources: briefing A39

V1 (14 Nov) prints "Total Budget % Increase 7.23%" on a gross rise of $305,000.54 = 12.25%; V2 (3 Dec, never presented) prints 7.22% against 12.24%; V3 prints −0.67% against +4.35%. The headline crosses zero, and the comparison is net FY26 against gross FY25 — the FY25 ledger in the same packet foots to $2,489,151.00 with no revenue lines. The 7.23% is net of $125,000 of revenue, and the superintendent had to prise the gross out of the presenter: "the real number isn't really 180,000" / "No it's 305".

Primary source: briefing Addenda 17 and 18 (three-version table); the FY26 SAU 6 budget sheets V1–V3.

TIER 1 A1.52 · The adopted SAU 6 FY26 figure appears in none of the packet documents and no total or percentage was ever stated aloud

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A40

$2,755,723 was produced orally by the business administrator ("Are you ready. 2,755,000. Make it even $723.") and appears in none of the eight packet documents; against FY24 actual expenditure it is +18.06%. In the whole 55½-minute hearing no total, no increase and no percentage was spoken — the tokens 2,794 / 2794 / 2,489 / 2489 / 7.23 / 12.25 / 305 / 180 / apportion appear nowhere in the 489-row CSV. The chair asked at 0:39:34 and got "I would have to figure that out because I don't know." No member of the public attended.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 9, 17, 18; the 12/12/24 hearing recording and packet.

TIER 1 A1.53 · The FY26 default budget — a figure delivered to the dollar five hours after being called an estimate, then moving $2.98M in 28 days

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A41

At about 2:24 p.m. on 18 December 2024 the chair asked the Finance Committee for the default budget and was told "I'm working on that tonight… I will get you a rough estimated number"; at about 7:25 p.m. the board was given $39,791,261, to the dollar, and it appears in no document in either packet. By the 15 January approved hearing minutes it is $42,772,778 — +$2,981,517, +7.49% in 28 days after "some minor changes" — and proposed FY26 came in at $42,933,564, i.e. $160,786 above the default, reversing the December expectation.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 19; the 18 December 2024 recordings and the 15 January approved hearing minutes.

TIER 1 A1.54 · SAU 6 ledger controls — spending against zero or absent appropriations

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A43

From the FY25/FY26 packets: HR cell phone $1,000.00 spent against a $0.00 appropriation; business office $2,000 vs $1,000; superintendent $2,500 vs $2,100; SPED mileage $1,439.07 vs $1,250 (the 4/10/25 minutes concede it "should have been budgeted for $2500"); Supt Dues & Fees $10,853.64 vs $8,450; SPED Supplies $3,301.48 vs $600; negative FY24 actuals of ($5,907.78) and ($241.95); and Supt Office Salaries FY24 actual $570,258.79 against an FY25 budget of $475,229.15. Exhibit A adds: superintendent's office salaries over by $107,204.88 (−23.49%), business-office contracted services over by $24,905.87 (−498%), maintenance telephone $4,000 budgeted / $0.00 spent, FY23 mileage exactly $2,500.00 on two lines against FY24 $0.00 on both.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 16, 17, 18; the FY25 and FY26 SAU 6 packets, Exhibit A.

TIER 1 A1.55 · "Auditors $0.00" across years in which three years were unaudited

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing A44

Exhibit A shows Auditors $10,000 budgeted, $0.00 spent; the FY26 ledger shows $0.00 in FY23 and FY24 against three unaudited years. The wider backlog: FY2022 not issued until 2025; as of November 2024 FY21 nearly done, FY22/FY23 targeted before 6/30/2025, FY24 unpromised, cash reconciled back to 2020, three years still unaudited at SAU 6. The legal frame matters and cuts against an automatic finding: RSA 21-J:19 is permissive and does not name SAUs, so no located NH statute requires an SAU annual audit — treat a late audit as a control weakness, not automatically a missed statutory deadline (C1.15).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 2, 8, 16, 17; Exhibit A and the FY26 ledger.

TIER 1 A1.56 · The Region 10 agreement carries a wrong region name twice, a dead cross-reference, and an unmentioned money split

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A46

The "Region 17" error appears twice — in section II (amended) and in section IX.2, uncorrected; IX.1 cross-references "paragraph 19", which does not exist; and VII.7 splits regional tuition reimbursement "80% Newport, 20% Claremont", a term never mentioned at the table. Clause XIV.3 requires signature "by the chairs", with three notarised blocks reading "Chairperson, … School Board" and no superintendent signature line anywhere — which is why the approved 9/4 minutes' "for the Superintendent to sign the agreement" is wrong; the tape has Petrin saying "Our school board chair to sign."

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16; the Region 10 agreement and the approved 9.4.24 minutes.

TIER 1 A1.57 · The Finance Committee reached a number that never entered the board's record

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A62

On 18 December 2024 the committee converged on a fully loaded FY26 increase of 5.5% on an FY25 base of $36,349,753 (draft $1,128,543 over after revenues, 8.91% gross, about $800,000 for two unratified CBAs), then: Sprague "Well, I'm going to throw out 4%" → Whitney "We want the total number to be a 4% increase" → Crawford "Just find me 200,000" (≈4.5% fully loaded) → Pratt "you got our orders." No motion, no second, no vote, no roll call, no adjournment. The approved 12.18.24 board minutes dispose of the Finance item in three sentences telling the public to watch the CCTV recordings.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 19; the 18 December 2024 Finance recording and the approved 12.18.24 minutes.

TIER 1 A1.58 · The record contains two incompatible characterisations of what happens to SAU 6 on 1 July 2026

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: html-briefing A46 · briefing C48

The Claremont staff report of 27 March 2026 (Drive 16M5jaunMtgwaVWRIi_iojNp2FgqMcl1W) reads "It is anticipated at this time that SAU 6 will dissolve as a legal separate entity from the Claremont School District", and two officials said the same at the 18 February 2026 meeting — while the SAU 6 chair corrects them on tape at show 17307, 0:35:20: Whitney, "the saw is dissolving"; Ruggeri, "It's not. It's not dissolving. Just to clarify." and "It would just be the Claremont board at that point, but it would still be the same. Six." The 15 April 2026 approved Claremont minutes agree that Unity is withdrawing "and it will only be Claremont in the SAU as of July 1, 2026". The only legal mechanism any record identifies is Unity's withdrawal under RSA 194-C:2, IV; the unit continues with one district. A page quoting either characterisation is quoting accurately, and a district document that says "dissolve" must not be silently corrected. The project's own adoption of the dissolution as settled background is recorded separately at C1.88.

Primary source: the 27 March 2026 staff report, Drive 16M5jaunMtgwaVWRIi_iojNp2FgqMcl1W, against show 17307 at 0:35:20 and the 15 April 2026 approved Claremont minutes.

TIER 1 A1.59 · A student-by-name special-education appendix published in the public Drive

Tier 1 · one-off, the most severe privacy exposure · Sources: briefing A83 · html-briefing A41

The 5/3/23 packet's Special Education Director's Report carries an appendix listing individual students by full name and grade under headings naming a disability basis, in the district's public Drive folder. The standing rule is to reproduce no name, grade or count; to describe the exposure; to cite FERPA (34 CFR 99.3, 99.30(a); 20 U.S.C. §1232g(b)(1)) and IDEA (34 CFR 300.622(a)); and to grep the finished page against the names so the page does not become a second copy of the disclosure.

Primary source: the 5/3/23 packet, Special Education Director's Report appendix, in the district's public Drive folder.

TIER 1 A1.60 · Two donor cheques published with bank, cheque number and the full MICR line legible

Tier 1 · systemic (two instances, four and a half months apart) · Sources: briefing A84, A85 · html-briefing A42

The 4/17/24 packet Exhibit B is a photograph of a donor's cheque with bank, cheque number and account/routing digits legible; the 9/4/24 packet Exhibit A is a second donor cheque with the full MICR routing/account line legible. The repetition four and a half months later is what makes it a pattern rather than an accident. Reproduce none of the numbers, and cite RSA 91-A:5, IV noting that it permits withholding rather than requiring it — it is not authority for publishing anything, and it is permissive in both directions (see C1.25).

Primary source: the 4/17/24 packet Exhibit B and the 9/4/24 packet Exhibit A.

TIER 1 A1.61 · 6/5/24 Exhibit D — the CCTV roster carries home addresses, personal phone numbers and e-mail addresses

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A86

The exhibit carries home addresses, personal phone numbers and e-mail addresses for nine named individuals. Describe, reproduce nothing. The same exhibit is the document that establishes the maintainer's CCTV board seat (D1.1), and it is a two-column PDF whose column order cannot be trusted on extraction (D2.6).

Primary source: the 6/5/24 packet Exhibit D.

TIER 1 A1.62 · A student named in the district's own 2/21/24 Exhibit A

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing A87

"Aubree Herzog" appears in the district's own exhibit. The instruction is explicit — "Student privacy: do not print this on a page" — even though the district published it. The corpus separately carried the spelling "Aubrey"; the district document settles it as Aubree, and the surname collides with Alex Herzog and with a third Herzog, Shawn/Sean (Title I at Maple), none of whom may be merged (D1.8).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 14; the district's 2/21/24 Exhibit A.

TIER 1 B1.1 · Phantom names — high-confidence surnames that name nobody in the room

Tier 1 · systemic, the corpus's most dangerous class · Sources: briefing B20 · html-briefing B13

The briefing keeps a standing list and forbids minting people from any of it: Nathan Ward, please = "name and ward, please" (the podium prompt, not a person) · Mr. Clark = District Clerk (mints a person out of an office) · a second by Brittany — the chair failing to identify a seconder, reading as a real name · So, Donald, we'd like to have a rollback (1.00) = "so down the line" · Sussex (1.00) = SAU 6, reading as a real place · Mr. Crowder (0.95 and 1.00) and Mr. Free (0.58) in one Petrin sentence · Mr. Smith. (0.98) and Mr. Pittman. (0.87) = the chair recognising Sprague · Mr. Dean, how are you today? · Another Mr. Costa to chime in · just like Mr. Foster said · Mr. governor and Charlie (later resolved to Gessner, C3.4) · Mr. Broughton (0.56, recurs at 15607 @0:51:08) · Barrett · Mr. Braxton (0.82) · Edmond (0.44) · Mr. Caskey (0.74) · James prophet here (0.60–0.94) · My dad Mattos is in there (≥0.93, later resolved to Matteau) · Dave. Jack. · Now, Tyler, take it away (0.50) · the good magazines tonight · Clarence Surprise · National Association of Taxpayer (an organisation that does not exist; it is the paraprofessionals' association/Teamsters) · Leah, (0.88) / Leah / L a / li e a = LEA, a statutory role rendered as a woman's name · Miss Kestner · Sniper. · The Oscar · Brian Souter · Police Chief Walmart · Sue car · City Management, Olli · Bill. The newest newbie · Eric Perry (single-source, later confirmed a real person). The two inventories disagree on one entry. briefing.md Addendum 8 lists the Dow building / the Dow office (both 1.00) here as "the SAU 6 central office… full confidence, plausible proper noun, no such place", while html_briefing.md §29i un-flags it: "the Dow is NOT an ASR garble — it is the district's own name for the SAU office building, used in its approved minutes and on an agenda." This is disagreement 4 of the five carried at the foot of this file; the html-briefing reading is the later and better-evidenced one, and both are recorded here.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 16, 17, 19; html-briefing §29i.

TIER 1 B1.2 · Dropped and inverted negations

Tier 1 · systemic, quote-critical · Sources: briefing B21 · html-briefing C1

Settled against packet PDFs: admitting during = "admin just ignoring"; Avenue = "admin"; feel heard = "feel unheard"; I can't hold myself to a high standard = "I hold myself to a higher standard". Two more are quoted as recorded and repaired nowhere: Pratt at 0:55:58 (16226), "And we just gone to the days that we were allowed…", and at 1:20:16, "we can't I can't in good faith say…". Also We use to increase = "reduced and increased", inside a verbatim reading of RSA 40:13, IX(b). The standing rule is absolute: a dropped negation is NEVER supplied — supplying it invents a vote.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 18 and 19; html-briefing §1.

TIER 1 B1.3 · Fused digit pairs and impossible numbers

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B22 · html-briefing B12

378 minute classes = three 78-minute classes · 178 minute prep = one 78-minute prep · 646 minute classes = six 46-minute · 146 minute prep = one 46-minute · $57,592, 852,500 and 857,000 $357,592 = a single $857,592. Confidence gives no protection: 3.53 to 12.75 (every token 1.00) for the NH Retirement rate is arithmetically impossible against a sentence calling it a decrease — settled by the packet as 13.53% → 12.75% — and 77 years for the LED payback is 7 years, settled by the 16 Oct approved minutes. Also for $20,000 = $420,000 and $82,000 = $583,000, both the clerk reading a motion back; October 16th, 2021 = 2024; 19927 = a collision of Claremont I (1993) and Claremont II (1997). The rule: any number that looks impossible is probably two numbers, and a reader taking the transcript at face value gets a 378-minute class.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 8, 9, 14, 15, 18, 19; html-briefing §27i.

TIER 1 B1.4 · Statute, policy and code numbers garbled by the recognizer

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B24 · html-briefing §28b

RSA 44 and 13 = RSA 40:13 · RSA 91-8 = 91-A · RSA 3215-F vs are essay 32 colon 5-F — two independent transcriptions of the same sentence · policy CVI, GCU, GCA = CBI / GCQ · policy DEDH = BEDH · policy BEED = BEDH · Policies BED. B. = BEDB · Policy HAC = EHAC · K. E b. = KEE · a sore 102 / Saw 99 = SAU 102 / SAU 99 · 43403 = ¶4.03 · Warren article / the abhorrent article = warrant article · jet services = debt service (inside a verbatim reading of RSA 40:13, IX(b)). A page that repeats any of these repeats a citation the district did not make.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 11, 12, 14, 17, 18, 19; html-briefing §28b.

TIER 1 B1.5 · Identical high-confidence ASR output for two different people — the two Herringtons

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B17 · html-briefing B11

Harrington is produced at 0.99–1.00 confidence for two different people in one file — Michael Herrington (Stevens principal) and Michelle Herrington (SRVRTC). They appear together in at least 16021, 16070 and 16222 and must never be merged; a confidence score is not an identification. Related variants: Doctor Harrington · Doctor Herren · Doctor Herron · Michael Arrington (0.52, reads as a real surname) · a shell = Michelle · the district's own Ms. Harringont.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 2, 7, 8, 9, 19; html-briefing §27h.

TIER 1 B1.6 · 15580 SAU6021524.mp4.CSV — three separate label failures in one file

Tier 1 · one-off file, systemic class · Sources: briefing B26

The row at 2956.86 s ("To make a motion to change our meeting schedule to a bi monthly schedule") is labelled Arlene Hawkins; it is diarized Speaker 11 = Heather Whitney, and the minutes name Whitney as mover — the label is wrong. Rocco Ruggeri has zero rows in the file's 460 while the minutes credit him with six acts; the Speaker 4 cluster labelled Frank Sprague holds both the second on the HR contract motion (1307.5 s) and the abstention on it (1322.2 s), so Ruggeri's voice is inside that cluster and no mover in it is safe from the label alone. The "lose touch" run at 2980.34 s labelled Bonnie Miles sits inside the chair's Speaker 1 cluster and plainly holds an interjection; the minutes split it between Atonya Hart and Miles.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 14; 15580 SAU6021524.mp4.CSV against the approved minutes.

TIER 1 B1.7 · CSV attributions that the approved minutes contradict

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B27 · html-briefing §23c

4/17/24 — the Valley Regional / Dartmouth-Hitchcock remark at 0:55:32 is Arlene Hawkins in the CSV and Bonnie Miles in the approved minutes, and the diarizer merges the two women so the tape cannot settle it. 6/5/24 — the Herzog tribute and the by-laws motion sit in one four-utterance cluster the minutes split between O'Hearn and Petrin. 9/12/24 — the ADC motion at 2681 s falls in the Whitney-cluster gap, so the CSV labels it Arlene Hawkins while the minutes credit Heather Whitney. 1/17/24 — the benchmark question is Miles in the minutes and Hawkins in the CSV. The generalised rule: when a CSV label produces a body or a fact that exists in no document, suspect the label before you suspect the document.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 13, 15, 16; html-briefing §23c.

TIER 1 B1.8 · Merged speaker clusters — same-sex voices, as the default expectation

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B28

The diarizer merges hard: Whitney+Kennedy+Hawkins into one cluster, Kennedy+Lewis into another, Blount+Madden+Sprague into a third in the Feb–Mar 2026 wave. The era's hardest case is Bonnie Miles and Arlene Hawkins — 48 segments in 16021, 106 in 15947, 7 rows in 16046 — whose anchored blocks interleave, so no temporal or topical cut works; where a chair recognition does not separate them the row must stay Unidentified with both candidates in the Role. Two open merges await a human ruling: 16192's Speaker 7/12 cluster merges Sprague and Petrin (the approved 12.4.24 minutes give three of its turns to Petrin, including the answer running continuously into "I only have an associate's degree"), and the Speaker 6/11 cluster filed Arlene Hawkins probably also merges Bonnie Miles (the same minutes give two of its questions to Miles). Two women or two men in one cluster is the default expectation, not the exception.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 1, 8, 18.

TIER 1 B1.9 · One voice split across clusters, and clusters inherited by a second person

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B29

The 2/7/26 deliberative split the moderator across seven clusters. The diarizer splits Heather Whitney into two temporally disjoint clusters at SAU 6 meetings — seen at 4/11/24 and 9/12/24 (Speaker 3 ends 2578.44 s, Speaker 11 starts 2770.80 s, zero overlap). And the chair's vacated cluster is inherited by whoever is silent early: at 10/2/24 Whitney occupied Speaker 2 to 1471 s, moved to Speaker 7, and Arlene Hawkins — silent for the first 25 minutes — fell into the cluster Whitney vacated. A single cluster spanning a meeting is not a single person.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 1 and 8.

TIER 1 B1.10 · Chair recognitions absorbed into the next speaker's onset, and sub-second onset clipping

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B30

"Thank you. Lauren." lands at the head of Loren Howard's segment; "Yes, Mr. Howard." at the head of Howard's own. Separately, any fragment under about 1 s with an ~80 ms gap to the next segment is almost certainly the NEXT speaker's onset and must be checked every time. Off-by-one override indices against the printed label distribution are named as the commonest error in this run's history.

Primary source: briefing opening contract and Addendum 1.

TIER 1 B1.11 · Segments that contain two speakers

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B31

In Claremont School Board - 8526 (8/5/26), 160 of 554 segments carry more than one speaker — e.g. the chair's handoff "Mr. Campo, I'm going to turn it over to you" and the auditor's reply share one diarizer segment. That file is the corpus's one turn-based CSV (375 rows over 554 segments) precisely because flattening it onto the segment grid would destroy real attribution work; verify_dialogue.py was extended to accept both conventions, re-checking a turn-based file only if its concatenated token list equals the transcript's exactly and reporting OK*.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 9; Claremont School Board - 8526 transcript and CSV.

TIER 1 B1.12 · Members recorded present with zero attributed rows

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B32 · map+pages Part 2 §2b · html-briefing §23c

The briefing's instruction in these cases is to present both candidates and choose neither. Its headline instances: Rocco Ruggeri zero rows in 15580's 460 against six minuted acts; Bonnie Miles present on 12/18/24 speaking zero attributed words, and present with zero attributed rows on 15 May 2024 — which is what exposed the CSV artefact at B1.13; Whitney Skillen and Bonnie Miles recorded present on 1/17/24 and never heard or named, zero occurrences of either surname or any variant. The finished pages disclose the same defect meeting by meeting:

Primary source: briefing Addenda 13, 14, 19; the 31 pages named.

TIER 1 B1.13 · A CSV label that invented a subcommittee membership

Tier 1 · one-off, with a general lesson · Sources: html-briefing B10 · briefing B33, C26 · html-briefing C20

Nobody read a membership list aloud on 15 May 2024. There is one first-person sentence — "today I sent an email to Mr. Sprague and Miss Crawford to get together so we can begin with our vision" — which the CSV labels for the chair, producing the phantom "Whitney + Sprague + Crawford" Capital Improvements roster that then entered briefing Addendum 7 and the project's own briefs. Read as Bonnie Miles it is exactly right, supported three ways: Miles is present with zero attributed rows; the sentence sits in a Speaker 1 cluster that by then carries a different voice by override while the chair's own words either side are Speaker 21; and the same merge happens three more times with the approved minutes naming Miles each time. The approved 5/15 and 4/17 minutes both give the Capital Improvements chair as Miles.

Primary source: the 15 May dialogue CSV read against the approved 5/15 and 4/17 minutes.

TIER 1 B1.14 · When a chair reads a document aloud, the CSV makes its contents her speech

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing B34 · html-briefing B9

In the October 2025 candidate recordings the chair reads three applicants' letters of intent aloud and the CSV attributes every word to her. On show 16872 at 0:51:02 a passage labelled "Heather Whitney" reads "…the last two as president of the Sri, which is the educators union" — an applicant's biography that nearly made a board member a union president.

Primary source: show 16872 at 0:51:02, dialogue CSV.

TIER 1 B1.15 · Four shipped-CSV corrections, all applied

Tier 1 · one-off each, resolved · Sources: briefing B36

16951 SchoolBoard110525.mp4.CSV: eight rows labelled Unidentified public commenter — Ward 2 (starts 8980.22, 9063.26, 9063.94, 9073.70, 9085.66, 9119.22, 9147.34, 9406.74) are Don Lavalette, proven three ways — he offers the board "Mr. Tyson[,] me" as the two options, another speaker names the field as "Mr. Lava[lette] and… Mr. Tyson", and the excerpt file 16958 already carried four of the eight under that name. 15336 SchoolBoard100423.mp4.CSV @3680.30: the curriculum-committee line labelled Unidentified is Jennifer Gallagher. 15483 SchoolBoard122023.mp4.CSV: Speaker 10's "Rebecca, surname never spoken" is Rebecca Duska, named by Bonnie Miles on 1/3/24 at conf 1.00/0.97 — see the unreconciled Rebecca question at A3.13. 15357 SchoolBoard101823.mp4.CSV: Speaker 4's candidate list was re-weighted, and that re-weighting is now itself doubtful because its premise collapsed (C1.65).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 1, 5, 6, 9.

TIER 1 B1.16 · A wrong speaker label carried against the person's own document

Tier 1 · one-off each · Sources: briefing B38

Shaun Laplante (not Sean/Shawn) is established by his own grant proposal, signature block and district e-mail slaplante@sau6.org — and the dialogue CSV speaker label is also wrong. Separately, 15607 labels the student member Kylie where the district's own filings print Kylee (A3.8).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11 (name resolutions) and Addendum 14.

TIER 1 B1.17 · Two recordings in the corpus are excerpts of other recordings, one with a spliced cold open

Tier 1 · one-off pair, standing rule · Sources: briefing B39 · html-briefing B3 · map+pages §3

16958 is an excerpt of 16951 (11/5/25) beginning 7,768.8 s in, covering the board-vacancy item (eventDate 2025-11-05, verified 8/28/26), plus a spliced cold open; it has its own transcript and dialogue CSV. 17168 is an excerpt of 17159 (2/18/26) at offset +2,277.9 s, created the afternoon after the meeting and clipped mid-turn at the end; 121 of 134 substantial rows align at the constant offset with no drift, and the excerpt's first segment fuses the 6:30 call to order onto "Moving on to article eight" — two utterances 38 minutes apart in the room. Standing rule: never compute a wall-clock time from an excerpt's timestamps; and if a recording opens mid-business, has no roll call, or ends mid-sentence, look for a sibling show on the same date before concluding the meeting itself was odd.

Primary source: the alignment of 17168 against 17159 (121 of 134 rows at 2,277.9 s); MAP.md §98, §110, §111.

TIER 1 B1.18 · Two independent machine transcriptions of the same 49 minutes differ materially

Tier 1 · one-off, standing rule · Sources: briefing B40 · html-briefing B4

Because 17168 is derived from 17159, the corpus holds two transcriptions of the same audio and they disagree in substance: RSA 3215-F vs are essay 32 colon 5-F, and "We're going to have to cut the budget roughly 9 million" vs "We were going to cut the budget. Roughly 9 million." Quote only from your own page's CSV; verify_quotes.py catches cross-transcript quotations and caught two. Where the other must be quoted, label it with its show number and do not deep-link it — one show ID per page.

Primary source: the two transcripts of shows 17159 and 17168, compared.

TIER 1 B1.19 · The same 2/1/2023 meeting was transcribed twice, with correlated errors

Tier 1 · one-off, standing rule · Sources: briefing B41 · map+pages §3.1

14875 SchoolBoard020123 and Claremont School Board Meeting 2123 are the same meeting, transcribed twice with different diarization; each gets its own CSV because the CSV mirrors the transcript file, not the meeting. They are two runs of the same stack, not two systems: both produce "Nathan Ward", "Macedonia", the same isolated administrator cluster and the same Miles clustering. Agreement between them is weak corroboration; DISAGREEMENT is the strong signal — the 2/1 agents resolved every disagreement on content, never by vote. Whether the duplicate should be retired is an open question in MAP.md.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 2 and 3; MAP.md §1.

TIER 1 B1.20 · MAP §96 conflated two different meetings on the same evening, and a shipped page inherited the error

Tier 1 · one-off, error class recurred twice · Sources: html-briefing B2, C55 · briefing B46 · map+pages §3.5

MAP.md had merged the Claremont board meeting of 6 October 2025 (5:30 p.m.) with the SAU 6 meeting (6:00 p.m.), and the 16882 page consequently stated that the Claremont meeting "has no recording of its own in the Cablecast gallery." Show 16881 IS that recording — title Special School Board Meeting 10/6/25, eventDate 2025-10-06, totalRunTime 774 s, agenda headed CLAREMONT SCHOOL BOARD MEETING at 5:30 p.m., Heather Whitney presiding — while 16882 is the SAU 6 meeting at 6:00 p.m. "The two agendas describe two different meetings of two different bodies." MAP was split into §96 (Claremont, show 16881) and §96a (SAU 6, show 16882) on 2026-08-29. The general rule that follows: before writing that a meeting has no recording, fetch the neighbouring show IDs from the Cablecast API and read their titles — several agents have now done this and it has changed the answer twice.

Primary source: the Cablecast API record for show 16881; MAP.md §96 / §96a.

TIER 1 B1.21 · The ASR loses the podium "name and ward" at deliberative sessions

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: html-briefing B14 · briefing D24

At deliberative sessions the minutes are the register of who spoke and the recording usually is not — the ASR loses the podium self-identification almost every time, and Nathan Ward, please is the podium prompt rendered as a person (B1.1). Claremont's minutes list floor speakers grouped by position (for / against / neither) but in speaking order within each group, verified twice on 2/3/24 against speakers who do self-identify — Gary Merchant 4th of 4 in both, Matt Bean 1st and Chris Pratt 5th in both — which makes ordinal identification defensible provided the working is shown and no name is given where two turns cannot be told apart.

Primary source: the 2/3/24 minutes verified twice against self-identifying speakers.

TIER 1 C1.1 · The mover/seconder clause was wrongly dated, which would have produced two opposite classes of error

Tier 1 · systemic, corrected 2026-08-29 · Sources: briefing C1 · html-briefing A35, §11 · legal-anchors V21

Briefing Addendum 10 stated that RSA 91-A:2, II's "names of the members who made or seconded each motion" clause was new — added 2023, 188:1 and amended 2025, 112:1 — and told agents not to apply it before those dates. That was wrong. The clause has been in force since 2018, 244:1, eff. January 1, 2019: the 2017 codification lacks it, the 2019 codification carries it, and it was re-verified three times in wave 1. What 2025, 112:1 added was the start-time, end-time and minutes-producer requirements, which genuinely must not be applied before 22 August 2025. Two consequences, both stated in the briefing: agents were about to credit districts with voluntary compliance for something the law required, and to miss real defects in 2019–2023 minutes that omit movers or seconders (A1.31).

Primary source: the 2017 and 2019 Justia codifications of RSA 91-A:2; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2.htm.

TIER 1 C1.2 · RSA 32:5 paragraph drift — gross basis and comparative columns both off by one

Tier 1 · systemic (40 pages), cleared 2026-08-29 · Sources: briefing C2 · html-briefing C12 · legal-anchors C13, F2

Pages built before 2026-08-29 cite the gross-basis requirement as ¶IV and the comparative columns as ¶V. Both are off by one. The verified mapping: ¶I is the public hearing not later than 25 days before the meeting with 7 days' notice, and the "after the conclusion of public testimony shall finalize the budget" clause; ¶III is the gross-basis requirement showing anticipated revenues from all sources; ¶IV is the comparative columns (at least prior-year appropriations and expenditures), with ¶IV(b) carrying the alternative for districts whose annual meeting precedes the fiscal-year close; ¶V is purposes of appropriation appearing in the warrant. Any flag written against "¶IV gross basis" or "¶V columns" cites a paragraph imposing a different duty, so the district would be accused of breaching a provision that says something else and the finding collapses on inspection. All 40 shipped pages carrying 32:5 were audited paragraph by paragraph and are now correct, including range citations — so an existing 32:5 citation must not be "fixed".

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-5.htm ; the 2023 codification at law.justia.com; the paragraph-by-paragraph audit of all 40 shipped pages.

TIER 1 C1.3 · RSA 91-A:2, ¶I's lettering was wrong, and the caucus argument survives it

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected 2026-08-29 · Sources: briefing C3 · html-briefing C15 · legal-anchors N8, N10

The project's own guidance placed legal counsel at I(c). ¶I runs: (a) strategy or negotiations for collective bargaining · (b) consultation with legal counsel · (c) a caucus of members of the same political party · (d) circulation of draft documents formalising decisions previously made in a meeting. Counsel is I(b); the caucus really is I(c), so the substantive argument stands — RSA 671:30 requires every school district without a special statute to use the non-partisan ballot system for electing district officers, unamended since 1979, 321:1, eff. 21 Aug 1979, so a board elected non-partisanly has no party caucus to hold and the exemption is unavailable as a defence for an off-record quorum. Two further points on ¶I: there is no "work session" exclusion, and (d) does not reach a session at which the decision is made.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2.htm ; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LXIII/671/671-30.htm.

TIER 1 C1.4 · A post-hearing budget reduction was nearly flagged as a violation and is not one

Tier 1 · systemic rule, cleared 2026-08-29 with no shipped instances · Sources: briefing C4 · html-briefing C13 · legal-anchors N5, N6, F13

RSA 32:5, ¶I expressly directs the body, "after the conclusion of public testimony", to "finalize the budget to be submitted to the legislative body" — so the post-hearing $196,001.10 cut is the statute working as written. ¶II confirms it independently: its bar runs only against insertions — "shall not thereafter insert … an additional amount or purpose of appropriation which was not disclosed or discussed at that hearing" — so a reduction cannot breach it either. A post-hearing cut is lawful twice over. ¶I's wording predates the only recent amendment (2025, 144:1, eff. 30 Aug 2025) and appears verbatim in the 2023 codification, so it was in force throughout the corpus. No shipped page flags a post-hearing reduction as a violation; every post-hearing mention concerns ¶II insertions, correctly.

Primary source: RSA 32:5 ¶¶I–II, current text and 2023 codification; corpus sweep of post-hearing mentions.

TIER 1 C1.5 · The 25-day rule was blended with a calendar deadline and the arithmetic was wrong

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected on the page 2026-08-29 · Sources: briefing C5 · html-briefing C14

The 25-day rule is a floor between hearing and meeting, not a December 31 deadline, and must not be blended with the SAU-budget deadline, which is a different statute — RSA 194-C:9, I, "At a meeting held before January 1". The 12/7/23 page shipped saying "December 14 is twenty-four days before the statutory deadline"; December 14 → January 1 is eighteen days. The briefing records that the task brief carried the wrong figure and the agent adopted it — which is why it warns "do not assume a figure in your brief is checked."

Primary source: the arithmetic in days against RSA 194-C:9, I.

TIER 1 C1.6 · A shipped page overstated what an off-camera caucus decided

Tier 1 · one-off, fixed 2026-08-29 · Sources: briefing C6 · html-briefing C16

The 12/13/23 page (15471) computed a correct $117,000 binder-to-vote net change and then located it at the 18 December caucus, asserting the caucus was "the session at which the figure the board voted on was assembled." That is overreach. The real gap is $350,000, between the 18 December televised figure (Sprague on tape at 2:04:16, "we're looking at 1.783" on the FY24 base of $34,880,312, i.e. about $36,663,000) and the $36,313,407.97 moved on 20 December — and Crawford was still reverse-engineering that same difference herself on 5 January ("I was trying to determine where the 350,000…"). The rule generalises: a gap between what was discussed on tape and what was moved is a hole in the record, not proof of what was decided off camera — report both figures and the gap, assert nothing about the closed session.

Primary source: Sprague on tape 18 December at 2:04:16 against the 20 December motion figure; Crawford on 5 January.

TIER 1 C1.7 · A consent-agenda sentence was nearly attributed to the wrong meeting

Tier 1 · systemic risk, cleared as to shipped pages · Sources: briefing C7 · html-briefing C17

"No discussion, unanimously approved" belongs to the 6 December draft minutes, not 20 December, and there it disposes of the 11.15.23 minutes rather than 6 December's own. The 20 December defect is the opposite and worse: no vote was taken at all. Cleared 2026-08-29 as to shipped pages — 15483 and 15453 both attribute it correctly — and retained as a standing warning to check which document a minutes sentence lives in.

Primary source: the December 6 draft minutes; corpus check of Output/HTML.

TIER 1 C1.8 · The catalogue's RSA 186-C:18, III "80%-of-entitlement floor" did not exist before 2025

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing C8 · html-briefing C4 · legal-anchors C1, C37, V1, F4

The skill's catalogue asserted an 80%-of-entitlement floor on proration of catastrophic special-education aid. That floor was added by 2025 N.H. HB 2 §137, codified at RSA 186-C:18, III(a); the earlier text ends "the appropriation shall be prorated proportionally based on entitlement" — no floor at all in 2023–24. Citing the catalogued holding against a pre-FY2026 meeting "would wrongly imply the State broke the law by funding catastrophic aid at 67.5%", and there is no 90% figure anywhere in that section (A1.26). An earlier 2025 amendment (2025 N.H. Laws ch. 138 / SB 292, eff. 8/24/25) was superseded in the codified text, so HB 2 is the cite, not SB 292. The paired hazard: the paragraph contains two different 80 percents — the department's share of costs above the 3½× threshold up to 10× (2023, 79:141, 142, eff. 1 July 2023) is not the entitlement floor, and reading one as the other reproduces the error by another route.

Primary source: https://legiscan.com/NH/text/HB2/id/3254745 ; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/186-C/186-C-18.htm ; 2023 and 2024 Justia codifications.

TIER 1 C1.9 · RSA 188-E:9-a is not the CTE construction-funding statute

Tier 1 · one-off miscited anchor, corpus-wide warning · Sources: briefing C9 · html-briefing C10

It covers charitable donations and the business profits tax credit, not building-aid splits. It must not be cited for building-aid splits, and such figures are to be reported as the speaker's characterization unless the real provision is verified. The related substantive negative is at A1.25: RSA 188-E:3 fixes no percentage at all.

Primary source: the text of RSA 188-E:9-a.

TIER 1 C1.10 · The catalogue's quotation of RSA 91-A:1-a, VI(d) is truncated before the operative clause

Tier 1 · systemic — it underpins every subcommittee finding · Sources: briefing C9 · html-briefing C9 · legal-anchors C5

The quotation stops early. The full text ends "…or other political subdivision, or any committee, subcommittee, or subordinate body thereof, or advisory committee thereto." That trailing clause is what actually carries every subcommittee flag in the corpus, so with the truncated version no subcommittee of a board or SAU could be shown to be a "public body," and every subcommittee notice and minutes finding would have failed for want of an anchor.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-1-a.htm.

TIER 1 C1.11 · The RSA 198:40-a note over-corrected and banned a valid citation

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C2, V2 · html-briefing C5

The file's earlier note "was wrong in a way that over-corrects, and pages were told not to cite the statute at all. That is too strong." The current amounts — $4,100 base / $2,300 F&R / $2,100 SPED / $800 ELL, third-grade reading repealed — were enacted by 2023, 79:150, eff. July 1, 2023, so for meetings from July 2023 the current statutory text is the right one to quote. Uncorrected, pages from the great majority of the corpus would have omitted the governing statute and substituted an NHDOE explainer for it. Before July 2023 the figures were $3,866.18 / $1,933.08 / $2,079.89 / $756.43 plus $756.43 per third grader below proficient — FY2024 estimate rates from NHDOE's 15 November 2022 explainer, computed under the pre-amendment formula, not FY2024–25 actuals.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/198/198-40-a.htm ; the 8/2/23 packet Exhibit H; Mary Henry on tape, "base adequacy aid went from 3866 to 4100".

TIER 1 C1.12 · The RSA 198:40-f row was wrong twice

Tier 1 · systemic — touches every adequacy-aid page · Sources: legal-anchors C3, V22

Marked "CORRECTED 2026-08-29 — this row was wrong twice." (a) The dollar figure is the maximum grant per free-and-reduced-eligible pupil, not a "grant floor" — the grant floor is an equalized-valuation threshold, $1,600,000 in the 2023 text. (b) The amounts: $8,500 governs FY2024 and FY2025 (2023, 79:153, running to 1 July 2025); $11,500 eff. 1 July 2025; $11,730 is today's text, from 2025, 141:224, eff. 1 July 2026. Uncorrected, a page would have described a per-pupil maximum as a district-level funding floor and applied a 2026 dollar figure to a 2024 meeting — overstating the grant by roughly 38%.

Primary source: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-hampshire/2023/title-xv/chapter-198/section-198-40-f/.

TIER 1 C1.13 · RSA 198:40-d and RSA 198:40-f were crossed

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected in place · Sources: legal-anchors C4, V25

RSA 198:40-d is the 2% annual-adjustment section, not the extraordinary-needs section; the extraordinary-need grants live at 40-f. A page citing 40-d for extraordinary-need grants would have pointed at an escalator clause as the authority for a grant programme. Vintage: 40-d is original 2023, 79:151, eff. 1 July 2023, and 2025, 141:223 rewrites it effective 1 July 2026 (adding "rounded up to the nearest whole dollar"), which reaches the 2026 meetings at the end of this backlog.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/198/198-40-d.htm ; the 2023 codification of 198:40-f.

TIER 1 C1.14 · RSA 91-A:3, II(l) vs II(k) — a live misattribution risk

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C6

II(l) is the legal-advice exemption. II(k) is the student/tuition-contract exemption, which carries its own publication duty: the contract and the nonpublic minutes must be public before approval, and approval must be at a public meeting "at which, or after which, the public has had an opportunity to participate". Crossing them would either excuse a tuition-contract session as legal advice or attribute a publication duty to a privileged consultation.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 C1.15 · The RSA 21-J:19 entry quotes words that are not in the statute

Tier 1 · systemic — a sweep of any page quoting it is directed · Sources: legal-anchors C7, N20, F11

The file's own "Catalog corrections" section said the section is "permissive as to timing — 'may be conducted within one year'." That phrase is not in the section. The holding (permissive) is right; the quotation is invented, and any page that quoted it must be corrected — it asserts a one-year statutory window that does not exist, which would convert a late audit into a missed statutory deadline. Compounding it, RSA 21-J:19 says "may hire" and names towns, school districts and village districts — not school administrative units — so no located NH statute requires an SAU annual audit at all. The only located SAU audit duty is RSA 194-C:4, II(a), which lists "audits" among the services each SAU must provide (1996, 298:3; 2010, 5:2). RSA 197:25 is a district fallback. Treat a late audit as a control weakness, not automatically a missed statutory deadline (A1.55).

Primary source: legal-anchors, "Corrections to THIS file (2026-08-29, waves 6–7)"; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-4.htm.

TIER 1 C1.16 · The catalogue paraphrase of 34 CFR 300.101 was quoted as the regulation

Tier 1 · systemic — a heavily reused anchor · Sources: legal-anchors C8

The catalogue paraphrases it as "all children with disabilities aged 3 through 21." The regulation says "all children residing in the State between the ages of 3 and 21, inclusive." Quoting the paraphrase narrows FAPE's stated scope and would misstate the rule in any page that puts it in quotation marks. Do not quote the paraphrase as the regulation.

Primary source: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-III/part-300/subpart-B/subject-group-ECFR6f45db2a2f22b73/section-300.101.

TIER 1 C1.17 · Two 2023 session laws crossed: 188:1 vs 189:1

Tier 1 · systemic — three agents independently tripped on it · Sources: legal-anchors C9

Both took effect October 3, 2023: 2023, 188:1 amended RSA 91-A:2 (minutes and notice); 2023, 189:1 amended RSA 91-A:3 and is the source of ¶IV, the 10-year seal review. Do not attribute ¶IV to 188:1. An attribution error here puts the seal-review duty in the wrong section and would misdate the provision if the two chapters had differed.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov source notes — RSA 91-A:3's note ends 2023, 189:1.

TIER 1 C1.18 · An agent drafted a flag citing "RSA 91-A:1-a, IX" — there is no such paragraph

Tier 1 · one-off, caught pre-publication; the failure mode is systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C10, N48

RSA 91-A:1-a runs paragraphs I–VI only. The definition of "meeting" — a quorum convened to discuss or act on a matter within the body's jurisdiction — is at RSA 91-A:2, I. The agent caught it; the file records it as "exactly the invented-subsection failure the briefing warns about." Published, the flag would have rested on a paragraph that does not exist.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-1-a.htm ; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2.htm.

TIER 1 C1.19 · The catalogue truncates RSA 32:5's disclosure sentence, and it is ¶II

Tier 1 · systemic — budget pages across the corpus · Sources: legal-anchors C11, C12

The sentence ends "…shall be disclosed or discussed AT THE FINAL HEARING." The catalogue's truncation drops the qualifier, so the sentence reads as a general disclosure duty rather than one keyed to a specific hearing — which would support a flag against a body that disclosed a purpose at an earlier hearing. The same sentence also appeared elsewhere in the catalogue as an unnumbered correction: it is ¶II, the paragraph a "changed after the hearing" question actually engages, and without the number it could not be cited precisely and invited the paragraph drift at C1.2.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-5.htm ; the 2023 codification at law.justia.com.

TIER 1 C1.20 · RSA 194-C:5 paragraph error in the 2026-08-28 SAU-governance table

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C14

That table puts "the SAU board fixes the salaries of all SAU personnel and apportions the expense" at ¶I. Those sentences are ¶III. ¶I is the April 1 – June 1 meeting and the election of chairperson, secretary and treasurer (1996, 298:3, eff. Aug. 9, 1996; never amended). A page citing ¶I for salary-fixing points at the reorganization paragraph instead.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-5.htm.

TIER 1 C1.21 · RSA 194-C:5, III was quoted incompletely, dropping the removal power

Tier 1 · one-off entry, high consequence · Sources: legal-anchors C15

Full ¶III: "…shall fix the salaries of all school administrative unit personnel, shall apportion the expense of the salaries and benefits among the several districts, and shall certify the apportionment to their respective treasurers and to the state board of education. The school administrative unit board shall have the authority to remove superintendents and other administrators." The removal power is the statutory anchor for the January 2024 termination and appears nowhere else in the catalogue; without it, that termination had no located statutory authority and could have been described as ultra vires.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-5.htm.

TIER 1 C1.22 · The RSA 91-A:2, I entry drops "contemporaneously" and the chance-encounter sentence

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C16

The definition of a meeting requires members able to communicate with each other "contemporaneously." That single word decides every shared-document and e-mail question, and the catalogue's entry omits it; the entry also omits the chance and social-encounter sentence. Without "contemporaneously", an e-mail chain or a circulated document could be characterised as a meeting, producing a Right-to-Know violation the statute does not support.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2.htm.

TIER 1 C1.23 · "Sequential communications" wrongly attributed to RSA 91-A:2, I

Tier 1 · systemic, flagged as a live invention risk · Sources: legal-anchors C17

RSA 91-A:2, I contains no "sequential communications" prohibition. The language is in RSA 91-A:2-a, II: "Communications outside a meeting, including, but not limited to, sequential communications … shall not be used to circumvent the spirit and purpose of this chapter." RSA 91-A:2-a is in force from 2008, 303:4, eff. July 1, 2008; never amended — it binds the whole corpus. A serial-communications flag hung on 91-A:2, I quotes text that is not there.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2-a.htm.

TIER 1 C1.24 · 20 U.S.C. §6311(c)(4)(E) — an earlier page cited the wrong clause

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C18

"(i) is the 95%-participation requirement. (ii) is the denominator rule. (iii) is only the State's duty to explain how it factors (i) in. An earlier page cited (iii)." A 95%-participation finding anchored on (iii) rests on a State reporting obligation rather than the participation requirement itself.

Primary source: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title20-section6311&num=0&edition=prelim.

TIER 1 C1.25 · The attorney-client exemption is RSA 91-A:5, XII, not ¶IV

Tier 1 · systemic — a sweep of any page citing ¶IV for privilege is directed · Sources: legal-anchors C19, N34, N35

Corrected 2026-08-29: the attorney-client exemption is ¶XII — "Records protected under the attorney-client privilege or the attorney work product doctrine." Any page citing ¶IV for privilege is wrong. ¶IV covers internal personnel practices, confidential/commercial/financial information and privacy-invading files; both paragraphs from 2022, 122:3, eff. 27 May 2022. ¶IV is also permissive, not prohibitory — it permits withholding, does not require it, and is not authority for publishing anything, so citing it in either direction misreads it (A1.60). Related: ¶VI, the emergency-functions/security exemption, is limited by its own terms to material "developed by local or state safety officials that are directly intended to thwart" an act "intended to result in widespread or severe damage to property", so a general safety-plan withholding does not qualify.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-5.htm.

TIER 1 C1.26 · The reversed reading of RSA 198:4-b, II(a) — a false HIGH flag on any vote to retain

Tier 1 · systemic — "correct it wherever you find it" · Sources: legal-anchors C20, F1, V27

The text reads "Prior to expending retained general funds, the school board shall hold a prior public hearing", with newspaper notice of at least 7 days. Earlier wording in the catalogue read as though the hearing had to precede retention. That misreading manufactures a false HIGH flag on any vote to retain, and it nearly did on the 16 October 2024 page. ¶II permits retention of ≤5% of net assessment under RSA 198:5 and states no purpose limitation; ¶I's "unanticipated expenses" constraint does not reach ¶II money (A1.17). Vintage note recorded to prevent the inverse error: ¶II's cap was 2.5% before 2020, 38:25, eff. 27 Sept 2020 — every meeting in this corpus post-dates that, so applying 2.5% would flag a lawful retention as excessive.

Primary source: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-hampshire/2023/title-xv/chapter-198/section-198-4-b/ ; the 2019 codification at law.justia.com.

TIER 1 C1.27 · "2024, 69:1 post-dates any 2023–24 meeting" was wrong

Tier 1 · systemic, marked "CORRECTION, ACT ON THIS" · Sources: legal-anchors C21, V18

The catalogue said RSA 194:23-f's 2024 amendment post-dates the corpus. It does not. 2024, 69:1, eff. August 13, 2024 binds every meeting from that date, which is most of the 2024–25 school year in this corpus. New text: the high school selects; the student body elects by simple majority; student government sets procedures; one-year term; ¶III "The school board shall decide the date at which the term shall begin." Use the 2022, 195:2 text only before 13 Aug 2024. The trap runs both ways — 2023 meetings need the earlier text, and post-13-Aug-2024 meetings need the new one — so every student-member page after that date would otherwise have applied superseded text and could have flagged compliant practice as non-conforming.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194/194-23-f.htm.

TIER 1 C1.28 · RSA 194-C:2's source note was stale, and ¶V (Merger) and ¶IV's withdrawal duties were unrecorded

Tier 1 · systemic — the Unity withdrawal runs through much of the corpus · Sources: legal-anchors C22, V47

The catalogue said "Note ends 2010, 5:1, eff. June 18, 2010." gc.nh.gov now ends 2024, 250:1, 2, eff. July 1, 2024, and there is a new ¶V (Merger) — one superintendent, a merger grant of "an additional $200 per pupil… for a period of 2 years", and "merger must be completed by July 1, 2030." Do not cite ¶V before 1 July 2024. ¶IV also carries duties the file had not recorded: construction and operating cost estimates; "a proposed plan for the disposition of any school administrative unit assets and liabilities"; a transition plan and timeline; "hold at least one public hearing no less than 14 days prior to submission to the state board"; and withdrawal takes effect on the date the state board issues its certificate, not a date the parties choose. Uncorrected, a Unity-withdrawal page would have missed the 14-day hearing duty and the certificate-date rule entirely — and would have run on a fourteen-year-old source note.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-2.htm.

TIER 1 C1.29 · RSA 197:23 was repealed; the treasurer text is RSA 197:23-a

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C23

RSA 197:23 was repealed (1963, 87:2, eff. July 16, 1963); the treasurer's-duties text is RSA 197:23-a. Citing 197:23 for the manifest or payment-order duty cites a repealed section. Related: RSA 197:22 is the treasurer's bond (1997, 319:4); RSA 197:24 is the acting treasurer. And RSA 671:2 is "Election Dates" and 671:1 is "Applicability" — neither enumerates district officers or mentions a treasurer.

Primary source: legal-anchors, "FINAL corrections and additions (2026-08-29)".

TIER 1 C1.30 · The RSA 197:23-a source-note caution — raised, then lifted

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C24

An earlier entry cautioned that the fetched source note ended "2023, 36:2, eff. July 16, 2023" — the same session-law cite recorded for RSA 35:9 — so a merged neighbouring note could not be ruled out, and directed citing the holding rather than the note. The caution can be lifted: two independent re-fetches confirm its own source note genuinely runs 1887, 105:8 … 2021, 65:20-22 … 2023, 36:2, eff. July 16, 2023. Left standing, the caution would have suppressed a valid vintage statement.

Primary source: legal-anchors, "FINAL corrections and additions".

TIER 1 C1.31 · 34 CFR 106.41(c) — "equipment and supplies" is factor (2), not (8)

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C25

Factor (2) is equipment and supplies; (8) is "Provision of medical and training facilities and services" (45 FR 30955, as amended 85 FR 30579, 89 FR 33888). An athletics-equity finding citing (8) for equipment points at medical and training facilities instead.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry; the Federal Register citations as given.

TIER 1 C1.32 · The McKinney-Vento definition is at 42 U.S.C. §11434a, not §11432

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C26

42 U.S.C. §11434a(2)(A), (2)(B)(i) carries the definition — "lack a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence" and the "doubled up" category. An earlier catalogue entry points at §11432, which is the definitions section's neighbour: §11432(g)(1)(J)(iii) is the transportation duty, not the definition. A homelessness-eligibility finding cited to §11432 quotes text that is not there.

Primary source: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title42-section11432&num=0&edition=prelim ; §11434a per the correction.

TIER 1 C1.33 · RSA 288:1's holiday list was under-recorded, producing wrong business-day arithmetic

Tier 1 · systemic — touches every minutes-timeliness calculation · Sources: legal-anchors C27, N46

Earlier entries listed only three or four of them, which produced wrong business-day arithmetic. The complete enumeration is eleven: January 1 · third Monday in January (MLK Civil Rights Day) · third Monday in February (Washington's Birthday) · last Monday in May · July 4 · first Monday in September · second Monday in October · biennial election day · November 11 · Thanksgiving · Christmas Day. Source note ends 1999, 105:2 / 106:2, eff. Aug. 6, 1999 — so Juneteenth is not on the list, and treating it as excluded would shorten a count and manufacture a late posting. Every minutes-timeliness calculation in this corpus must exclude all eleven; with a short list a compliant posting would have been counted late. RSA chapter 288 is Title XXV, not XXIII (D2.16).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/xxv/288/288-1.htm.

TIER 1 C1.34 · RSA 194-C:4, II was recorded as one service when it runs to eighteen

Tier 1 · systemic, a near-miss false accusation · Sources: legal-anchors C28, N51, F5

The catalogue recorded only II(a), "audits". The full list includes (b) recruitment, supervision and evaluation of staff · (c) curriculum development and professional development · (e) assessment of pupil achievement · (f) district needs assessment · (p) annual budgeting · (r) consultant identification (1996, 298:3; 2010, 5:2, eff. June 18, 2010). The consequence: most of what an SAU strategic plan proposes sits INSIDE the SAU's statutory remit — do not flag such a plan as ultra vires. Where a gap exists it is fiscal, not jurisdictional: the money is appropriated by the constituent district meetings (RSA 194-C:9, I; RSA 189:39). With the one-service record, the SAU strategic plan would have been reported as acting beyond its statutory authority. The chapter also says nothing about employing or evaluating the superintendent — RSA 194-C:5, I is the right anchor for SAU-board authority, and ¶III for the removal power (C1.21).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-4.htm.

TIER 1 C1.35 · RSA 40:13, II-a's four lettered subparagraphs were not recorded

Tier 1 · systemic — every SB 2 budget season · Sources: legal-anchors C29

¶II-a has four lettered subparagraphs the catalogue did not record: (a) notice of budget hearings posted by the second Tuesday in January; (b) the RSA 273-A:1, III budget submission date and petitioned articles, also the second Tuesday; (c) hearings on or before the third Tuesday, plus supplemental hearings on 7 days' notice, the recessed-hearing rule and the budget-committee delivery date; (d) warrants and budgets posted on or before the last Monday in January. In force from 2019, 192:2, eff. July 10, 2019. Without the lettering, the "notwithstanding" resolution at C1.51 could not be pinned to (c), and the January calendar could not be tested article by article.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-13.htm.

TIER 1 C1.36 · RSA 40:13's default-budget definition is ¶IX(b), not ¶XI

Tier 1 · systemic — every deliberative-session page · Sources: legal-anchors C30 · html-briefing A18

Recorded twice as a TRAP. XI(a) is the disclosure duty plus the four minimum contents of the default-budget form; XI(b) is "This amount shall not be amended by the legislative body"; XI(c) is the prescribed second-session ballot wording. A page citing XI for the definition quotes a disclosure/form provision as though it defined the budget, and would fail to test the IX(b) eliminated-positions reduction at all — the exact reduction the district's own worksheets truncate (A1.15). Affects the deliberative-session pages at show 14892 (2/8/23), 15552 (2/3/24), 16315 (2/1/25) and 17125 (2/7/26).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-13.htm ; the 2023 codification at law.justia.com.

TIER 1 C1.37 · RSA 40:4 was recorded as ¶I only — the weather-postponement provision was missing

Tier 1 · one-off entry, systemic use · Sources: legal-anchors C31

¶II(a)–(c) is the weather-postponement provision: the moderator may postpone "up to 2 hours but not more than 48 hours prior", with a consultation duty, a deeming clause, a 72-hour cap for RSA 40:13 districts, and the rule that the original date still satisfies statutory deadlines (1998, 278:1; 2019, 192:1, eff. July 10, 2019). Without ¶II, a postponed meeting would appear to breach a statutory deadline that the deeming clause preserves — directly relevant to the 2/8/23 deliberative session, whose snow date was 2/9 (C1.57).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-4.htm.

TIER 1 C1.38 · The RSA 91-A:2, II business-day definition was not previously recorded

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C32

"A business day means the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding national and state holidays." It governs every minutes-timeliness calculation in this corpus and was not recorded in the catalogue; absent it, a five-business-day or 144-hour calculation runs on calendar days and calls compliant postings late. Use with the full eleven-holiday list at C1.33.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2.htm.

TIER 1 C1.39 · The RSA 275:42 negative was over-generalised across chapter 275

Tier 1 · systemic (a reasoning error, not a single citation) · Sources: legal-anchors C33, N2

The catalogue records that RSA 275:42, I's "employer" does not reach political subdivisions — true, so the eight-day wage-payment rule should not be cited against a school district, but subdivision-specific. RSA 275:78, II carries its own definition — "…or the state or any of its political subdivisions, which has 6 or more employees working in the state" — which does reach a school district. Check each section's own definition. Generalised, the negative would have wrongly exempted the district from the state nursing-mothers provisions once they took effect.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XXIII/275/275-78.htm.

TIER 1 C1.40 · The RSA 194-C:9, ¶IV warning was one-sided

Tier 1 · systemic for the autumn-2024 wave · Sources: legal-anchors C34, V15

The catalogue warns against citing ¶IV before October 2024. ¶IV IS in force from 1 October 2024 (2024, 329:1) and therefore binds 11/14/24, 12/3/24, 12/12/24 and everything after — which matters precisely because the Unity apportionment is contested in that window. Text: the SAU board "may consider other methods" of apportionment; any method "shall have been approved by the constituent school districts"; adopted "only if there is a majority affirmative vote in each school district." The 2023 codification runs only to ¶III (source note 2003, 279:1), so the trap misleads both ways: citing ¶IV against a pre-Oct-2024 meeting is wrong, and omitting it from the contested window is equally wrong.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-9.htm ; the 2023 codification at law.justia.com.

TIER 1 C1.41 · RSA 194-C:9, ¶I — two clauses not previously recorded

Tier 1 · systemic for the Unity apportionment thread · Sources: legal-anchors C35

The equalized valuation is that "of each district as of June 30 of the preceding school year"; and the new-service bar runs "unless a majority of the school districts … representing not less than 60 percent of the total pupils … have voted favorably." In force from 16 September 2003 (2003, 279:1). Without the June 30 date an apportionment could be tested against the wrong valuation year; without the 60% clause a new-service objection could not be evaluated. Bears directly on the misstated apportionment basis at A1.20.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-9.htm ; the 2023 codification at law.justia.com.

TIER 1 C1.42 · Two SAU certifications conflated

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C36

RSA 194-C:9, I — the apportionment is certified prior to January 15 to the chairperson of each district school board (2003, 279:1). RSA 194-C:5, III — certification is to the treasurers and to the state board of education (1996, 298:3). Two different duties, two different recipients, two different deadlines. Conflating them produces a January-15 deadline finding against the wrong duty, or a missed-recipient finding against a district that certified correctly.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-9.htm ; /194-C-5.htm.

TIER 1 C1.43 · Three RSA 91-A:3 clauses easy to drop or misquote

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C38, N45, F12

¶III's sealing sentence in full: a seal requires "recorded vote of 2/3 of the members present taken in public session" — those four words sit inside the operative clause and are the test for a defective seal. ¶II(c) ends "other than a member of the public body itself" — not "of this board"; an agenda quoting it correctly must not be flagged, and reading it the other way would flag an agenda that quoted the statute exactly. ¶IV(b): pre-existing minutes never reviewed become "subject to public disclosure without further action of the public body." All 2023, 189:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 C1.44 · RSA 91-A:3, ¶I contains no exemptions

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C39, N33

All of them are in ¶II. A motion or a set of minutes citing "91-A:3, I(a)" for a subject-matter ground has stated no valid exemption at all. ¶I(b) requires the motion to state on its face the specific exemption under paragraph II, by roll call, majority of members present; ¶I(c) confines discussion to the matters in the motion. This both supplies a finding — against the 7 August 2024 Claremont minutes (A1.3) — and prevents the inverse error of treating I(a) as a valid ground.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 C1.45 · RSA 91-A:3, II(j) and II(i) are routinely misused

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors C40, N43, N44

II(j): "Consideration of confidential, commercial, or financial information that is exempt from public disclosure under RSA 91-A:5, IV in an adjudicative proceeding pursuant to RSA 541 or RSA 541-A." Outside an adjudicative proceeding it is not available. II(i) is EMERGENCY-FUNCTIONS PREPARATION, not student matters — II(c) is the right forum for an individual student matter. Both 2023, 189:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023. A page validating a II(j) entry outside an adjudicative proceeding, or a II(i) entry for a student matter, would have endorsed a nonpublic session with no available ground.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 C1.46 · RSA 189:35-a and RSA 189:34 must not be crossed

Tier 1 · systemic risk flag · Sources: legal-anchors C41

189:35-a, II: "Ten half days of unexcused absence during a school year shall constitute habitual truancy"; ¶III requires the district to define "half day" (2005, 7:1; 2010, 9:2, eff. July 6, 2010). 189:34, ¶II(a) is the duty to define "excused absence" — a different duty in a different section (2013, 249:14, eff. Sept. 1, 2013). Citing 189:34 for the truancy threshold, or 189:35-a for the excused-absence definition, attributes a duty to a section that does not impose it. Related negative: RSA 189:24 is "Standard School", not attendance or discipline, so a truancy or discipline finding cited to it points at a school-standards provision.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry, April–June 2024 wave.

TIER 1 C1.47 · RSA 53-A:1 does not reach school districts

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C42, N47

RSA 53-A:1 is "Purpose" and reaches only "municipalities and counties." The definition that names school districts is RSA 53-A:2: "public agency" = "any political subdivision… including but not limited to school districts" (2016, 46:1, eff. July 2, 2016). RSA 53-A:3 is the joint-exercise mechanism for a city/district shared position (2016, 46:2). A shared-position analysis anchored on 53-A:1 would have concluded the chapter does not reach the district at all.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry, autumn 2024 wave.

TIER 1 C1.48 · The zero-gap-transcript inference was wrong, and one page still carries it

Tier 1 · systemic inference pattern; one page outstanding · Sources: legal-anchors C43, F8

A page in this run inferred from a 1.1-second maximum inter-row gap that "the camera keeps running through the recess and the nonpublic session." That inference is wrong. On the 12/7/23 SAU 6 recording the chair says "It is now 625. We will resume at 635" and the board is back 45 recording-seconds later; the nonpublic session spans 53 recording-seconds of audio that is audibly the room reassembling. Continuous audio plus ten missing wall-clock minutes is a spliced broadcast: recording positions stop being clock times after the splice, adjournment times inferred from the tape are wrong, and a nonpublic session's true length is unrecoverable. The 8/17/23 SAU 6 page makes the same inference ("seventy-six seconds of an unbroken recording") and needs re-checking.

Primary source: the 12/7/23 SAU 6 recording; the 8/17/23 SAU 6 page.

TIER 1 C1.49 · RSA 32:5, ¶V-a and ¶V-b were not previously recorded

Tier 1 · systemic for warrant pages · Sources: legal-anchors C44

¶V-a is the recorded-vote / numerical-tally requirement — the tally must appear beside the article. ¶V-b is the tax-impact notation. Their absence from the catalogue meant the two most directly testable warrant-presentation duties had no anchor, so a warrant omitting a tally could not be flagged.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-5.htm.

TIER 1 C1.50 · HB 358's internal section number is contradicted by the source

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors C45

Two fetches of the bill text disagreed (§20 vs §22). The effective date is corroborated four ways; the section number is not — do not state one. The file's own nursing-mothers entry gives the source note as "2023, 191:20". Stating a section number the source does not support would put a specific, checkable falsehood into a page.

Primary source: https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB358/2023 ; https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XXIII/275/275-78.htm.

TIER 1 C1.51 · RSA 40:13, II-a's "Notwithstanding any other provision of law" displaces the 25-day floor

Tier 1 · systemic — every SB 2 budget hearing in the corpus, marked "ACT ON THIS" · Sources: legal-anchors F3, N22

RSA 40:13, ¶II-a opens "Notwithstanding any other provision of law" and expressly governs "Budget hearings under RSA 32:5 and RSA 195:12." Its subparagraph (c) puts those hearings "on or before the third Tuesday in January", while ¶III puts the first session "between the first and second Saturdays following the last Monday in January." The two are irreconcilable by design — a third-Tuesday hearing can never be 25 days before a first-Saturday-of-February session — and II-a's "notwithstanding" clause is what resolves it. LIVE: the 15 January 2025 budget hearing page (MAP §69). 15 Jan → 1 Feb is 17 days. DO NOT FLAG IT. In force from 2019, 192:2, eff. July 10, 2019.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-13.htm.

TIER 1 C1.52 · 28 CFR 35.200 — a corpus-wide bar on web-accessibility flags

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V33, F6

Published 89 FR 31337, eff. 24 April 2024 (WCAG 2.1 AA); the compliance dates were amended by 91 FR 20912, 20 April 2026 and now read 26 April 2027 / 26 April 2028 (special district governments). No compliance date had arrived in 2024 and none has arrived yet — do not flag a district PDF or website as a violation of it on any page in this corpus. A page doing so would accuse the district of breaching a rule whose obligations have not begun. The available provision for a missing coordinator or grievance procedure is 28 CFR 35.107, in force since 1991.

Primary source: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/chapter-I/part-35/subpart-H/section-35.200.

TIER 1 C1.53 · 34 CFR 106.8 / 106.45 — eCFR serves the 2024 Title IX rule

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V3 · html-briefing C6 · briefing D12

eCFR now serves the 2024 text at 106.8 and 106.45 (2024 Title IX rule, 89 FR 33885). Meetings before August 2024 need the 2020 rule at 85 FR 30026 (May 19, 2020), "These regulations are effective August 14, 2020" — a page using eCFR would test a 2023 grievance procedure against 2024 requirements. Compounding it, 34 CFR 106.30 now 404s on eCFR because the 2024 rule replaced it, so for a pre-August-2024 meeting the 2022 CFR annual edition on govinfo.gov must be quoted. The legal-anchors file records no entry for 106.30; its Title IX trap is anchored on 106.8, 106.45 and 106.41(c).

Primary source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/19/2020-10512/ ; https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-34/subtitle-B/chapter-I/part-106/subpart-B/section-106.8.

TIER 1 C1.54 · RSA 188-E:3, II — the 20-year repurposing exception did not exist in 2023

Tier 1 · systemic for CTE pages · Sources: legal-anchors V4

The 2023 source note ended 2021, 210:2; the note now ends 2025, 190:1, eff. July 1, 2025. Today's text carries a 20-year repurposing exception that did not exist in 2023, when a CTE facility became district property "for use by the career and technical education center exclusively". A repurposing that breached the 2023 exclusivity rule would look permitted under today's text. Use the 2023 codification (2021, 210:2 text).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/188-E/188-E-3.htm.

TIER 1 C1.55 · 88 Fed. Reg. 65778 — the CEP identified-student percentage fell 40% → 25%

Tier 1 · one-off provision, systemic within the food-service thread · Sources: legal-anchors V5

Published 26 September 2023, effective 26 October 2023. For any meeting before that date, "citing today's rule makes correct 2023 advice look wrong" — a superintendent correctly stating a 40% floor would appear to have misinformed the board. The working link is the govinfo copy; note the document-number trap at D2.17.

Primary source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-09-26/html/2023-20294.htm.

TIER 1 C1.56 · RSA 189:11 — Holocaust and genocide instruction, with an incomplete source note

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V6

Three amendments took effect 1 July 2023, plus 2024 and 2025 amendments, and "gc.nh.gov's source note shows only the later ones". Subparagraph content and lettering changed. For meetings before 7/1/23 cite the 2020, 29:14 provision and do not assert current subparagraph lettering, or a page will quote a requirement that had not yet been enacted.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 189:11 (source note incomplete).

TIER 1 C1.57 · RSA 193-F:4 — the bullying-policy element list was amended August 2025

Tier 1 · systemic for policy-review pages · Sources: legal-anchors V7

2025, 57:1, eff. Aug. 1, 2025, amended the enumerated list of required policy elements, so a district policy compliant with the earlier list would appear deficient on any pre-August-2025 page. Mitigation: cite chapter 193-F rather than quoting the list.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 193-F:4.

TIER 1 C1.58 · RSA 35:9 — capital reserve funds, amended 16 July 2023

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V8 · html-briefing C7 · briefing D12

Amended by 2023, 36:2, eff. July 16, 2023, so the text gc.nh.gov serves today is not the text in force for any 2023 meeting before mid-July — which is every 2023 meeting through the 6/21/23 board and 7/13/23 SAU 6 sessions. Mitigation: RSA 35:15 is stable (last amended 2021) and is usually the better anchor. The same session-law cite appears in RSA 197:23-a's note, which triggered and then resolved the merge caution at C1.30.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 35:9 / 35:15.

TIER 1 C1.59 · RSA 91-A:3, IV — the 10-year sealed-minutes review did not exist before 3 October 2023

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V9

New paragraph at 2023, 189:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023: a body may adopt review procedures; absent one it must review and vote by majority whether the ¶III circumstances still apply, "no more than 10 years from the last time the public body voted"; minutes sealed before the effective date and not reviewed within 10 years of it become "subject to public disclosure without further action." Exclude it from any earlier meeting — otherwise a board with 30- or 99-year seals would be flagged under a duty that did not yet exist (A1.32).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-3.htm.

TIER 1 C1.60 · RSA 141-C:20-c, II — "notarized" was struck in July 2022

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V10

2022 ch. 55 (HB 1035), eff. July 19, 2022, struck the word "notarized". The current text is correct from that date onward, so a district accepting a non-notarized exemption form after 19 July 2022 is compliant; only pre-7/19/22 material needs the earlier text.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 141-C:20-c.

TIER 1 C1.61 · 2 CFR 200.344 — the 120-day liquidation rule moved paragraph

Tier 1 · systemic — every 2023–24 ESSER/liquidation page · Sources: legal-anchors V11

The 120-day liquidation rule was at paragraph (b) in 2023 and is at (c) today, after the 2024 Uniform Guidance revision effective 1 October 2024. ED's own June 2024 guidance still cites (b), so a page citing (c) would be at odds with the very memo it relies on. Cite the paragraph that existed.

Primary source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2023-title2-vol1/xml/CFR-2023-title2-vol1-sec200-344.xml ; the ED memo on ARP ESSER obligation deadlines and extensions.

TIER 1 C1.62 · 2 CFR 200.302(b) — reworded by the 2024 revision

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V12

eCFR now serves "Identification of all Federal awards…", dropping the 2023 text's "in its accounts" and rewriting the source-and-application sentence. For 2023–24 meetings a financial-records finding would quote language the district was never subject to. Use the 2023 annual edition via the govinfo pattern (D2.15).

Primary source: the govinfo CFR-2023-title2-vol1 annual edition.

TIER 1 C1.63 · RSA 32:5 — the budget-hearing section was amended in 2025, but ¶¶I–V are unchanged

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V13

2025, 144:1, eff. Aug. 30, 2025; the 2023 text's source note ended 2021, 134:3–4. The file verified that ¶I, ¶II, ¶III, ¶IV and ¶V are identical in the 2023 codification and today — the 2025 amendment did not disturb them, so those paragraphs bind every meeting in the corpus. Any paragraph outside that verified set needs its own vintage check: "a core budget-process provision — get the vintage right."

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-5.htm ; https://law.justia.com/codes/new-hampshire/2023/title-iii/chapter-32/section-32-5/.

TIER 1 C1.64 · RSA 198:41 — the education grant formula changes across 2025, 2026 and 2027

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V14

The 2023 text is 2023, 79:156, eff. July 1, 2023; the current note runs to 2025, 141:83, with further 2026 and 2027 effective dates. Any 2023–24 meeting, and each of the late-corpus 2026 meetings, needs its own in-force check.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 198:41.

TIER 1 C1.65 · RSA 91-A:4 — the Right-to-Know records section carries its own 2024 trap

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V16

2024, 49:1, 2, eff. Aug. 13, 2024. ¶I's inspection right is old and safe. The current ¶IV(b)–(d) cost rule — five business days to make available, deny, or state the time reasonably necessary; (d) only "the actual cost of providing the copy"; "No cost or fee shall be charged for the inspection or delivery, without copying" — carries the 2024 note and must not be applied to a pre-August-2024 records request.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 91-A:4.

TIER 1 C1.66 · RSA 198:4-d — only the September 1 filing date is safe for earlier meetings

Tier 1 · systemic for finance pages · Sources: legal-anchors V17

The section was amended by 2025, 141:401, eff. July 1, 2025. For any pre-July-2025 meeting, only the September 1 DOE-25 filing date is safe to rely on; quoting any non-date element of the current section would import later text. The section contains no extension provision in any vintage (A1.23).

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 198:4-d.

TIER 1 C1.67 · RSA 198:15-a, IV — building aid, with a 2024 amendment that post-dates 2023

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V19

2023, 35:2, eff. July 1, 2023; 2024, 47:1 post-dates any 2023 meeting. Applying the 2024 text to a 2023 meeting misstates the provision.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 198:15-a.

TIER 1 C1.68 · RSA 169-D:2 — the CHINS definitions were amended in 2024

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V20

Last pre-October-2023 amendment 2021, 182:5; 2024, 42:7 and 88:6 post-date any 2023 meeting, so quoting the current definition against one imports later text.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 169-D:2.

TIER 1 C1.69 · Ed 306.07 (School Facilities) — the 12-13-2024 readoption

Tier 1 · systemic, part of the Ed 306 renumbering family · Sources: legal-anchors V23

Both Cornell/LII and the state site serve the readopted text (Doc. #14150, eff. 12-13-24), so any 2023–24 facilities finding tested against it is tested against later text. Recovery route: the 2023 text is recoverable from NHDOE's own March 2023 side-by-side revision draft, which prints the quoted requirements in the existing column.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rules/state_agencies/ed300.html ; NHDOE March 2023 side-by-side.

TIER 1 C1.70 · Ed 306.15 — renumbered and re-captioned

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V24

Under Doc. #14150, eff. 12-13-24, Ed 306.15 is "School Year" today but was "Provision of Staff and Staff Qualifications" in 2023. The catalogue's 2026-08-19 entry gives Ed 306.15 as the 180-day/hour-equivalents rule (≥450 h kindergarten, ≥945 h grades 1–6, ≥990 h grades 7–12). For any 2023 meeting a school-year finding cited to Ed 306.15 would point at a staffing rule.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rules/state_agencies/ed300.html.

TIER 1 C1.71 · RSA 275:78, :79, :81 — the NH nursing-mothers duty did not exist before 1 July 2025

Tier 1 · systemic across the 2023–mid-2025 window · Sources: legal-anchors V26

2023, 191:20 (HB 358, 2023 N.H. Laws ch. 191, signed August 2023), eff. July 1, 2025; penalties at RSA 275:82 follow 1 July 2026. "Any 2023 – mid-2025 meeting told a nursing-mothers policy is 'required by state law' is being told something not yet true." The binding source in that window is the federal PUMP Act, 29 U.S.C. §218d, in force from 29 December 2022 — which the district's own policy miscites to title 42 (A1.10). Do not state HB 358's internal section number (C1.50).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XXIII/275/275-78.htm · /275-79.htm · /275-81.htm ; https://legiscan.com/NH/bill/HB358/2023.

TIER 1 C1.72 · RSA 198:20-b, III — the hearing threshold was $5,000, not $20,000

Tier 1 · one-off boundary, systemic in the gift-acceptance thread · Sources: legal-anchors V28 · briefing D12

2023, 38:1, eff. July 18, 2023, raised the threshold from $5,000 to $20,000. III(a) at ≥$20,000: public hearing plus newspaper notice ≥7 days stating time, place AND subject; III(b) under $20,000: "school board shall post notice in agenda and include notice in meeting minutes." ¶I conditions the authority on a district enabling article. Any pre-18-July-2023 gift or grant between $5,000 and $20,000 is affected: citing the current text "turns a required hearing into an apparently voluntary courtesy, inverting the finding."

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 198:20-b.

TIER 1 C1.73 · RSA 193:38 — discrimination in public schools, amended September 2024

Tier 1 · systemic for the 2023–Aug 2024 window · Sources: legal-anchors V29

2019, 282:1 (SB 263), eff. Sept. 17, 2019; 2024, 117:1, eff. Sept. 1, 2024. "The text served today is not the text in force for any 2023 – Aug 2024 meeting" — a discrimination finding for that window would be tested against later language.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/xv/193/193-38.htm.

TIER 1 C1.74 · RSA 671:20 — ¶II was added in 2025

Tier 1 · systemic across the ballot pages · Sources: legal-anchors V30

The section was one sentence (ballot preparation by the district clerk) from 1979, 321:1; 2025, 281:1, eff. Sept. 30, 2025 adds ¶II, which requires the ballot to print, immediately preceding the school-budget question, the preceding year's average cost per pupil per RSA 189:75, I(a) and "ELA Proficiency: X%; Math Proficiency: X%; Science Proficiency: X%", as the school district clerk's duty. Do not apply ¶II before that date — a 2024 ballot omitting proficiency scores would be flagged under a duty that did not exist; it is in force for any page dated on or after 30 September 2025.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/LXIII/671/671-20.htm.

TIER 1 C1.75 · RSA 193-C:6 — statewide assessment and the parental opt-out, amended October 2024

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V31

2018, 91:1, eff. July 24, 2018; amended 2024, 350:3, eff. Oct. 1, 2024, so the section as served today post-dates every meeting before that date. Content: unconditional parental exemption; "shall not penalize any exempted student nor shall the department… penalize any school district for a lower participation rate"; the district must develop an exemption form and provide an alternative activity.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 193-C:6.

TIER 1 C1.76 · RSA 188-E:1-a — ¶VI was added in July 2025

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V32

2022, 272:2, eff. July 1, 2022; 2025, 229:1, 2, eff. 1 July 2025 adds a ¶VI (a CTE access programme by 1 January 2026). The 2023 codification has five paragraphs — do not cite ¶VI before July 2025, or a pre-July-2025 CTE page is tested against an access-programme duty that did not exist.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 188-E:1-a.

TIER 1 C1.77 · RSA 193-E:2-a, I — the eleven learning areas were amended September 2024

Tier 1 · systemic for adequacy pages · Sources: legal-anchors V34

Source note ends 2024, 186:1, eff. Sept. 10, 2024. Today's text does not govern meetings before that date.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/193-E/193-E-2-a.htm.

TIER 1 C1.78 · RSA 193:3 — change of school / best interest of student, amended July 2025

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V35

2025, 293:1, eff. July 1, 2025. Today's text is not the 2023–24 text.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 193:3.

TIER 1 C1.79 · 89 FR 30046 — the 2024 Uniform Guidance revision is the boundary for this backlog

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V37

Published 22 April 2024, effective 1 October 2024, and it "applies to awards issued on or after that date, so a 2023–24 award stays under the 2023 annual edition." The revision doubled the equipment/supplies threshold $5,000 → $10,000 and raised the single audit threshold $750,000 → $1,000,000. It is "the boundary that makes the govinfo CFR-2023-… pattern the right one for this backlog" (D2.15). The file gives two different Federal Register starting pages for the same revision — see C2.8.

Primary source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/22/2024-07496/.

TIER 1 C1.80 · 2 CFR 200.313 — the equipment disposition threshold doubled

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V38

89 FR 30136, Apr. 22, 2024, eff. 1 Oct 2024; the pre-2024 threshold was $5,000, and disposition now applies to equipment "with a current fair market value of $10,000 or less (per unit)." Section content: equipment use, property records, biennial physical inventory, loss-prevention control system, maintenance. A 2023–24 disposal of $6,000 equipment would look exempt under today's text when it was not.

Primary source: eCFR 2 CFR 200.313 and the govinfo CFR-2023 annual edition.

TIER 1 C1.81 · 2 CFR 200.501 — the single-audit threshold depends on the audited year's vintage

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V39

$1,000,000 for fiscal years beginning on or after 2024-10-01, otherwise $750,000. A district spending $800,000 in FY2024 owed a single audit; the same spend in a fiscal year beginning after 1 October 2024 does not. Pick the threshold by the audited year's vintage.

Primary source: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-2/subtitle-A/chapter-II/part-200/subpart-F/section-200.501.

TIER 1 C1.82 · RSA 186-C:2 — the ages 3–21 definition was amended September 2025

Tier 1 · systemic for special-education eligibility pages · Sources: legal-anchors V40

2025, 156:1, eff. Sept. 5, 2025. "Today's gc.nh.gov text is not the text in force for any 2023–24 meeting; use the 2024 codification."

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 186-C:2.

TIER 1 C1.83 · RSA 186-C:3-a — today's text is the December-2024 text, and it says nothing about preschool

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V41, N24

Source note ends 2024, 351:2, eff. Oct. 1, 2024, so today's text does not govern pre-October-2024 meetings. Substantively it is also a negative anchor: the section opens "The division shall help school districts meet their responsibilities under this chapter…", imposing duties on the State's division and department, and says nothing about preschool, pre-kindergarten or children aged 3–5, and nothing releasing a district from operating a preschool programme. Citing it for a preschool obligation or exemption quotes a State-duty provision.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/186-C/186-C-3-a.htm.

TIER 1 C1.84 · Ed 306 — the December 2024 readoption, with the numbers

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors V42, D14 · html-briefing C8 · briefing D12

Doc. #14150, eff. 12-13-24, readopted Ed 306.01–306.28. Ed 306.14 "Student-Educator Ratios" was 306.17 "Class Size": K–2 25 or fewer per educator (striving for 20); grades 3–5 30 or fewer (striving for 25); middle and high school 30 or fewer. Ed 306.12(d) (was 306.15): each school with an enrollment of 500 or more provides an assistant principal, or two or more persons with Ed 506 administrative licensure acting as an FTE — "keyed to enrollment, not ADA/ADM, and it is a floor." Ed 306.17 is now "Alternative Programs." Any class-size or administrator-staffing finding for a pre-13-Dec-2024 meeting cited to today's numbering points at a different subject, and using ADA/ADM instead of enrollment misapplies the assistant-principal rule in either vintage. Cite the part page; do not guess subsection numbers.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rules/state_agencies/ed300.html ; NHDOE's March 2023 side-by-side.

TIER 1 C1.85 · RSA 32:5-e and RSA 32:5-f — the school district budget cap did not exist before 1 October 2024

Tier 1 · systemic for the 2025–26 pages · Sources: legal-anchors V43

2024, 353:2, eff. Oct. 1, 2024; 2025, 183:5 (32:5-e) and 183:6, 7 (32:5-f), eff. Sept. 13, 2025. 32:5-f ¶III requires a public hearing "at least 15 days, but not more than 30 days, before the question is to be voted on", notice in ≥2 public places and published in a newspaper ≥7 days prior; ¶IV fixes mandatory ballot wording carrying a dollar blank — "_____ dollars per pupil cost" — closing "as of October 1." In force, ¶III is why a budget-cap article can require a February hearing of its own even in an SB 2 district that has already held its deliberative session: for a 10 March vote the window is 8–23 February, and a 7 February deliberative session falls one day outside it. Applying any of it to a pre-October-2024 meeting is wrong (A1.22).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-5-e.htm ; /32-5-f.htm.

TIER 1 C1.86 · RSA 189:75–189:78 — cost-per-pupil and the Mandatory Report to Voters

Tier 1 · one-off boundary, systemic within the 2026 pages · Sources: legal-anchors V44, N49

All 2024, 332:3, eff. July 1, 2025. 189:75, I cost-per-pupil is "the LOWEST of three alternatives (a)/(b)/(c)"; 189:76 Mandatory Report to Voters is "a real, testable posting duty first reaching the 2026 annual meeting". Applying the report duty to any earlier meeting, or computing cost-per-pupil by any alternative other than the lowest, is wrong. Chapter 189 ends at 189:78 — a citation to a higher section number in that chapter does not exist.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 189:75–:78.

TIER 1 C1.87 · RSA 194-D:5 — open enrolment, amended September 2025

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V45

2009, 241:14, eff. Sept. 14, 2009; 2025, 211:2, eff. Sept. 13, 2025. ¶I carries the 80% figure; ¶II assigns special-education funding and decision-making to the SENDING district. Applying the current ¶II allocation to a pre-September-2025 meeting is wrong.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 194-D:5.

TIER 1 C1.88 · RSA 194-B:11 — chartered public school adequacy, amended July 2025

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V46

Note ends 2025, 141:81, 82, eff. July 1, 2025. The State pays a state-authorised chartered public school adequacy under RSA 198:40-a "plus an additional grant of $4,900" per pupil from the education trust fund, and "The child's resident district shall have the responsibility, including financial responsibility, to ensure the provision of the special education and related services in the child's IEP." Applying the $4,900 figure or the current resident-district allocation to a pre-July-2025 meeting is wrong.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 194-B:11.

TIER 1 C1.89 · RSA 200:11-a — school air quality, amended September 2024

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V48

2024, 226:7, eff. Sept. 17, 2024; the core annual air-quality survey duty dates to 2010, 319:1 and is safe throughout. Quoting the current text against a pre-September-2024 meeting imports later language.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 200:11-a.

TIER 1 C1.90 · RSA 194:61 — unused district facilities, amended August 2023

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V49, N29

2021, 186:1, eff. Aug. 10, 2021; 2023, 198:3, eff. Aug. 4, 2023. A sale or lease must be subject to an approved chartered public school's right of first refusal, and the superintendent reports unused facilities annually. Applying the current text to a meeting before 4 August 2023 is wrong. Paired negative: RSA 194-B:3-a is NOT the charter-school property statute — chapter 194-B contains no such section; 194:61 is.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 194:61.

TIER 1 C1.91 · RSA 189:13-a — the SAU is named in some paragraphs and not others

Tier 1 · systemic paragraph-scope trap · Sources: legal-anchors V50

2023, 55:1, eff. July 31, 2023; 164:1, 2, eff. Sept. 26, 2023 (last amendment). ¶V — "The governing body of a school district, chartered public school, or public academy shall adopt a policy relative to hiring practices…" — does not name the SAU; ¶I(a)/¶VI — "The employing school administrative unit, school district, or chartered public school shall complete a criminal history records check…" — does. A hiring-policy flag against the SAU under ¶V cites a paragraph that does not reach it, and pre-26-September-2023 meetings need the earlier text.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/xv/189/189-13-a.htm.

TIER 1 C1.92 · 7 CFR 210.16 and 7 CFR 210.14(e) — food service

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V51

210.16 runs 53 FR 29147 through 88 FR 57845, Aug. 23, 2023; 210.14(e) was last amended 89 FR 32073, Apr. 25, 2024. 210.16(d): a food service management company contract "shall be of a duration of no longer than 1 year", renewals "may not exceed 4 additional years". 210.14(e): "The maximum annual average price increase required under this paragraph shall not exceed ten cents." Applying the post-April-2024 paid-lunch-equity cap to an earlier year is wrong — and this is the ceiling that bounds the ten-cent-per-meal agreement at A1.36.

Primary source: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/subtitle-B/chapter-II/subchapter-A/part-210/subpart-D/section-210.16.

TIER 1 C1.93 · RSA 485:17-a — lead in school drinking water, amended July 2022

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors V52

2018, 4:18, eff. July 1, 2019; 2022, 325:1, eff. July 8, 2022. Three rounds of testing, sampling completed 1 Jan 2016 – 30 Jun 2024; action level 5 ppb; on exceedance notify parents within 5 business days and supply compliant water; department-approved remediation plan within 180 days. Applying the 5 ppb action level or the 5-business-day notice to a pre-July-2022 event is wrong.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 485:17-a.

TIER 1 C1.94 · 45 CFR part 1308 no longer exists

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N4

Head Start disability standards are now at 45 CFR 1302 subpart F, §§1302.60–.63. A citation to part 1308 resolves to nothing.

Primary source: legal-anchors catalogue correction.

TIER 1 C1.95 · RSA 91-A:2, IV is state-government-only — a school board must be assessed under ¶III

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N11

¶IV applies "only to boards, committees, councils, advisory committees and like bodies of STATE government." It is not available to a school board or an SAU board; ¶III is the paragraph that governs them. ¶III(a)–(e): remote attendance only when in-person "is not reasonably practical", with the reason stated in the minutes; a quorum physically present; all members able simultaneously to hear and speak to each other; and (e) "All votes taken during such a meeting shall be by roll call vote." In force 2023, 188:1, eff. Oct. 3, 2023 (next 2025, 112:1, eff. Aug. 22, 2025).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/VI/91-A/91-A-2.htm.

TIER 1 C1.96 · New Hampshire does not require a district to employ a school nurse

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N12

RSA 200:27 says a district "may provide"; RSA 200:29 "may nominate and … appoint". RSA 200:38 imposes mandatory immunisation and examination duties on the nurse, "so a vacancy leaves those duties unheld — that, not a staffing mandate, is the defensible finding." 1971, 499:1 · 2023, 172:1, 2, eff. July 28, 2023 · 2001, 83:2, II.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 200:27, :29, :38.

TIER 1 C1.97 · RSA 188-E:5, I names no region number

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N15

The program "shall be broad enough to serve the reasonable business and industry needs of the area" (note ends 2022, 272:3, 4). A finding that a centre served the wrong region has no statutory region definition to rest on — which bears on the Region 10 / "Region 17" confusion at A1.56.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 188-E:5.

TIER 1 C1.98 · 20 U.S.C. §7801 — the "highly qualified teacher" definition was struck

Tier 1 · systemic as a corrective · Sources: legal-anchors N16

ESSA §8002 (Pub. L. 114-95, Dec. 10, 2015) struck the definition. "Reach for it whenever a board dates a staffing constraint to NCLB" — a page repeating a board's NCLB-era framing would apply a repealed federal standard.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry.

TIER 1 C1.99 · RSA 189:68-a imposes duties on OPERATORS, not districts

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N19

"Student Online Personal Information" (2015, 128:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2016). A district cannot breach it; do not cite it against one.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry.

TIER 1 C1.100 · RSA 273-A:3 contains no two-week duty on a public employer

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N21

¶II(a) is a 120-day-before-budget-submission-date notice on the party desiring to bargain; ¶IV requires the employer to record that date with the PELRB (note ends 2013, 244:1, eff. Sept. 22, 2013). A two-week response finding against the board has no basis in the section. Related: RSA 197:3, III, not RSA 273-A:3, is the special-meeting authority for negotiated cost items (note ends 2021, 77:1, eff. Aug. 17, 2021). RSA 273-A is Title XXIII, not LXIII (D2.16).

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 273-A:3.

TIER 1 C1.101 · RSA 193:13, I(a) — the suspension gate is a WRITTEN DESIGNATION, not a credential

Tier 1 · systemic for discipline pages · Sources: legal-anchors N25

"A representative designated in writing by the superintendent … may suspend pupils … not to exceed 10 consecutive school days" (2020, 38:1, eff. July 29, 2020 and July 1, 2021). The gate is the written designation, not an administrator's credential, so a suspension flag based on the suspender's job title or licence misses the actual test.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 193:13.

TIER 1 C1.102 · RSA 33:7 does not reach school districts, and RSA 198:20-a is not it either

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N27

"Tax Anticipation Notes" runs to cities and towns and village districts only (note ends 1997, 105:3, 4). RSA 33:1's "municipality" does include a school district (2018, 118:1) "but 33:7 does not use that word." And RSA 198:20-a is about payments to non-approved nonpublic schools for disabled children. Do not cite either for a school-district tax anticipation note.

Primary source: legal-anchors entry.

TIER 1 C1.103 · RSA 189:1 creates no State Board waiver power

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N28

180 days "or the equivalent number of hours as required in the rules of the department of education" (2011, 42:1, eff. July 8, 2011; unamended). A page describing a State Board waiver of the school-year requirement would invent a power.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 189:1.

TIER 1 C1.104 · RSA 5-B:5 sets standards for the pooled risk management PROGRAMME, not a duty on a district

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N31

It is not a resolution duty on a participating district. A finding that the district failed to adopt a required resolution misreads whom the section binds. RSA chapter 5-B is Title I (D2.16).

Primary source: gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/I/5-B/5-B-mrg.htm.

TIER 1 C1.105 · RSA 189:29-b creates no gifted-and-talented programming mandate

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N32

It requires only an annual narrative report, which "shall so state" if no programmes exist. A district with no gifted programme is compliant so long as it reports, and a page treating 189:29-b as a mandate would flag the absence of a programme.

Primary source: legal-anchors catalogue correction.

TIER 1 C1.106 · RSA 194-C:9 requires no public hearing on the SAU budget

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N36, F14

¶I is the only calendar duty: "At a meeting held before January 1, the school administrative unit board shall adopt a budget." So a district that holds a hearing exceeds the statutory minimum, and a page importing RSA 32:5's hearing regime into the SAU budget would flag a compliant board for doing more than the law requires.

Primary source: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-hampshire/2023/title-xv/chapter-194-c/section-194-c-9/.

TIER 1 C1.107 · RSA 32:1 does not name school administrative units

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N37

RSA 32:1 states the chapter's application in terms of "towns, districts, school districts and village districts — it does not name school administrative units." RSA 32:10 lets a governing body transfer between appropriations, which is useful when a district or SAU policy is said to be "consistent with RSA 32:10". Chapter 194-C, not RSA ch. 32, is where an SAU's budget authority lives.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/32/32-1.htm ; /32-10.htm.

TIER 1 C1.108 · RSA 194-C:5, II(a) — the office of superintendent is not compulsory

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N38

"School districts shall not be required to have a superintendent" — superintendent services are compulsory, the office is not, "which is why 'superintendent or executive director' appears in this record." II(c): a new administrative position needs 50% of districts representing 60% of pupils. 1996, 298:3; never amended. A page flagging the absence of a titled superintendent would flag a lawful arrangement.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-5.htm.

TIER 1 C1.109 · RSA 194-C:8 — an uncounted voice vote is not irregular

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N40

Weighted votes "shall only be used upon the demand of a majority of the members of any board present and voting", so uncounted voice votes are not irregular — but the statute makes district voting strength relevant to officer elections. This bounds the tally findings at A1.31: the defect there is the absence of movers, seconders and any announced count where the minutes must record them, not the voice vote as such.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194-C/194-C-8.htm.

TIER 1 C1.110 · RSA 194-C:1 — an SAU may not hold land, buildings, borrow or mortgage

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N41

Units "shall be corporations… to make necessary contracts in relation to any function of the corporation", with an express bar on land, buildings, borrowing and mortgages (1996, 298:3, eff. Aug. 9, 1996). Establishes both what an SAU may do and the outer bound of it — relevant to the asset-and-liability disposition plan RSA 194-C:2, ¶IV requires on withdrawal (C1.28).

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 194-C:1.

TIER 1 C1.111 · RSA 197:7 fixes no number of signatures

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: legal-anchors N42

Posting the warrant, attested copy, 14 days (1975, 11:4, eff. Apr. 25, 1975) — "and it fixes no number of signatures." A finding that a warrant lacked required signatures has no basis here.

Primary source: gc.nh.gov RSA 197:7.

TIER 1 C1.112 · RSA 194:10 — officer salaries belong to the voters

Tier 1 · one-off; this one supplies a finding rather than preventing one · Sources: legal-anchors N52

"At its annual meeting each school district shall determine the salaries of its school board and other district officers, and the district clerk shall certify the same to the selectmen" — unamended since 1927. In an SB 2 district the "annual meeting" is the deliberative session plus the March ballot, so a board that fixes an officer's pay by its own vote — Claremont, 11/1/23, clerk at $300 per meeting — is doing what this section gives to the voters.

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/XV/194/194-10.htm.

TIER 1 C1.113 · RSA 40:13 has no vintage trap, and neither do seven neighbouring provisions

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N53 · briefing D12

"IN FORCE FROM: 2019, 192:2, eff. July 10, 2019 — the last amendment. The text served today is the text in force for EVERY meeting in this corpus. Durable; no vintage trap." Likewise RSA 40:10 (1996, 64:1, eff. July 1, 1996; never amended), RSA 40:4-b (1971, 524:1; never amended), RSA 189:39 (1971, 371:2; never amended), RSA 273-A:5, I(e) (1979, 374:4; never amended), RSA 32:8 (1993, 332:1, eff. Aug. 28, 1993; unamended), RSA 671:30 (1979, 321:1; never amended) and RSA 91-A:2-a (2008, 303:4; never amended). Recorded so that a vintage caveat is not attached where none is needed.

Primary source: the source notes of the sections named.

TIER 1 C1.114 · RSA 40:10's reconsideration restriction does not reach the March ballot

Tier 1 · systemic for deliberative sessions · Sources: legal-anchors N54

¶III: the restriction lasts only "until final adjournment of the meeting at which it is adopted, or any adjourned session of such meeting" — so it does NOT reach the March ballot. ¶V applies the section to "school district meetings under RSA 197". A floor citation to "RSA 40:13, IV" for a motion to restrict reconsideration is defensible, because IV incorporates 40:6–40:10, but the operative section is 40:10 — which matters because the 29 January 2024 working session directed a move to restrict reconsideration (A2.1).

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-10.htm.

TIER 1 C1.115 · RSA 40:13, VI — the first session cannot keep an article off the ballot

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: legal-anchors N55

"All warrant articles shall be placed on the official ballot for a final vote, including warrant articles as amended by the first session." The first session cannot keep an article off the ballot, and no motion is needed to send one forward. Related clauses recorded with it: XI(b) "This amount shall not be amended by the legislative body"; XV "Votes taken at the second session shall not be reconsidered"; IV(c) "An amendment that changes the dollar amount of an appropriation in a warrant article shall not be deemed to violate this subparagraph."

Primary source: https://gc.nh.gov/rsa/html/III/40/40-13.htm.

TIER 1 C1.116 · All three pilot agents silently cleaned up ASR text while quoting it

Tier 1 · systemic; the convention is now corpus-wide · Sources: html-briefing C1

The pilot found every agent improving the transcript inside quotation marks — "the single defect most likely to discredit the project". The convention that resolves it: brackets mean insertion or correction with the garbled wording left visible whenever the correction changes sense ("school boys" [boards] keeps both); stutters may be condensed unmarked; a dropped negation is NEVER supplied, because supplying it invents a vote (B1.2); and quotations from an agenda, minutes or statute must be attributed to that document rather than left reading as speech.

Primary source: the pilot's review of all three agents' pages.

TIER 1 C1.117 · An earlier briefing had the wrong superintendent for 2023

Tier 1 · systemic — affects every 2023–24 page's roster · Sources: briefing C10 · html-briefing C2, C24 (trap)

It said Chris Pratt was acting superintendent in 2023. Michael "Mike" Tempesta was Superintendent of SAU 6 from July 2019 until he was fired 11–12 January 2024, so any 2023 recording has Tempesta. Pratt was Stevens High School principal through 11 January 2024, became interim superintendent that night, and was made permanent about 22–23 May 2024 effective June 2024 — so never "interim" after May 2024 and never "Superintendent Pratt" before January 2024. The 9/6/23 packet's "Questions for B. Nester" and "Questions for C. Pratt" are not a superintendent search. The trap that produced the error survives: on the 4/19/23 recording Pratt says "when I was superintendent there" — of Bellows Falls, before Claremont.

Primary source: the primary sources as read by the pilot; the 4/19/23 recording.

TIER 1 C1.118 · The superintendent changeover date was left open and is now settled

Tier 1 · one-off, closed · Sources: html-briefing C3

The SAU 6 board voted the evening of Thursday 11 January 2024 with both motions effective Friday 12 January 2024 — terminating Tempesta's contract under paragraph nine with six months' severance, and appointing Christopher Pratt interim superintendent with contract terms expressly delegated to the chair and counsel for later approval. Roll on each: 10 in favour, Erickson opposed, Popescu abstaining. Pratt was appointed that night, not contracted — the contract thread runs on to A1.34. The statutory authority for the removal is RSA 194-C:5, III (C1.21).

Primary source: the 1/11/24 recording (show 15523 at 0:06:15 and 0:08:11), the draft minutes 1hQ4ByhOf5iYiiZbot4XueUVQzVohOoqh, and the 1/17/24 Claremont agenda masthead six days later.

TIER 1 C1.119 · "Noelle Kronberg is a 2025 arrival" was wrong by more than a year

Tier 1 · systemic, corrected · Sources: briefing C11

She was appointed SAU 6 board clerk on 11/9/2023 and Claremont School Board clerk on 11/15/2023, and reads the roll at every meeting after that. The related line also needed qualifying: the elected clerk seat drew no candidate in March 2023, but the board appointed a clerk in November — two different things. Before 11/9/23 the roll-reader is Ben Nester, or occasionally Koski, Sprague, Erickson or Tempesta.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 5 correcting Addendum 2.

TIER 1 C1.120 · The 2023 deliberative session was dated 2/10/23; it was 2/8/23

Tier 1 · one-off · Sources: briefing C12 · html-briefing C11

Snow date 2/9. The warrant in the 2/1/23 packet, the notice, the agenda, both sets of minutes, MAP.md §2 and briefing Addendum 3 all agree. The amount and tally in that sentence were right. The packet is to be trusted over the addendum here — and the postponement machinery that makes the snow date lawful is RSA 40:4, ¶II (C1.37).

Primary source: the warrant in the 2/1/23 packet, corroborated by the agenda, Addendum 3 and MAP.md §2.

TIER 1 C1.121 · The 2/8/23 moderator was said never to be named; she is Tracy Pope, and the caution was backwards

Tier 1 · one-off, reversed · Sources: briefing C13

Briefing Addendum 3 said the moderator is never named and warned against equating her with Pope because Pope "is elected moderator at that election — after this meeting". Reverse that caution. Three documents name her presiding: both sets of minutes ("Meeting called to order by Moderator, Tracy Pope"), the packet's Rules of Procedure ("Tracy Pope, Moderator"), and the 11/3/22 special-district minutes in the same packet. She was the incumbent, presiding over a session at which her own one-year seat was on the warrant, and was re-elected 3/14/23.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 10; both sets of 2/8/23 minutes and the packet's Rules of Procedure.

TIER 1 C1.122 · "Andy" was carried as one unreconciled name; it is two people plus a fifth documentary spelling

Tier 1 · one-off, closed · Sources: briefing C14

Briefing Addendum 3 listed Andy Bernier (2/8/23) and Andy LaFrance (12/1/23) as unreconciled, later joined by Lafreniere (11/1/23) and Andre Lafont (5/15/24). The 2/8/23 minutes list "Andy Lafreniere — Ward 3" speaking against the amendment during debate, while the recording has the moderator naming Andy Bernier of the NH School Funding Fairness Project after the meeting closed — different people, different moments. And the SRVRTC Vision Committee chair is Andre LaFreniere, per the approved 6.20.24 minutes ("Alex Herzog read a statement on behalf of Andre LaFreniere") — the fifth rendering and the first in a district document. Note the collision with the Crawford garble Andy Crawford (1.00) at B3.6.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 10 and 15; the 2/8/23 minutes and the approved 6.20.24 minutes.

TIER 1 C1.123 · The Stephanie Hurst citation was misattributed to the wrong speaker and the wrong meeting

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C15

Briefing Addendum 3 cited a "4/2/25 Whitney" recollection; 4/2/25 is Sprague, and "we lost her within a year to… Georgia" is in 12/3/25, not 4/2/25. The surname is nevertheless solid — six renderings across four meetings and two speakers, best anchored by 4/16/25 Whitney at conf 0.94 in the act of retrieving it, and 12/3/25 at 0.92–0.93; the 1/5/24 hit everyone had been relying on is the weakest of the six (Hurst at 0.61). Ignore the false positives Polly Bathurst (1/17/24) and Zach Hurst (2/15/23). Addendum 3's title claim ("SAU 6 Curriculum Director") is separately contradicted by the 2/15/23 minutes ("Literacy Specialist") — see A3.19.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 6 and 11.

TIER 1 C1.124 · Two principals were dated a year and a half too late

Tier 1 · one-off each, corrected · Sources: briefing C16

Briefing Addendum 2 said Frank Romeo (CMS) and David Irwin were documented "2024-25 only". Romeo is CMS principal from at least 2/1/23; David Irwin is CMS assistant principal from at least Aug 2023 — he self-IDs 8/16/23 and is on that night's nomination list — and district documents place him earlier still, as CMS Academic Dean on the 2021–23 ELA advisory board. Note the ASR hazards: Frank Miller (1.00) is Romeo in his own self-introduction, and Dave Erwin is Irwin (B3.17).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 3, 4, 11.

TIER 1 C1.125 · "The 7/13/23 SAU 6 chair vote is not audible" — the minutes give it outright

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C17

Hawkins 8, Erickson 3. Ruggeri nominated Erickson (2nd Gallagher); Sprague nominated Hawkins (2nd Simpson). So Arlene Hawkins is SAU 6 chair from 7/13/23, not "from 11/9/23 onward" as Addendum 2 had it. Hawkins had been elected SAU 6 treasurer on 4/13/23 and vacated that office by becoming chair; Bonnie Miles became treasurer 8/17/23. Horsky's 6/21/23 resignation had vacated the chair he won 6–5 on 3/30/23, which is why officers reopened on 7/13. The CSV provenance note that called the tally unrecoverable is corrected at B2.2.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11, corrections part 2; the approved 7/13/23 SAU 6 minutes.

TIER 1 C1.126 · Addendum 2 overstates the 7/19/23 appointment

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C18

It reads "Candace Crawford appointed 4-2 over David Bailey and Kevin Tyson." Bailey drew no nomination — the 4–2 was Crawford v. Tyson only. (Tyson is this project's maintainer; see D1.1.)

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11, corrections part 2.

TIER 1 C1.127 · Kelly Simpson was placed on the SAU 6 board a year early, and Garry Bator was missing entirely

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected then re-narrowed · Sources: briefing C19

Three mastheads — 12/1/22, 1/17/23, 2/16/23 — name exactly five Unity members: Erickson, Popescu, Bator, Ruggeri, Hart. So Simpson was NOT on the board in that window, and Garry Bator, absent from every addendum, was. The hedge "at least through February 2023" is right and its window is the limit: from 4/13/23 the position reverses — the 4/13, 5/11 and 7/13 mastheads all name Simpson and none names Bator, and on 5/11 Simpson answers every roll, is named by the chair, seconds the recess motion and is credited by Erickson with raising the conflict-of-interest concern.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11 and its corrections part 2; the mastheads named.

TIER 1 C1.128 · "The 10/18 minutes wrongly recorded Gallagher present" is FALSE — and a correction built on it must be unwound

Tier 1 · one-off, consequential · Sources: briefing C20 · briefing A48

The approved 10/18 minutes read, in terms, Absent: Jennifer Gallagher; two agents confirmed it independently against the document. Because the 2026-08-28 re-weighting of 15357's Speaker-4 Role note rested on the premise that "Gallagher, not Miles, was the 10/18 absentee" — and Miles was promoted as a candidate on that basis — the premise is now doubtful and the Speaker-4 cluster must be treated as unresolved; live candidates are Assistant Superintendent Mike Koski, curriculum director Cat/Kat McLaughlin, and Candace Crawford. The separate 15336 @3680.30 correction is unaffected. The underlying source conflict is carried at A1.39. The 15357 page states its own limit correctly: "Bonnie Miles is treated as neither — she is named in no record and heard in none, and this page makes no claim about her attendance in either direction."

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11, "Addendum 5 correction"; the approved 10/18/23 minutes.

TIER 1 C1.129 · Addendum 4's 10/4/23 subcommittee roster is incomplete and wrong on chairs

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C21

The agenda names them: Capital Improvement chair Bonnie Miles, Budget chair Frank Sprague (not Whitney), Policy chair Skillen, Ad Hoc chair Gallagher — and the addendum omits the Curriculum Committee entirely, which Gallagher chairs. Attendance for 10/4/23: Candace Crawford absent, the other six present.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11; the 10/4/23 agenda.

TIER 1 C1.130 · Addendum 7's officer-election seconders are wrong against the district's own minutes

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C22

Addendum 7 recorded the vice-chair second as "Whitney", taken from the ASR's ambiguous "A second now." The approved 3/20/24 minutes say: chair — "Frank Sprague nominated Heather Whitney, Arlene Hawkins seconded"; vice chair — "Candace Crawford nominated Frank Sprague, Bonnie Miles seconded". The tape has one unidentifiable word. Report both; choose neither.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 14; the approved 3/20/24 minutes.

TIER 1 C1.131 · "Alex Herzog is leaving… no departure is ever stated outright" is wrong

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C23

It is stated outright on 6/5/24 at 1:08:44 ("resignation as director of the Tech center") and in the approved 6.5.24 minutes ("recognized Dr. Herzog, his resignation") — seven weeks after he presented a 5–7-year strategic plan and a $10–12M renovation to that board.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 15; the 6/5/24 recording at 1:08:44 and the approved minutes.

TIER 1 C1.132 · The "Present" roll-answer signature was carried forward past its expiry, twice

Tier 1 · one-off, retired · Sources: briefing C25

Gallagher was the only member answering "Present" rather than "Here" — until the March 2024 election, after which that answer is Heather Whitney's; two later files record a "Present" answer that is not Gallagher's. Then it dies altogether: on 15 May 2024 three members answer Present (Sprague, Skillen, the chair), Miles answers Yes, and Hawkins, Petrin and Crawford answer here. The tell is retired — an attribution heuristic that outlived its evidence would have put the wrong name on roll answers.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 6, 7, 15.

TIER 1 C1.133 · Addendum 7's "later readings drift" was a CSV artefact, not a drifting record

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C26 · html-briefing C20, §23c

The 15 May 2024 recording's "Whitney + Sprague + Crawford" Capital Improvements membership came from a mislabelled first-person sentence that belongs to Bonnie Miles (B1.13); the approved 5/15 and 4/17 minutes both give the chair as Miles. The correction reaches the project's own Addendum 14 brief as well as Addendum 7, and the same §23c pass closed Addendum 14 by establishing the Parliamentary Procedure committee's third member as Michael Petrin (A2.25).

Primary source: html-briefing §23c; briefing Addendum 14.

TIER 1 C1.134 · Addendum 8's 8/21/24 vote count was wrong

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C27

Addendum 8 says "Petrin was the lone No (6–1)" for both motions. The title/amendment vote was 5–2 — yes: Skillen, Miles, Hawkins, Crawford, Sprague; no: Petrin and Heather Whitney. Only the main motion was 6–1.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16 §1; approved CSB minutes 8.21.24, item IV.4.

TIER 1 C1.135 · Addendum 8 repeated a transposition of the FY24 encumbrance figures

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C28

Exhibit B p.22 gives total encumbrance $648,931.76; $648,931.76 − $65,000 = $583,931.76, which matches the two roofs voted on 20 June. So $648,000 is the total and the roofs are the difference — Henry transposed them on tape and Addendum 8 repeated it. The consequence is material: on the exhibit's own derivation a $65,000 encumbrance leaves a budget balance of about $1,128,000, not $544,145.29 — a ~$584,000 ambiguity the board never resolved (A1.49).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16 §2; Exhibit B p.22.

TIER 1 C1.136 · Addendum 8's "$400,000 from reserves" for the Stevens roof is unsupported

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C29 · briefing A13

The $420,000 was released 6 March 2024 under RSA 198:4-b, II(a), the clerk's read-back confining it to "unintentional, unanticipated special education costs". Mary Henry corrected the roof attribution twice on tape (0:31:43, 0:31:45); a member restated it anyway and the approved minutes adopted his version — so the project inherited the district's error (A1.21).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16 §3.

TIER 1 C1.137 · Addendum 8's ESSER account was wrong in two directions

Tier 1 · one-off each, corrected · Sources: briefing C30

First closure: the 16 October approved minutes record only "Frank Sprague shared that he would still like to see a presentation on ESSER"; the 2 October minutes contain no finance report and no ESSER mention; ESSER is never mentioned at the 4 September meeting at all, in any garble form; and on 18 September Pratt says "we have the end of September to spend the money" — the wrong verb, since 30 September was the obligation deadline and liquidation ran to 28 January 2025 (see the 2 CFR 200.344 paragraph move at C1.61). Then the counter-correction: 16 October is NOT the corpus's last ESSER mention — it is spoken at 16155, 16157, 16213, 16215, 16222, 16226, 16253 and 16266, always retrospectively. What ends on 16 October is the board asking for an accounting, and no later recording contains one. Addendum 16 §4 must be amended because ESSER is mentioned on 2 October at 0:09:13 (A1.43).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 16 §4 and 17.

TIER 1 C1.138 · Addendum 8 read the wrong column for the Whitney cluster boundaries

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C31

The quoted values were End(sec), not Start; the Start-column values are 2578.44 / 2770.80. The practical consequence is a live attribution conflict: the ADC motion at 2681 s falls inside that gap, so the CSV labels it Arlene Hawkins while the minutes credit Heather Whitney (B1.7).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 16 §5; the 9/12/24 dialogue CSV.

TIER 1 C1.139 · Addendum 8's joint-meeting caution is overturned — the names were recoverable after all

Tier 1 · one-off, overturned · Sources: briefing C32

Addendum 8 held that only Girard, Manale and "Limoges/Lemos" were defensibly nameable, that the chair's attendance list "is not parseable into clean names", and that treating it as an attendance record "would manufacture people". The approved minutes (Drive 1aY0leNEDzk_VGJLu9WsMoCideg5x4zhB) name eight: Mayor Dale Girard, Asst. Mayor Deb Matteau, Brian Zutter, Jonathan Hayden, William Greenrose, Wayne Hemingway, William Limoges, City Manager Yoshi Manale — and the chair's garbled list names exactly those eight and nobody else: Gerard=Girard, Deborah McGill=Matteau, Brian Sutter=Zutter, Mr. William green. Rose.=Greenrose (the surname split in two, which is what made the list look unparseable), Yoshi Marnell=Manale. It manufactures nobody. The minutes' per-question attributions then match the diarizer's clusters nine times over: the 18-row cluster is Zutter, the 11-row clusters Greenrose and Hemingway, each at three separate points; the 6-row closing cluster is Matteau on the minutes' ordering alone — the weaker call.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 17; the approved joint-meeting minutes, Drive 1aY0leNEDzk_VGJLu9WsMoCideg5x4zhB.

TIER 1 C1.140 · "Pratt read all four rolls on 11/14" — he read three

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C33

Attendance 0:00:43, into nonpublic 0:04:41, out 0:06:07. The fourth roll of that evening was Kronberg's, at the separate Claremont meeting later the same night, where she was present, read the roll and both roll-call votes, and signed the minutes (A1.4, A2.1).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 17; the 11/14/24 SAU 6 recording and the Claremont draft minutes.

TIER 1 C1.141 · Addendum 9's SAU 6 "no tally" claim needs qualifying

Tier 1 · one-off, qualified · Sources: briefing C34

The 11/14 minutes record a named dissent — "all present voting in favor with the exception of Kelly Simpson who opposed" — four weeks before the 12/12 counted dissent. The recordings carry no tally; the minutes do.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 17; the 11/14/24 SAU 6 minutes.

TIER 1 C1.142 · Deborah vs Danielle Skinner — the "do not merge" instruction was right

Tier 1 · one-off, confirmed · Sources: briefing C38

Addendum 4 flagged that Koski's 8/16/23 nomination list reads "Deborah Skinner, art, Stevens High School" while the 6/21 and 7/19 "Miss Skinner / D Skinner" is support staff doing food service, free-and-reduced lunch and PowerSchool, and forbade merging them on the surname. District documents confirm two people: Danielle Skinner = Data Manager / Food Service / PowerSchool, SAU 6, distinct from Deborah Skinner, art teacher at Stevens.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 4 and 11; the district documents named.

TIER 1 C1.143 · The Stevens principal changeover was dated repeatedly and each dating was wrong

Tier 1 · systemic, narrowed · Sources: briefing C39

Addendum 2 left it open; Addendum 6 narrowed it to after 1/17/24 (Pratt still reports "as being the principal at the high school"); Addendum 7 put the window at 1/17/24 → 3/6/24 and had Herrington unambiguously in post by 6/20/24. All of that is superseded by district documents: Michael Herrington was Stevens ASSISTANT principal in the 2023-24 handbook alongside Paige Jarvis; the 2/21 Exhibit 4 is written by "the new interim principal", unsigned, speaking of "continuity between Chris and myself", with reports due 8 Feb and the packet posted 14 Feb — so the change had happened by mid-February 2024, not by 6 March; and Exhibit F (DMG deck, posted 4 June 2024) names him High School Principal, earlier than Addendum 7's 6/20 dating. The interim principal is still named nowhere.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 2, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15; the 2023-24 handbook and the 2/21 Exhibit 4.

TIER 1 C1.144 · Pratt's permanent appointment was carried as "unwitnessed"; it is now dated and witnessed

Tier 1 · one-off, closed · Sources: briefing C40

Addendum 7 recorded it as "~22–23 May 2024, unwitnessed". Three confirmations landed: 8/21/24 (15947) two members speaking to his face — Petrin, "Chris was the acting superintendent because someone left mid-term"; Miles, "Mr. Pratt was an interim superintendent before you became the superintendent" — and 9/12/24 (16011) Hawkins announcing "the appointment of Superintendent Christopher Pratt… which was effective in June." District documents bracket it: the 5/15/24 masthead reads "Interim Superintendent", the 6/5/24 agenda and approved minutes read "Superintendent". Settled: announced ~22–23 May 2024, effective June 2024, formally recognised 9/12/24 — with the caveat that the Claremont board does not appoint the superintendent (RSA 194-C:5), so the 11 May retreat note "Hired a great superintendent" is loose usage, not a record of appointment. 22 May 2024 is the meeting whose minutes exist but whose video, packet and MAP section do not (A2.1).

Primary source: briefing Addenda 7, 8, 15; shows 15947 and 16011.

TIER 1 C1.145 · "No student rep exists yet" and "Bonnie Miles is elimination-only" were both over-generalised

Tier 1 · systemic, qualified · Sources: briefing C41

Addendum 4's "no student rep exists yet for 2023-24" was true only as of 9/6: Nicole Bouchard and Kylee Plummer were seated 11/1/2023. And "Miles is an elimination-only call in almost every 2023 meeting" holds in some files and not others — she is named outright on 8/9 (three ways), 8/16, 9/20, 3/6, 4/17, 6/5 and 6/20, and remains elimination-only in 2/21, 4/11 SAU and 5/15. Check per meeting; never inherit — and three separate agents reached her the same way and all flagged it, so "do not let repetition harden into confidence."

Primary source: briefing Addenda 3, 4, 5, 7.

TIER 1 C1.146 · Era 0's vacant seat — an inference upgraded to a document

Tier 1 · one-off, closed · Sources: briefing C43

Addendum 10 treated Joshua Lambert as "a strong inference, not a fact" — the 11/3/22 minutes list him sitting; on 2/8/23 he seconds the amendment from the audience. Addendum 11 closes it documentarily: the 12/1/22 SAU 6 minutes list twelve members including him; 1/17/23 and 2/16/23 list eleven, with Lambert the only name removed.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 10 and 11; the 12/1/22, 1/17/23 and 2/16/23 SAU 6 mastheads.

TIER 1 C1.147 · Mary Henry's appointment date was carried as her start date

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C44

Addendum 2's "starting early July 2023" is her start date. She was appointed business administrator on 11 May 2023, on Tempesta's nomination.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11, corrections part 2.

TIER 1 C1.148 · Sprague's SAU 6 vice-chairship was carried past its end

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C45

Frank Sprague was SAU 6 Vice Chair before Ruggeri — recorded in no earlier addendum — and his SAU 6 vice-chairship ends 3/30/23. From that date the SAU 6 vice chair is Rocco Ruggeri, and Sprague's "vice chair" title thereafter is the Claremont board's. Do not carry the SAU role past March 2023. Note that vice chair is not one of RSA 194-C:5, I's three statutory offices (A1.29).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 11, corrections part 2.

TIER 1 C1.149 · Two claims about the SAU 6 chair in early 2023 were wrong in opposite directions

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C46

Addendum 2 put Hawkins in the SAU chair from 11/9/23. The SAU 6 chair in Feb 2023 is Marjorie Erickson (Unity), established four ways at the 2/16/23 meeting — cleanest being a roll-call residual where she reads the roll naming every member except herself and answers "Me? Yes." Horsky then beats her 6–5 on 3/30/23 by PAPER BALLOT, so individual votes are not on the record, with Ruggeri elected vice chair by unanimous voice vote the same night. Do not put Hawkins in the SAU chair before late 2023 — and per C1.125, from 7/13/23 she is.

Primary source: briefing Addendum 3; the 2/16/23 and 3/30/23 SAU 6 records.

TIER 1 C1.150 · The Unity withdrawal planning committee was recorded with the wrong size, and a chair that was never named

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected · Sources: briefing C47

The project note carried a seven-member committee. Ruggeri, 4/11/2024: the Unity town vote of "March 16th" approved creating it, and it is 5 town members + 2 board members + the superintendent = EIGHT. No chair is named on the recording — Ruggeri delivers the report but never says he chairs it — and the briefing later confirms no planning-committee chair has ever been named, in any file, in the whole corpus.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 7 and 9; the 4/11/2024 recording.

TIER 1 C1.151 · SAU 6 does not dissolve on 1 July 2026 — the run's biggest factual correction

Tier 1 · systemic, corrected · Sources: briefing C48 · html-briefing C25 · html-briefing A46

§28 and several shipped pages recorded the dissolution as settled background because two officials said so at the 18 February 2026 meeting. They were wrong, and the SAU 6 chair corrects them on tape — show 17307 at 0:35:20, Whitney: "the saw is dissolving"; Ruggeri: "It's not. It's not dissolving. Just to clarify." and "It would just be the Claremont board at that point, but it would still be the same. Six." The 15 April 2026 approved Claremont minutes agree. What ends is UNITY'S MEMBERSHIP under RSA 194-C:2, IV; the unit continues with one district. Ruggeri himself uses the loose word twice before correcting it, which is how the error propagated. But do not over-correct: the district's own staff report of 27 March 2026 (Drive 16M5jaunMtgwaVWRIi_iojNp2FgqMcl1W) says SAU 6 "will dissolve as a legal separate entity", so the record genuinely contains both characterisations and a page quoting either is quoting accurately (A1.58). The business administrator's own words support only that "Saw six employees get merged to the school district."

Primary source: show 17307 at 0:35:20; the 15 April 2026 approved Claremont minutes; the 27 March 2026 staff report.

TIER 1 C1.152 · The corpus graded the identical missing-record fact both HIGH and MEDIUM

Tier 1 · systemic, resolved by rule · Sources: briefing C56 · html-briefing C18, §22h · map+pages Part 2 §4

The user's ruling now governs: HIGH where the absence is unmitigated — a public body met, no minutes exist in any district share, nothing on the record explaining it (RSA 91-A:2, II sets five business days; RSA 91-A:1-a, VI(d) makes a subcommittee a public body, C1.10); MEDIUM where the record mitigates it — someone on tape says minutes exist elsewhere or are coming, the body lacked a quorum and transacted nothing, or the meeting was noticed and packeted with only the minutes missing. Each page must say which limb it applies and why; a page with no HIGH flag is a valid outcome and one must not be manufactured; and where severity diverges from a neighbouring page on similar facts the divergence must be stated, as the 2/21/24 page did against the 17 January page. The resulting distribution across the 126 pages — 1,614 flags, mapped to years by the date in each page's <h1>, counting flag-high, flag-med, flag-obs, flag-pos, the only flag classes in the corpus:

Per-page averages: 2023 = 15.1 flags/page (1.7 HIGH); 2024 = 18.0 (2.3 HIGH); 2025 = 8.1 (0.6 HIGH); 2026 = 10.3 (1.1 HIGH).

Primary source: the corpus's own inconsistent grading, resolved by the user's decision; the flag-class scan of the 126 pages.

TIER 1 C1.153 · Two 2023–24 claims about who could read the roll were over-general

Tier 1 · one-off each, corrected · Sources: briefing C58

"The clerk reads the roll" is wrong as a general rule: Hawkins reads the rolls herself on 12/14/23 and on two of the four rolls on 1/11/24; when the chair says "the secretary take a roll call," it is Kronberg, otherwise check. And a roll-reader no addendum records turns up in a document: the 1/11/24 minutes read "roll call vote taken by Mike Koski." Kronberg's 2024 attendance had to be established file by file — 8/21 absent (chair read it), 9/4 present, 9/12 present, 9/18 absent (Crawford read it), 10/16 present, 11/14 absent (Pratt), 11/20 present, 12/4 present, 12/12 present, 12/18 absent (Mary Henry read it) — four distinct substitute readers in five months.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 6, 8, 9, 13; the 1/11/24 minutes.

TIER 1 C1.154 · §22e's "the paperwork is right from April 2024" clearance was too broad

Tier 1 · systemic — a scoping error relied on by later pages · Sources: html-briefing C19

The clearance covers SAU 6 only, and nonpublic-session citations only. Claremont has its own ongoing version of the citation problem — the by-laws' Appendix D and the 7 August 2024 minutes (A1.2, A1.3) — and SAU 6's own 12 September 2024 policies cite the wrong statutes twice (A1.5, A1.6). The corrected instruction is to check every SAU 6 page through February 2024, and to check both bodies separately rather than reading one body's clearance across.

Primary source: html-briefing §22e's own re-scoping of the earlier clearance.

TIER 1 C1.155 · MAP §20 called the 9/6/23 interviewees "superintendent candidates"; there was no search

Tier 1 · one-off, corrected 2026-08-29 · Sources: map+pages §4.15

"An earlier version of this note called them 'superintendent candidates'. They were not — there was no search." Consistent with C1.117: the 9/6/23 packet's "Questions for B. Nester" and "Questions for C. Pratt" are not a superintendent search, and Tempesta was superintendent until January 2024.

Primary source: MAP.md §20 correction, 2026-08-29.

TIER 1 D1.1 · A maintainer conflict of interest that must be disclosed, not managed away

Tier 1 · systemic, standing rule · Sources: briefing D23 · html-briefing §8, §23h · map+pages Part 2 §3

Kevin Tyson maintains this project, and the 6/5/24 packet (Exhibit D, the CCTV roster — itself a privacy exposure, A1.61) names him as the holder of Seat 3 on the CCTV Board of Directors, a City Council appointment running 13 July 2022 – 31 May 2025 — CCTV being the source of every recording in this corpus. He also appears in the record as a candidate for the seat Crawford took on 7/19/23 (C1.126) and as one of the two options offered at the 11/5/25 meeting. Wherever the maintainer, CCTV's board or CCTV's own interests appear in a document a page relies on, disclose it plainly in the footer; where he does not appear, the footers say so explicitly. Do not omit the item and do not soften it. Ninety-six of the 126 pages carry some form of "Kevin Tyson maintains this project"; 16 additionally disclose the CCTV seat:

Related non-CCTV maintainer disclosures: 14937 SchoolBoard030123 — "Frank Sprague names him at 0:49:01 as the interviewer of the school board candidates on CCTV, calling him 'a much better interviewer than I was'"; 15205 SchoolBoard071923 — "was one of the three applicants for the seat filled at this meeting"; 16433 SchoolBoard-040225 — "spoke during citizens' comments at this meeting and is a named speaker in the source dialogue file"; 16463 SAU6Mtg-041025 — spoke at the 4/2/25 CSB meeting covered by the companion page; 16813 SchoolBoard090325 — "spoke during the public hearing and later applied for the board seat announced at this meeting"; 16831 School Board 091025 and 16857 SchoolBoard091725 — named as one of five applicants; 16872 SchoolBoard100125 — "one of the two candidates who received votes at this meeting… nothing on this page was reviewed or altered by him before generation"; 17125 SchoolBoardDeliberative020726 — "Voter, Ward 2… Moved both of the amendments that carried"; 17201 SchoolBoard030426 — "the only policy-subcommittee minutes this project can locate anywhere in Drive are from 2022 and 2023 and are owned by Kevin Tyson"; 15510 SchoolBoardFinance010524 — "the only Finance Committee minutes the index holds at all are two 2026 files owned by this project's maintainer, not by the district".

Primary source: the 6/5/24 packet Exhibit D (CCTV roster); the 16 pages named and the related disclosures.

TIER 1 D1.2 · Unquoted heredocs silently corrupted money on generated pages

Tier 1 · one-off incident, standing hazard on every heredoc-built page · Sources: briefing D8 · html-briefing D1

cat >> page.html <<EOF makes bash expand $688 as a variable, so $688,426.17 lands on the page as 88,426.17, $36,313,407.97 as 6,313,407.97, and $196,001.10 as 96,001.10. One agent corrupted six of ten page chunks this way, and on a budget page that is a page full of wrong money with nothing visibly broken. It was caught only because verify_quotes.py failed the quotations containing amounts — the quoted spans no longer matched the dialogue CSV. The fix: always write <<'EOF', never <<EOF; if the page needs a shell variable, write the literal text and substitute afterwards with python.

Primary source: verify_quotes.py failing the quotations that contained amounts.

TIER 1 D1.3 · Reformatted scratch dumps silently drop text, producing fabricated quotations

Tier 1 · one-off incident, systemic hazard · Sources: briefing D6 · html-briefing D13

A re-wrapped dump dropped a three-word repeat out of the middle of a quotation — "There's there is over 60 parents" for "There's there is that there is over 60 parents" — and it reads as clean text. It is a fabricated quotation. Copy long quotations from the CSV field itself, not from a reformatted dump, and run the checker before believing your own transcription.

Primary source: the re-wrapped scratch dump compared against the CSV field.

TIER 1 D1.4 · Shared /tmp scratch names let one agent read another meeting's dialogue as its own

Tier 1 · one-off incident, rule imposed · Sources: briefing D7 · html-briefing D12

During wave 1 an agent's condensed dialogue at /tmp/cond.txt was overwritten by a sibling working on a different meeting; it read about 230 lines of the wrong meeting believing they were its own and began drafting a treasurer election and a procurement discussion that never happened at its meeting. It caught the swap only on a length mismatch. Rule: write every scratch file to a path containing the meeting's base name, e.g. /tmp/gtp-<BASE>/cond.txt, and treat any /tmp file you did not just create as untrusted.

Primary source: the wave-1 incident, caught on a length mismatch.

TIER 1 D1.5 · Standing prohibitions against importing a name the file does not speak

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing D20

The auditor is only ever "Mike" on many recordings — the corpus canon is Michael Campo / Plodzik & Sanderson, and the briefing forbids importing the surname or the firm into files that do not speak them (B3.21). Michael McCosker is nearly absent from the 2024 board record — named nowhere in 15947, 15814, 15994, 16011 or 16021 — so do not assume he attends Claremont board meetings in 2024 and do not attribute unnamed administrator voices to him by default. A "Crawford" voice before 7/19/23 is not a board member, and a "Petrin" voice between mid-March 2023 and March 2024 is not a board member — both are errors the 2025 roster would invite if applied backwards. And "Heather" in charter-school context is Heather Shepherd, not the chair.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 2, 4, 8.

TIER 1 D1.6 · Excerpt timestamps must never be converted to wall-clock time

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing D21 · html-briefing §28b

Stated as a hard rule alongside the excerpt pair at B1.17: if a recording opens mid-business, has no roll call, or ends mid-sentence, look for a sibling show on the same date before concluding the meeting itself was odd — and never compute a wall-clock time from an excerpt's timestamps. The same prohibition applies after any established splice, where recording positions stop being clock times (A2.31, C1.48).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 1.

TIER 1 D1.7 · Statute-vintage traps: current text does not govern most of this corpus

Tier 1 · systemic — the standing rule behind 40-plus individual traps · Sources: briefing D12 · html-briefing C4–C8 · legal-anchors, VINTAGE TRAPS header

Before citing any provision whose dollar amount, percentage, deadline or numbering carries the flag, check what it said on the meeting's date. Roughly half this backlog predates the 2025 and 2026 session laws, and the catalogue's holdings "need an 'in force from' column before the remaining 78 pages are built." The individual traps are recorded at C1.8, C1.11–C1.13, C1.26–C1.28, C1.40, C1.52 and C1.53–C1.93; the durable provisions that need no caveat are at C1.113. For any 2023–24 Uniform Guidance or title-34 citation use the govinfo annual edition, never the current eCFR (D2.15).

Primary source: html-briefing §4, §9, §12, §16; briefing Addenda 10 and 11; the legal-anchors vintage tables.

TIER 1 D1.8 · Surname collisions the sweep flagged and deliberately left unmerged — for a human, not an agent

Tier 1 · systemic · Sources: briefing D13

Cassandra Edwards (39 rows / 5 files) vs Sandra Edwards (11 / 1) — same ward (3), same profession, never co-occur, probably one person; a merge is recommended but needs a document, and the 17092 Role already hedges "as announced; not on public roster". Michael Myers (1/7/26, Ward 3) vs Mike Myers (2/7/26, Ward 3, also an assistant moderator) — almost certainly one man a month apart, but both are self-identifications, and overriding what someone called himself needs better grounds. Hilary Walsh (Stevens technology teacher, self-ID) vs Hillary Walsh (Ward 1 commenter, adult-ed teacher, "name per approved minutes") — plausibly one person, independently sourced two ways, left split. Hanna Brooks (resident commenter) vs Hannah Brooks (Greater Sullivan County Public Health Network / Dartmouth-Hitchcock presenter) — different roles, left split. Genuinely different people sharing a surname, no action: Kiran/Onyx/Patrick Adrian · Michelle/Rod Beaton · Christina/Ray Bernard · Derek/Sarah Ferland · Jennifer/Maggie Gallagher · Dale/Ellie Girard · Alex Hill/Karen Liot Hill · Cynthia/Loren Howard · Charlene/Marian/Mary/Rob Lovett · Paul/Tom Luther · Eric/Leslie Peabody · Michael/Hannah Petrin · Scott/Tracy Pope · Rob/Stephen Walker · Sherry Williams/Asher James Williams · Alex vs Aubree Herzog, plus Shawn/Sean Herzog (Title I at Maple) as a third · Michael vs Michelle Herrington, which appears in the same file at least three times and must never be merged (B1.5).

Primary source: briefing Addendum 9; the corpus-wide surname sweep.

TIER 1 D1.9 · Sprague's biography is contradictory six ways and neither reading was forced

Tier 1 · one-off, deliberately open · Sources: briefing D19

Across the corpus one man is a guidance counselor (8/2/23), a principal ("three different high schools", 7/19/23; 11/15/23; 12/18/23; "when I was in Mr. Herrington's position", 8/21/24), a director of student services ("and I acted as the LEA", 12/6/23), an administrator ("when I was working for the district", 1/5/24), a Newport employee in the early 90s (12/13/23), and a juvenile-court liaison ("I did that for six years", 11/19/24) — and on 12/4/24, every word at conf 1.00: "I'm not considered to have a higher degree because I only have an associate's degree… both my wife and I both have [associate's] degrees." That cannot be squared with a principalship. Two possibilities remain open and neither was forced: an unusually varied career, or Speaker 7 in 16192 merges two men — and the approved 12.4.24 minutes give three of that cluster's turns to Michael Petrin, including the answer running continuously into the associate's-degree line, which is external support for the merge reading (B1.8). A human should rule before either CSV is changed.

Primary source: briefing Addenda 4, 5, 6, 9, 18; the 12/4/24 recording and approved minutes.

TIER 1 D1.10 · ffmpeg scene analysis cannot distinguish a splice from a camera cut

Tier 1 · systemic — a permanent limit of the pixel method on these recordings · Sources: briefing D3 · html-briefing D11

An agent frame-differenced a suspected join and found YAVG spikes of 42–140 — but the same measure shows routine spikes of 60–74 elsewhere in the same file, from multi-camera shot changes. The video does not decide it. Where a zero-gap transcript raises the question, present both readings and say what would settle it — a district-side clock reference, or the raw CCTV log — and never assert a splice from pixels. The cheaper tests that do work, in order: run-time arithmetic, then spoken clock times, then spoken countdowns (B2.3, C2.4).

Primary source: the frame-differencing run — YAVG 42–140 at the join against 60–74 elsewhere in the same file.