Claremont School Board — April 6, 2016

MEDIUM The motion to enter nonpublic session states no exemption

At 2:02:18 the chair asked whether a nonpublic session was needed, the superintendent said "We do just for a brief minute please", and the chair called for "a motion to go into nonpublic." Rebecca Ferland seconded and a roll call began (2:02:32). Neither the motion nor any remark around it names a ground. The 2015 codification of RSA 91-A:3, I(b), in force on this date, provides: "Any motion to enter nonpublic session shall state on its face the specific exemption under paragraph II". The roll call the same paragraph requires was taken. Graded MEDIUM rather than HIGH because the transcript is fragmentary at this point (the mover is not audible and the roll call is garbled) and the minutes, which might record a citation, are not available online. What was discussed, and whether any decision was made or minuted within 72 hours as RSA 91-A:3, III required, cannot be checked.

Sources: RSA 91-A:3, I(b) and III (2015 codification; source note ends 2015, 19:1; 49:1; 105:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2016; 270:2).

MEDIUM A $5,000 private donation was accepted by motion with no public hearing shown on the recording

At 1:28:49 the superintendent presented a $5,000 donation from the Children's Fund of the Upper Valley for a middle school cross country program, and the board accepted it together with a $500 gift and an in-kind literacy award at 1:33:04. Under RSA 198:20-b as in force in 2016, a board may accept unanticipated money from "a private source" only if the district has adopted an enabling article (¶I), and "For unanticipated funds in the amount of $5,000 or more, the school board shall hold a prior public hearing on the action to be taken", with newspaper notice at least 7 days before (¶III(a)). This gift is exactly at the threshold. No hearing appears on the recording and no one mentions one.

Two mitigations keep this at MEDIUM. The recording starts after the meeting began, so a hearing held earlier that evening would not be captured. And the business administrator plainly knew the rule: at 0:52:04 he said of the $110,000 energy rebate "we could have a public hearing and accept them under RSA 198 20 be", and recommended instead that it lapse to taxpayers. Whether the district had adopted the enabling article, and whether notice of a hearing was published, would be shown by the warrant and the minutes, neither available online.

Sources: RSA 198:20-b, I and III(a) (2016 codification; source note ends 2005, 188:1, so the same text governed in April 2016).

MEDIUM The MS-22 certification of appropriations was signed more than 20 days after the March vote

At 1:37:32 the business administrator presented the MS-22, "the report of a appropriations actually voted", as a document "that we must approve and sign", and members signed it at the table. RSA 21-J:34, II, in the text in force in 2016, requires the governing body to "certify the appropriations voted" and says "This report shall be filed within 20 days of the close of the meeting." The recording does not give the ballot date, but the new members elected in March were sworn in on March 16, 2016 (project governance timeline), so the vote was earlier than that; even a vote on March 15 would put the deadline at April 4, before this meeting. Graded MEDIUM rather than HIGH because the filing date with the Department of Revenue Administration is not in any available record, and the department may have accepted or extended it; the administrator's remark that everything else "is done electronically" leaves open whether an electronic filing preceded the signature page.

Sources: RSA 21-J:34, II (2016 codification; source note ends 2007, 182:2, eff. April 1, 2007).

MEDIUM The board let the superintendent decide changes of school assignment by consensus, where the new statute called for a board vote

The superintendent explained at 1:22:03 that under a law "that came into effect this year" he must seek board approval before letting a pupil who moves within the city stay at the old school, and asked for license to decide and report afterward. Asked "We have to do a motion on this", he answered "It's our agreement", and the chair recorded a "Consensus of the board" at 1:26:58 with no motion or vote. RSA 193:3, III(a), as amended by 2015, 125:1 (eff. Aug. 8, 2015) and in force on this date, required each board to adopt a change of school assignment policy "requiring a vote of the school board to reassign a pupil", and listed as a condition that the school board "votes to approve the reassignment". An informal delegation cannot supply the vote the statute requires for each reassignment. The motive was practical (a family should not wait two weeks), the superintendent promised to report each case, and he said he would not name children in public; those points mitigate but do not cure the gap.

Sources: RSA 193:3, III(a) (2015 codification; source note ends 2015, 125:1, eff. Aug. 8, 2015; next amended 2016, 44:1, eff. July 2, 2016).