Participants
Everyone heard or named as present in the recording. Names follow the project's 2015-2023 roster and the speaker attribution report for this recording, since no minutes survive; transcript renderings are noted where they differ.
| Name | Role | Participation |
|---|
| Michael Petrin | SAU 6 Board chair (Claremont member; never named on this recording, identified from the project roster and the November and December 2021 SAU recordings) | Calls the meeting to order (0:00:32); runs the agenda, minutes and votes; restates the merit-pay motion (0:25:38); announces the next meetings and the October 25 restructuring forum (0:31:58). |
| Frank Sprague | Member (Claremont; Claremont School Board chair) | Moves the July 1 minutes (0:02:35, 0:03:02); questions the merit pool and proposes suspending it (0:15:41 to 0:17:53); asks how salaries will be presented (0:26:11, 0:26:44). |
| Steven Horsky | Member (Claremont) | Moves to suspend release of merit pay (0:23:02, 0:23:30); asks whether the new website is accessible to people with disabilities (0:30:58, 0:30:59). |
| Nicholas Stone | Member (Claremont) | Seconds the merit-pay motion (0:23:23); confirms the pool figure (0:20:58). |
| Heather Whitney | Member (Claremont) | On the evaluation process: “It doesn't have to be draconian.” (0:24:37); asks when the website launches (0:31:41). |
| Rob Lovett Jr. | Member (Claremont) | Credited by the chair with seconding the minutes (0:02:40, 0:03:11); no attributed row. |
| Marjorie Erickson | Member (Unity; attribution medium) | Recalls that the merit evaluation template was never used as intended (0:19:57, 0:20:26, 0:21:56). |
| Other Unity members | Members (Unity) | Not identifiable: the roll answers are not transcribed (0:01:41 to 0:01:58); one answer reads “Ryan Nicholson here.”, which matches no known member. |
| Michael Tempesta | Superintendent, SAU 6 | Superintendent's report on the Dow building renovation and COVID-19 (0:03:34 to 0:10:36); the Apptegy website conversion (0:29:56 to 0:31:43). |
| Richard Seaman | Assistant superintendent for finance, SAU 6 | Introduces the SAU 6 budget: retirement rates, health insurance, salary pressure and the merit pool (0:11:36 to 0:17:23); salary schedules (0:26:19 to 0:27:40); budget calendar (0:27:57 to 0:29:04); on outsourcing accounts payable (0:34:33 to 0:36:12). |
| Ben Nester | Director of Special Education, SAU 6 (attribution medium) | Recalls the merit evaluation tool (0:18:02, 0:18:36) and says it still exists (0:22:19, 0:22:52). |
| Mary Woodman | Clerk | Asked to take the roll (0:00:47); the roll itself is mostly untranscribed. |
| Unidentified | Various | 22 of 219 rows (10.0%), including the member who notes a misspelled name in the minutes (0:02:45) and the member who asks about outsourcing accounts payable (0:32:50 to 0:36:22). |
Order of business (reconstructed)
No agenda survives. The chair refers to “Letter A is the C six budget preview.” (0:11:07) and to “item D the Covid tracking update.” (0:29:18); items B and C are not identifiable from the recording. The order below is reconstructed from the chair's transitions.
Items in the order taken up, with dispositions as heard in the recording
| Taken up | Item | Disposition |
|---|
| 0:00:32 | Call to order; Pledge; roll call | “I let you call the October 21st first 2021 six board meeting to order.” (0:00:32) Roll answers mostly untranscribed (0:01:41 to 0:01:58). |
| 0:02:03 | Approval of the agenda | No changes; mover not heard; “Second by Steven.” (0:02:12); voice vote. |
| 0:02:25 | Minutes of July 1, 2021 | Sprague: “I'll make a motion that we accept the minutes from July 1st of 2021.” (0:02:35) The chair: “Motion by Frank, seconded by Rob.” (0:02:40) A member: “my name is felt wrong and that it's an O instead of a you at the end.” (0:02:45) Sprague re-moves “to accept the minutes, as amended.” (0:03:02); voice vote (0:03:11). |
| 0:03:31 | Superintendent's report | Dow building renovation; COVID-19 in Claremont and Unity; testing; professional development. No action. |
| 0:11:07 | Citizens' comments | None; the chair's words are transcribed “Senior citizens here.” (0:11:07). |
| 0:11:07 | A. SAU 6 budget preview | Introduction by the assistant superintendent for finance (0:11:36). Merit pay: Horsky moves to suspend release until a formal evaluation process exists (0:23:02); Stone seconds (0:23:23); restated by the chair and carried by voice (0:25:38, 0:25:58). Calendar: draft in November, approval about December 16 (0:29:04). See flags 2 to 4. |
| 0:29:18 | D. COVID-19 tracking update | Covered in the superintendent's report (0:29:24). |
| 0:29:53 | SAU 6 website | Conversion delayed to the following week (0:29:56, 0:31:43). |
| 0:31:58 | Future agenda items | Mid-November SAU 6 budget meeting; Claremont meets November 3, Unity November 9; restructuring forum October 25 (0:31:58, 0:32:34). |
| 0:32:42 | Other business | A member asks whether accounts payable could be outsourced (0:32:55 to 0:34:30). |
| 0:36:34 | Adjournment | Motion and second credited by the chair, partly garbled (0:36:34, 0:36:44); voice vote. |
Discussion timeline
Times are taken from the dialogue transcript (Dialogue/11980 SAU6102121.mp4.CSV) and link into the recording.
Topics in the order discussed
| Time | Topic | What was said | Flags |
|---|
| 0:00:32 | Call to order and roll | Called to order (0:00:32); roll answers not captured (0:01:41 to 0:01:58). | HIGH |
| 0:02:25 | July 1 minutes | Approved as amended after a member notes a misspelled name (0:02:45); motion Sprague, second credited to Lovett (0:02:40, 0:03:11). | |
| 0:03:34 | Dow building renovation | The superintendent shows the SAU office work; Unity members have visited (0:03:34); “It should be completed in the next three weeks or so.” (0:04:27) | |
| 0:04:47 | COVID-19 in both districts | Few classroom disruptions despite spikes (0:05:35); Unity's vaccination rate understates coverage because of the town's zip codes (0:06:27, 0:06:45); Unity's matrix thresholds: “their minimal starts at 300 active cases to 400 for moderate to 500 for severe.” (0:07:02) Free drive-up testing at River Valley Community College “from 9 to 3, seven days a week.” (0:08:59) | |
| 0:11:36 | SAU 6 budget introduction | “We're not anticipating any change in staffing from the budget that was approved for this year.” (0:11:36) The state raised retirement rates after budgets were set: “So we budgeted last year for teachers, for example, 17.8% was our contribution and it was increased to 21.02%” (0:12:32), and for other employees “We budgeted for 11.17 and starting this year, after our budgets were approved, it was raised to 14.06%.” Health insurance: “at least hearing in the 6% raise range is a lot better than hearing in the 12 to 13% range.” (0:13:26) No salary recommendation yet (0:13:54). “payroll and benefits is 70 plus percent of our of our of our expenses. Technology picks up another 20 plus percent of it.” (0:14:16) | POSITIVE |
| 0:15:41 | Merit pay: how it is paid | Pool “For this year $33,000.” (0:16:02), paid to “Everyone within the saw.” (0:16:07); no formal evaluation (0:16:17, 0:17:23). Sprague: “I would like to suspend that until there's actually an evaluation process in place” (0:16:26), but not yet as a motion (0:17:53). Horsky: “I don't think it was supposed to be just a flat 3% slush fund.” (0:19:32) | OBSERVATION |
| 0:18:02 | Merit pay: history | Nester: “there was an evaluation tool put in” (0:18:02), which “got lost and then chaos ensued.” (0:18:36); later, “there was a finalized packet and it was, it was, it was, it was a matrix.” (0:22:19) Erickson: never used as envisioned (0:19:57). Seaman suggests budgeting it “but only pay it out if the program if the evaluation is in place.” (0:20:46) | OBSERVATION |
| 0:23:02 | Merit pay: motion and vote | Horsky moves “to suspend the use of the merit pay.” (0:23:02); Stone seconds (0:23:23); Horsky: “Freeze, the release of the funds until the system is put in place.” (0:23:30) Payout is in June (0:24:11). The chair restates the motion (0:25:38); voice vote (0:25:58). | POSITIVE HIGH |
| 0:26:11 | Salary schedules | Presented position by position; salaries are public but the schedule also carries health-care information, so Seaman asks the board to keep it confidential (0:26:19). “But not all the information related to salaries is public information. Someone requests it, we provide it.” (0:27:40) | POSITIVE |
| 0:27:57 | Budget calendar | Draft to the board a week ahead (0:28:14); “It's not a big budget, it's not a complex budget.” (0:28:14) Final approval “16th of December type of timeframe for the final approval.” (0:29:04). | POSITIVE |
| 0:29:53 | SAU 6 website | Conversion to “a much slicker, user friendly app to G as the outfit.” (0:29:56) (probably Apptegy). Horsky: “We had issues with being compliant for disabled people. We're 100% compliant on this, this run.” (0:30:59) The superintendent says the vendor reviews it: “everything is checked. They do a review as well as part of the package.” (0:31:21) | |
| 0:31:58 | Future dates | “the Claremont Restructure Elementary Restructuring Forum of October 25th from 6 to 730 at Stephens High School.” (0:31:58) “People can attend virtually.” (0:32:34) | |
| 0:32:50 | Outsourcing accounts payable | A member, citing “our conference with Matt Upton today” (0:32:55), asks “So what does it cost you to write a check?” (0:34:02) Seaman: “I've worked with outside Services for doing this with modest success.” (0:34:47) and “Cutting the check is not the expensive part.” (0:35:18); “I don't think we're having trouble actually attracting resumes” (0:35:46). | |
| 0:36:34 | Adjournment | Voice vote (0:36:44). | |
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 October 21, 2021, or is labeled an observation where no verified rule applies.
HIGH The minutes of this meeting were not written within five business days, and none survive
RSA 91-A:2, II, in the text in force since January 1, 2019, requires minutes to be promptly recorded and open to public inspection not more than five business days after the meeting; for this meeting that was Thursday, October 28, 2021. They did not exist then. At the next SAU 6 board meeting, on November 18, 2021, the chair said the board did not have the minutes and the clerk said she had not finished them, citing a broken ankle and a computer failure (November 18, 2021 page). That was the nineteenth business day after this meeting (November 11, Veterans Day, is a legal holiday under RSA 288:1). The chair there called them the October 20th minutes; the SAU 6 board's previous meeting was this one, on October 21, and the Claremont board had already approved its own October 20 minutes on November 3. On December 16, 2021, the thirty-eighth business day, the SAU 6 chair told the board it had no previous meeting minutes that night (show 12088); no approval of the October 21 minutes appears on the November or December recordings. No copy survives in any district share: MAP.md records no Drive material for this meeting, and neither share reaches back before July 2022.
The project's severity rule grades an absence MEDIUM where the record mitigates it, for example where someone on tape says minutes are coming. That limb was considered and rejected here: the statements on tape do not mitigate the deadline, they establish that it passed. The clerk's reasons explain the delay and are recorded here for fairness; they do not change what the statute required. The recording itself cannot stand in for the minutes. The roll call is mostly untranscribed, so which Unity members attended is unknown ({T(4)} to {T(7)}); the agenda motion's mover is not heard ({T(9)}); and the merit-pay vote was a voice vote with no tally on tape ({T(147)}, {T(148)}).
Sources: RSA 91-A:2, II (2021 codification; source note ends 2018, 244:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2019): minutes, movers and seconders, five business days; RSA 288:1 (legal holidays, including November 11 and Thanksgiving); the November 18 and December 16, 2021 SAU 6 recordings (shows 12033 and 12088)
OBSERVATION A 3 percent merit pool of about $33,000 had been paid to every SAU employee without a formal evaluation
Asked how the budgeted merit pool is distributed, the assistant superintendent for finance said it was budgeted at 3 percent (0:15:49), “For this year $33,000.” (0:16:02), and that it goes to “Everyone within the saw.” (0:16:07) When Sprague asked “So is it fair to say that there's not really an evaluation process that to to give that out?” (0:16:10) he answered “Yeah, I think that's a fair statement.” (0:16:17) and that supervisors' evaluations are “not something that's formalized into the into the files.” (0:17:23) The director of special education recalled an evaluation tool from about 2018-19 that “got lost and then chaos ensued.” (0:18:36) Erickson, a long-serving Unity member: “to my knowledge, in three years it's never been utilized the way we had envisioned it” (0:19:57). Horsky: “I don't think it was supposed to be just a flat 3% slush fund.” (0:19:32) RSA 194-C:5, III makes the SAU board responsible for fixing the salaries of all SAU personnel. A pool the board created for merit, paid uniformly without the evaluation the board intended, is a gap between the board's decision and its execution. Neither the original vote creating the pool nor the payment records are in the public record, so this page cannot say who authorized the uniform payouts.
Sources: RSA 194-C:5, III (2021 codification; 1996, 298:3, unamended): the SAU board fixes the salaries of all SAU personnel; the recording
POSITIVE The board withheld the merit pool until a documented evaluation exists, and restated the motion before voting
Horsky moved “to suspend the use of the merit pay.” (0:23:02), adding “we can budgeted in, but I don't want it released.” (0:23:02); Stone seconded (0:23:23). Before the vote the chair said “So we're working on making sure motions are clear.” (0:25:38) and restated it: “your motion is to suspend the increases until the, formalized evaluation process is put in place.” (0:25:38). Members made clear the aim was documentation, not withholding pay as such: Whitney, “It doesn't have to be draconian.” (0:24:37); the chair, “We're looking to get the formalized process in place in order to give those those merits out.” (0:24:58) The superintendent committed to a process before the June payout (0:24:23). Tying a pay pool to a documented evaluation, and restating a motion so the record of what passed is unambiguous, go beyond what any statute requires. The motion carried by voice (0:25:58); the tally is not recorded on tape.
Sources: RSA 194-C:5, III (2021 codification); the recording
POSITIVE Budget calendar set to finish before the January 1 statutory deadline, with drafts circulated a week ahead
The assistant superintendent for finance proposed a first-draft meeting in November and final approval about December 16 (0:15:04, 0:29:04), and offered to “send it out to the board for a week prior and electronic form” (0:28:14). He described the salary schedule as position by position, noting “Salaries because that's public information.” (0:26:19) while health-care details in the same schedule are not (0:26:19), and agreed to add a prior-year column at Sprague's request (0:27:04). RSA 194-C:9, I requires the SAU board to adopt its budget at a meeting held before January 1 and to apportion it among the member districts, half on average membership and half on equalized valuation. The calendar meets that deadline with 16 days to spare, and the advance circulation and position-level detail exceed it.
Sources: RSA 194-C:9, I (2021 codification; source note ends 2003, 279:1): adoption before January 1; apportionment formula
Appendix: source files
Official and public sources
- Cablecast: SAU 6 Meeting of 10/21/21 (show 11980; run time from the Cablecast API not retrieved, the API refuses requests from this environment)
- Google Drive: no packet folder, agenda, budget draft or minutes. MAP.md: neither share holds a year folder older than 2022, and the Meeting Minutes share starts at 2023 and has never held an SAU 6 file (checked 9/26/26). Not searched again for this page, per the run instructions for meetings with no Drive material.
- Later recordings cited for the minutes: November 18, 2021 (show 12033; page) and December 16, 2021 (show 12088). The Claremont board's October 20, 2021 meeting is on its own page.
Project files
Working files this page was built from. The dialogue file is linked; the others are not published with the page.
Dialogue/11980 SAU6102121.mp4.CSV (219 attributed rows; the basis of this page)Input/Videos/11980 SAU6102121.mp4Input/Transcripts/11980 SAU6102121.mp4.jsonInput/SupportingDocuments/MAP.md, section 154Scripts/attribution_reports_2015_2023/11980 SAU6102121.mp4.md (speaker attribution report)
Laws and rules cited on this page
- RSA 91-A:2, II, 2021 codification (source note ends 2018, 244:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2019; in force until Oct. 2, 2023): minutes content, movers and seconders, five-business-day inspection
- RSA 288:1 (source note ends 1999): legal holidays, used for the business-day count
- RSA 194-C:5, III, 2021 codification (1996, 298:3, unamended): the SAU board fixes the salaries of all SAU personnel
- RSA 194-C:9, I, 2021 codification (source note ends 2003, 279:1): SAU budget adopted at a meeting before January 1; apportionment half on average membership and half on equalized valuation