Participants
Everyone heard on the recording. Names follow speakers’ own introductions, the project’s 2015-2023 roster and the speaker attribution report; no document lists attendees.
| Name | Role | Participation |
|---|
| Michael Tempesta | Superintendent, SAU 6 (presenter) | Presents the restructuring proposal and answers every question (0:00:15 to 1:00:32). He is never named on this recording; the attribution rests on his role, the slide deck he showed the Claremont board on September 15 (September 15 page), and his reference to “my third year for sending budgets through the budgeting committee” (0:54:08). |
| Patrick Adrian | Resident; former Claremont School Board member (project roster) | Recognized by name (0:26:18); asks whether the board will still put restructuring to a public ballot, as he says the chair had told him (0:26:31 to 0:27:34); confirms “Nobody ever made a motion.” (0:28:30). |
| Jessica Christian | Parent of three district students; educator | “I'm Jessica Christian, and I am a parent of three students that are in the district.” (0:30:19). Asks what the survey data will drive (0:30:19), then argues its questions could only be answered one way (0:40:58, 0:43:39) and asks how restructuring itself would produce the promised gains (0:45:19, 0:47:37). |
| Gene Allen (spelling unverified) | Teacher; parent of a high school student | “This is Gene Allen, and I have a couple of questions.” Asks about a pre-K curriculum committee (0:35:59) and about the survey: she “had the opportunity to respond twice to that survey” (0:51:07) and asks for family-friendly wording (0:51:44). The superintendent addresses her as “Jean” and “G”. |
| Tyler (first name only) | Former student | Asks why classes would grow at the school with the fewest students, recalling “giant classes with 35 kids” at the middle school (0:55:00, 0:55:31). |
| Unidentified | Staff member relaying online questions | Relays the online chat: “Right. Shelby had a question.” (0:33:47); “Jean with her hand up and then we have some chats going” (0:50:31). Shelby’s question is read aloud, but only a fragment of it is captured in the transcript (0:33:53). |
| Unidentified | Online or audience participant | Asks about funding for universal pre-K (0:31:52) and a follow-up on pre-K teachers (0:53:25); the speaker cannot be determined. |
Order of business (reconstructed)
No agenda survives; the order follows the superintendent’s slides and the questions.
Segments in the order presented.
| Taken up | Item | What happened |
|---|
| 0:00:15 | Welcome and format | A hybrid forum: “We set out to be remote and we also set out to be in person.” About “8 or 9 people in the auditorium” (0:00:15) and “I think we have seen 12 participants so far online” (0:00:37). Notice went out “last week”… with a reminder that went out late (0:01:07). No call to order, roll call, motion or vote. |
| 0:02:03 | Background and purpose | The proposal dates from November 2019 and stalled with the March 2020 shutdown (0:02:03, 0:02:34); purpose, scope and timeline (0:03:02 to 0:08:33). |
| 0:04:47 | Survey results | Preliminary survey, “about 75 or 8 or 80 respondents” (0:04:47 to 0:07:26). |
| 0:09:02 | Strategic plan, benefits and concerns | Strategic-plan context (0:09:02 to 0:10:32); benefits (0:10:37 to 0:11:54); open concerns (0:12:23 to 0:14:45). |
| 0:16:23 | Configuration slides | The March 2020 configuration and a draft using current enrollment (0:16:23 to 0:24:58); next steps and a steering committee (0:25:17, 0:25:49). |
| 0:26:18 | Questions | Questions from the room and online (0:26:18 to 0:59:11). |
| 0:59:58 | Closing | The superintendent invites participants to join the steering committee (0:59:58, 1:00:15). |
Discussion timeline
Times are taken from the dialogue transcript (Dialogue/11933 SAU6092021.mp4.CSV) and link into the recording.
Main topics in recording order, with the most concrete statements first.
| Time | Topic | What was said | Flags |
|---|
| 0:03:02 | Why restructure | “to promote greater student academic achievement focusing on early literacy numeracy, socialization in interventions that are needed” (0:03:02); the plan would consolidate “our early childhood center, Maple Avenue Elementary, Discard [Disnard] Elementary and Bluff Elementary” (0:03:36), so that each grade attends one school and universal pre-K becomes possible (0:04:18). | |
| 0:04:18 | Steering committee | To include “teachers, parents, administrative, school board members and council members” (0:04:18); a “minimally of a 2 or 3 month process” before information goes to the board (0:04:47). | |
| 0:08:33 | Timeline | “We are here now in the 20th televising this.” A second forum is planned for October 25, then feedback to the board and budget-subcommittee impact analysis in November (0:08:33, 0:38:39). | |
| 0:10:37 | Benefits claimed | “Stability and control of class size and staffing. Complete equity for all students.” Universal all-day pre-K for four-year-olds, possibly three-year-olds (0:11:04); grade cohorts that stay together (0:11:29, 0:11:54). | |
| 0:12:23 | Concerns still open | Transportation must be modeled for every child (0:12:23, 0:12:56); more transitions, staff reassignments, “the loss of the neighborhood school” (0:13:19, 0:13:43); questions whether it is about taxes (0:14:11). See the method note on the transcript at 0:14:11. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:16:53 | Configuration figures | Current elementary enrollment is read as “307 and Maple 243 and 153 of the block” (0:20:08), “that same 757” in total (0:23:12); the draft assumes class sizes of 14 for pre-K and early grades and 18 for others (0:22:42); estimated capacity “of about 75 more kids minimally than the 757” (0:57:29). The building-by-building labels in these rows are garbled in the transcript. | OBSERVATION |
| 0:26:31 | A public ballot? | Adrian recalls a plan to put restructuring before voters (0:26:31, 0:27:04). The superintendent: “I don't know that we they made a motion” (0:27:49); Adrian: “Nobody ever made a motion.” (0:28:30). | |
| 0:30:45 | What the survey is for | “that data is incredibly incomplete and we know that” (0:30:45); “we didn't even identify folks” (0:31:05). | OBSERVATION |
| 0:32:04 | Paying for pre-K | Teachers freed by consolidation would staff pre-K; “we are hoping that we can get 100 or so or more” children (0:32:27); “we don't think that we're going to have to hire additional pre-K teachers” (0:53:37); without restructuring, “We would have to give something up, pay for that or get it some other way.” (0:46:39). | OBSERVATION |
| 0:40:32 | Cost | “this is supposed to be neutral or less money”; “I don't think it's going to get by the board if it's more money.” (0:40:32). Transportation is “our biggest concern” and the next step (0:35:25). | OBSERVATION |
| 0:40:58 | Survey design questioned | Christian: “I felt also that there was no other way to answer them, but important and very important” (0:40:58). Allen could answer twice and wonders about “the legitimacy sometimes of of some of the surveys” (0:51:07). The superintendent agrees and promises a fuller survey (0:41:50, 0:52:16). | OBSERVATION |
| 0:55:31 | Class sizes at Bluff | Tyler asks why Bluff, with few students now, would take about 70 more (0:55:31). The superintendent: fourth and fifth graders there would be in classes of about 18, keeping smaller classes for the early grades (0:56:39, 0:57:07). | |
Items flagged for review
These flags are a reviewer’s aid, not findings of violation and not legal advice. Each one names the rule it rests on, as that rule read on September 20, 2021, or is labeled an observation where no verified rule applies.
OBSERVATION Labeled an SAU 6 meeting, but the recording shows a community forum with no board business
MAP.md files this recording as an SAU 6 Board meeting, and the Cablecast title reads “SAU6 Meeting - Elementary School Restructuring Proposal - 9/20/21”. The recording itself shows a forum run by the superintendent, open to the public in person and online: no call to order, no roll call, no motion and no vote. The superintendent had announced it to the Claremont board on September 15 as a forum (September 15 page), and here he describes the format: “We set out to be remote and we also set out to be in person.” (0:00:15). Under RSA 91-A:2, I, as in force in 2021, a meeting is the "convening of a quorum of the membership of a public body" (statute text); no board member is identified on the recording, so nothing shows that a quorum of either board convened, and the minutes duty of RSA 91-A:2, II attaches only to meetings. That is why this page carries no missing-minutes flag. If board members attended in numbers, that is not visible here.
Sources: RSA 91-A:2, I and II (2019 codification)
OBSERVATION The evidence offered was preliminary: an unweighted survey and no cost or transportation model
The superintendent described the survey as “incredibly incomplete”… and without identifying information (0:30:45, 0:31:05); a participant said she could respond twice (0:51:07), and another that its questions admitted only one answer (0:40:58). The proposal is described as “supposed to be neutral or less money” (0:40:32), but no cost figures were shown, transportation, which he called “our biggest concern”, had not been modeled (0:35:25), and the capacity estimate was called “the preliminary run in sketch of it” (0:57:29). Several numbers in the configuration slides are garbled in the transcript (0:20:08). None of this breaches a rule; the superintendent presented it as a starting point. It records that, as of this forum, the public had no cost analysis to weigh, and the board’s earlier talk of putting restructuring to voters had never become a motion (0:27:49, 0:28:30).
Sources: recording only; no rule cited.
POSITIVE A proposal still in planning was taken to the public in a televised, hybrid forum with live questions
The forum was held in person and online, with questions taken from the room and from the chat (0:00:15, 0:33:47, 0:50:31); “We have CCTV televising this as well.” (0:04:00); the superintendent said the slides would be online the next day (0:16:23) and invited participants onto a steering committee (0:59:58). No statute required a public forum on a proposal that had not reached the board, so this goes beyond the legal minimum.
Sources: recording only; no rule requires a forum.
Appendix: source files
Official and public sources
- Cablecast: SAU6 Meeting - Elementary School Restructuring Proposal - 9/20/21 (show 11933; run time from the Cablecast API not retrieved, the API refuses requests from this environment)
- Google Drive: no packet folder, slides, survey or minutes. MAP.md: neither share holds a year folder older than 2022, and the Meeting Minutes share starts at 2023 (checked 9/26/26). Not searched again for this page, per the run instructions for meetings with no Drive material.
Project files
Working files this page was built from. The dialogue file is linked; the others are not published with the page.
Dialogue/11933 SAU6092021.mp4.CSV (194 attributed rows; the basis of this page)Input/Videos/11933 SAU6092021.mp4Input/Transcripts/11933 SAU6092021.mp4.jsonInput/SupportingDocuments/MAP.md, section 152Scripts/attribution_reports_2015_2023/11933 SAU6092021.mp4.md (speaker attribution report)
Laws and rules cited on this page
- RSA 91-A:2, I and II, 2019 codification (in force Jan. 1, 2019 to Oct. 2, 2023): meeting defined as the convening of a quorum; minutes duty for meetings