Claremont School Board Finance Committee, December 18, 2024

Afternoon session of the school board’s three-member Finance Committee, televised by CCTV, hours before the regular board meeting the same evening. The administration presented a revised FY2025–26 draft with pre-K removed, $1,128,543 over after revenues; the committee worked through tax effects and settled, by consensus and without a motion, on asking the administration for about $200,000 more in cuts, roughly a 4–4.5% increase fully loaded. This page is built from the dialogue transcript of the recording and the board’s agendas and minutes; no minutes of this session were located. Timestamps link to the same moment in the Cablecast recording.

Body
Finance Committee (agendas: “Finance Sub-Committee”) of the Claremont School Board, an advisory subcommittee under the board’s by-laws. Members: Frank Sprague (chair), Heather Whitney, Candace Crawford; all three present (the chair introduces them at 0:00:09). Three of seven board members is not a quorum of the board.
Date
Wednesday, December 18, 2024. The chair: Today is Wednesday the 18th (0:00:09).
Start time
Noticed for 1–3 p.m. on the November 20 and December 4 agendas. The actual start is not settled. The project’s notes record a Cablecast eventDate of 12:50 p.m. for this show (read 2026-08-29; the API refused this environment on 2026-10-03). The chair’s spoken countdowns (“with 45 minutes left in this session” at 1:15:14, “we have a half hour left” at 1:26:40) fit a 3:00 p.m. close if the session began at about 1:00 p.m., and fit a close near 2:47–2:51 p.m. if it began at 12:50 p.m. The recording runs 1:56:50 by the last dialogue row. It ends with the chair’s “I think our business is done” (1:56:43); no motion to adjourn is heard.
Location
SRVRTC John Goodrich Community Room, Claremont, as noticed on the November 20 and December 4 agendas. Not restated on tape.
Recording
Cablecast: School Board Finance Meeting 12/18/24 (show 16226; extent from the last dialogue row, 1:56:50). Recorded by Claremont Community Television (CCTV) / Claremont Community Media Center (CCMC).
Minutes
None located in the district’s Drive shares, the board’s Finance Sub Committee folder or later board packets (checked 2026-10-03; see flag 1).
Related meetings
Previous committee session Friday, December 13 (December 13 page). The full board met at 6:30 p.m. the same evening (December 18 board page); its approved minutes record the Finance item and a default budget of $39,791,261.

Participants

Everyone heard or named present in the recording. Titles follow the board’s December 18, 2024 agenda masthead. Unidentified voices stay unidentified.
NameRoleParticipation
Frank SpragueChair, Finance Committee; vice chair, Claremont School BoardOpens on camera: “this is just our third meeting” and difficult decisions will be discussed “on TV” (0:00:40, 0:01:15). Argues that out-of-district placements are “a new phenomenon” (0:39:36) and wonders “how many of these placements took place without any real process” (0:42:54). Raises low-participation athletics, subject to Title IX (1:16:42). Proposes the target: “Well, I’m going to throw out 4%” (1:39:22). Lists the coming schedule (1:48:45) and closes the session (1:56:43).
Heather WhitneyMember, Finance Committee; chair, Claremont School BoardAsks for the increase after revenues and its tax effect (0:06:27–0:07:00). Proposes replacing elementary student service coordinators with school-based social workers (0:50:08–1:01:48). Estimates the combined first-year contract impact at about $800,000 (1:31:44). States that voters “can’t cut the budget below the default”, corrected by Henry and Crawford (1:34:18–1:34:26; flag 5). Restates the target: “We want the total number to be a 4% increase” (1:39:56). Questions the legal basis of the pre-K program (1:50:26–1:52:27).
Candace CrawfordMember, Finance Committee; chair, Capital Improvements and SRVRTC Visioning subcommitteesIntroduced as Andy Crawford in the transcript (0:00:09). Questions the 224% revenue figure in the draft sent the night before (0:19:39–0:21:30). Raises capital items from her subcommittee, including $95,000 for the Stevens roof (0:23:01, 0:24:50). Reconciles the new draft against the prior week school by school (0:27:31–0:35:01) and explains the $3.2 million increase by health insurance and special education (0:36:53). Computes the 5.5% figure (1:37:48) and closes with “Just find me 200,000” (1:55:12).
Chris PrattSuperintendent, SAU 6Introduces the revision; says out-of-district placements are still under review (0:02:15). Speculates that ESSER money made out-of-district placement easy (“we have the money, want them out, let’s do it”, 0:43:30). Describes a three-track paraprofessional proposal not yet ratified (1:04:07). Accepts the target: “I mean, you got our orders” (1:55:33).
Mary HenryBusiness Administrator, SAU 6Reports pre-K removed and about $250,000 of other adjustments (0:02:55, 0:04:03); $1,128,543 over after revenues (0:06:51); tax effects per $100,000 of valuation (0:10:10, 0:11:16, 1:39:02); the adequacy increase (0:16:04–0:16:48). On the default budget: “I’m working on that tonight” (1:33:14). Tells the committee “You do not have to have a preschool” (1:52:53).
Mike McCoskerDirector of Student Services, SAU 6Describes annual IEP review of out-of-district placements and the out-of-district coordinator’s case-by-case review (0:44:14); weekly truancy reports to DCYF (DC wife in the transcript) where students placed out of district do not attend (0:48:39, 0:48:44); explains the LEA role at IEP meetings (0:59:47).
Michael KoskiAssistant Superintendent, SAU 6Named present by the chair (Mike Kosky, 0:00:09). No words are attributed to him in the transcript.
UnidentifiedMostly short fragments from a merged male voice cluster (Chris Pratt or Frank Sprague)14 rows. One row at 0:01:47 holds two speakers: Sprague handing over to the administration and Pratt beginning his remarks.

Order of business (reconstructed)

The meeting was noticed by date, time and place on the board’s agendas, but no agenda of items was located. The items below are reconstructed from the transitions on the recording. No motion was made and no vote was taken.
Taken upItemAgenda text / disposition
0:00:09Opening and the administration’s revisionPre-K removed; middle-school reductions; about $1.1–1.2 million over after revenues. No action.
0:06:27Increase after revenues and tax effects$1,128,543 after revenues; per-$100,000 tax effects with and without the teachers’ contract; adequacy aid. No action.
0:19:39Crawford’s questions on the revised draftRevenue-adjusted percentage; capital items; school-by-school variances; the $3.2 million gross increase. No action.
0:39:36Out-of-district placementsProcess and history; attendance enforcement. No action.
0:48:58Social workers in place of student service coordinatorsWhitney’s proposal referred to the administration for review. No action.
1:15:14What the taxpayers will accept; athleticsLow-participation sports raised; athletics at Stevens $584,000. No action.
1:26:40CalendarJanuary 7 emergency board meeting to ratify two contracts; hearing January 15. No action.
1:33:11Default budget, contracts and the percentage5.5% fully loaded; Sprague proposes 4%; Crawford asks for $200,000 more in cuts (about 4.5%). Consensus, no motion (flag 3).
1:50:26Pre-K questionsTuition, state support and legal obligation. No action.
1:55:33Close“I mean, you got our orders”; chair: “I think our business is done” (1:56:43).

Discussion timeline

Times are taken from the dialogue transcript (Dialogue/16226 SchoolBoardFinance121824.mp4.CSV) and link into the recording. Quotations are as transcribed; bracketed words are corrections.

TimeTopicWhat was saidFlags
0:00:09OpeningSprague: “this is just our third meeting”; the last session showed special education and health insurance driving the increase (0:00:40). “In the interest of complete transparency, we will be talking about those on TV” (0:01:15).POSITIVE
0:02:15The administration’s revisionHenry: “I did take out pre-K because you guys had talked about that” (0:02:55); middle-school adjustments “just shy of about a half $1 million” (0:03:25); “about $250,000 in adjustments” from open positions “that weren’t truly open positions” (0:04:03); “roughly the 1.1 million over after revenue increases” (0:05:10).OBSERVATION
0:05:46Two packets and a 229% lineWhitney: the last two budgets “came in two packets” (0:05:46); “The one that says the 229% increase is not really a 229%” (0:06:27). Henry: “After revenues it is 1.1 million $28,543” (0:06:51). Preschool operating cost: “$430,104.13” (0:08:02).MEDIUM
0:10:01Tax effectsHenry: the draft means “$0.97 increase to the tax rate for a total of $97.27 per 100,000” (0:10:10); with the teachers’ contract, “$137.80 per 100,000”, “increased the tax rate by $1.38” (0:11:16). Crawford’s check that $97 plus $50 should be $147 is answered with “It doesn’t make sense” and a reference to valuations (0:18:59).POSITIVE
0:11:49Adequacy aidHenry: the extraordinary-need grant tied to free and reduced lunch “went from 8670 to 11,500” per pupil (0:16:04); “You end up with 7.5 instead of 5.6” (0:16:30), “That’s 2 million” (0:16:48); statewide education property tax down about $100,000 (0:14:50). Pratt asks what happens if it is a one-off (0:12:09).
0:19:39A draft sent without explanationCrawford on “1217, the 10:30 a.m. report that shows the million 128” (0:20:13); Henry: the total budget alone is “up 8.91%” (0:20:43). Crawford: “Do not ever send a budget out without a line of explanation. When the number shows 224% increase” (0:21:30); “We have a lot of board members who were on the ledge last night” (0:21:47). Pratt: “And that’s why before, we said we’d like not to give it to you in advance” (0:21:58).MEDIUM
0:22:26Capital itemsCrawford: items from the Capital Improvements meeting, “About $100,000, plus about 95,000 for the roof replacement at Stevens” (0:23:01), and playground equipment at Disnard and Bluff (0:24:57). Henry: the items “are not in the new budget” (0:23:39) and the maintenance director is encumbering planned projects (0:24:21).
0:26:33SAU assessment and school-by-school variancesCrawford: the SAU 6 cost to Claremont “goes down 91,000” (0:26:33). Against the prior week: Bluff about $1,000; Maple “down 33,700” (0:28:17); Disnard “51,700 less” (0:29:41); middle school “375,300 less” (0:31:21); Stevens “down 114,000”, the grant-funded social worker backed out (0:33:41, 0:33:47). Whitney: these are “Not true cuts” (0:31:08); Henry declines to detail one item “because it impacts one person” (0:33:32).
0:36:28Why the budget is up $3.2 millionCrawford: “this year’s budget is 3,238,000 more than last year” (0:36:28); health insurance up $1.4 million and special education at the middle and high schools “almost $2 million” together exceed the increase (0:36:53, 0:38:03).
0:39:36Out-of-district placementsSprague: “this number of out of district placements is, in my experience, is a new phenomenon” (0:39:36). Pratt: districts “were using Covid money to pay for the out of district” (0:40:55). McCosker: the out-of-district coordinator is “looking at every student to see if we can service them in district” (0:44:14). Stevens out-of-district transportation, “77,000” (0:45:37).
0:48:20Attendance of placed studentsPratt: if placed students do not attend, “We’ll file once a week if we have to” (0:48:20). McCosker: “It’s truancy”, reported to DCYF (0:48:44).
0:48:58Social workers instead of student service coordinatorsWhitney: elementary student service coordinators are “a workaround” (0:50:08), roughly “$80,000 a year at 185 plus ten” (1:01:08); school-based social workers would cost less and work year round (1:01:21). She says the coordinator role does not meet “Ed 306 requirements for an additional administrative position” (0:53:00). McCosker notes coordinators act as the LEA representative at IEP meetings (0:59:47). Crawford asks the administration to look into it (1:01:38).
1:02:20Paraprofessional contractSprague cites Nashua’s tiered paraprofessional pay. Crawford begins to describe the new contract, then asks whether she may before ratification (1:03:46); Pratt: “I proposed instead of one track three, and we’ll just have to see if that’s ratified” (1:04:07).
1:15:14What is palatable; athletics; reservesSprague: “with 45 minutes left in this session”, “what will be palatable to the taxpayers” (1:15:14). Whitney would look at low-participation sports (1:15:59); Henry: athletics at Stevens “584,000” (1:20:48). Crawford: “Are there any reserves that we can offset the texts [taxes]?” Whitney: “We’ve already voted on that” (1:17:58, 1:18:09).
1:26:40Calendar and the contractsSprague: “we’re not going to meet again until, the new year” (1:26:40). Whitney: an emergency board meeting January 7 to ratify the administrators’ and paraprofessionals’ contracts; the budget cannot be fully discussed “without violating the ground rules” (1:27:18). She asked the clerk’s office not to change the January 2 board agenda yet (1:29:23).
1:31:02Contract costsWhitney: the teachers’ contract, “514 is the SRA [SREA]. It’s not in here” (1:31:12); “We can’t talk about the numbers out loud” (1:31:40); her estimate of the combined first-year contract impact, “is going to be roughly $800,000” (1:31:44).
1:33:11Default budgetWhitney: “what is our default budget”; Henry: “I’m working on that tonight” (1:33:14), “anywhere from a half 1 million to 1 million, depending on what I find” (1:33:17). Whitney: “they can’t cut the budget below the default”; Henry: “Yes they can” (1:34:18, 1:34:24).OBSERVATION
1:34:31PercentagesSprague: inflation “3%, roughly” (1:34:31). Base for comparison, “36,349,753” (1:36:31); 40 million “would be an 11% increase” (1:36:51). Crawford: with revenues and the contracts, “It’s a 5.5%” (1:37:48). Henry: each $100,000 is “$0.08 on the tax rate. And $8.11 per 100,000” (1:39:02).POSITIVE
1:39:22The 4% targetSprague: “Well, I’m going to throw out 4%”, “Revenue included” (1:39:22, 1:39:41). Whitney: “We want the total number to be a 4% increase” (1:39:56). Sprague: “That’s just my suggestion” (1:40:02).OBSERVATION
1:46:10ScheduleWhitney suggests the committee meet, perhaps on a Saturday, to prepare a presentation for the January 15 hearing (1:46:10). Sprague: “tonight we’re going to give them just a thumbnail of where we’re headed” (1:49:04); Whitney will encourage board members “to watch these meetings” (1:49:17).MEDIUM
1:50:26Pre-K: what the law requiresWhitney: “We’re providing a service that is not required by any RSA” (1:51:56). McCosker: “If we have a program, you have to take them” (1:51:41). Pratt: “We’re just obligated to pay to the for the services that are tied to their IEP” (1:52:39). Henry: “You do not have to have a preschool” (1:52:53).OBSERVATION
1:53:00Find $200,000Crawford: reducing by 200,000 “would result in a 4.5% increase” (1:53:33), “about a four, 4.5% increase fully loaded” (1:54:27); “I don’t care where you find it” (1:54:51); “Just fine. Just find me 200,000” (1:55:12). Sprague: “I don’t have any more requirements than that either” (1:55:16).OBSERVATION
1:55:33ClosePratt: “I mean, you got our orders”; Henry: “Got our marching orders” (1:55:35). Crawford: “to cut more, I think is becoming irresponsible” (1:56:18). Sprague: “I think our business is done” (1:56:43). No motion, no vote.OBSERVATION

Items flagged for review

These flags are a reviewer’s aid, not findings of violation and not legal advice. Each names the rule it rests on; where no verified rule applies, the item is an observation. Statutes are cited as they read on December 18, 2024.

MEDIUM No minutes of this session exist in any district share; the committee’s direction to the administration is recorded only on tape

RSA 91-A:1-a, VI(d) makes the committee a public body, and RSA 91-A:2, II (2024 text) required minutes with “the names of members, persons appearing before the public bodies, and a brief description of the subject matter discussed and final decisions” within five business days, here by Thursday, December 26, 2024 (December 25 is a holiday). By-law 1.05(d) requires subcommittee minutes “on the SAU 6 website within 5 days of the meeting”, and by-law 1.11 makes the subcommittee chair responsible. None were located (checked 2026-10-03). Two other subcommittees minuted their December meetings and the district filed them in the December 18 board packet (Visioning, December 9; Capital Improvements, December 10).

This was the session at which the committee told the administration to find about $200,000 more (flag 3). The board’s approved December 18 minutes dispose of the Finance item by recommending that people “watch the CCTV recordings of the committee meetings”. Severity: MEDIUM, under the project’s rule, because this meeting was noticed on two board agendas and only the minutes are missing. The December 13 session, for which no notice was located, is graded HIGH on its own page (December 13 page).

Sources: RSA 91-A:1-a, VI(d) (subcommittees are public bodies); RSA 91-A:2, II, 2024 codification (minutes within 5 business days); By-laws 1.05(d) and 1.11; Approved CSB minutes 12.18.24

MEDIUM The budget versions under review were emailed to members and never published

The committee worked from drafts the public could not see: “two packets”, one with revenues (0:05:46, 0:05:58), a line showing a 229% or 224% increase (0:06:27, 0:19:39), “1217, the 10:30 a.m. report” (0:20:13), “page 62” and “Page 63” (0:20:05, 0:22:26), and “Last night’s budget” (0:32:06). Crawford reports board members “on the ledge last night” over an unexplained figure (0:21:47); Pratt answers that the administration had preferred “not to give it to you in advance” (0:21:58).

The board’s by-laws require committee materials to be public. The second rule numbered 2.09 in the adopted text: “Any and all presentations by the administration to the board or any committee shall be contained in the agenda and made available to the public in its original format online so the public may download or access the information prior to or during board meetings.” Rule 4.03(d) delegates posting of “any and all agenda materials not-exempt from public dissemination by RSA 91-A” with board or committee agendas. No version of these drafts was found in any district share; the first FY26 budget document located there is the proposed budget in the January 7, 2025 packet. A departure from the board’s own rule is graded MEDIUM.

Sources: Claremont School Board By-Laws, adopted June 5, 2024: the second rule 2.09 and rule 4.03(d)

OBSERVATION The 4% target and the $200,000 instruction were set by consensus, and the board was later told the target had been 5%

No motion was made and no vote was taken. Sprague proposed 4% “Revenue included” (1:39:22, 1:39:41); Whitney restated it (1:39:56); Crawford converted it into “Just find me 200,000”, “about a four, 4.5% increase fully loaded” (1:54:27, 1:55:12); the superintendent accepted “our orders” (1:55:33). Under by-law 1.05 subcommittees “are advisory in nature” and the board decides, so an informal direction is within the committee’s role. The point is what the record shows afterward.

The approved January 7, 2025 minutes record the business administrator’s presentation as: “After revenues, total increase is $350,330 before the teachers contract and other warrant articles” and “The target was 5% and with the teachers contract, it is just under that”. The target on this recording is 4%, or about 4.5% fully loaded. The record reviewed for this page does not explain the difference; the committee met again on January 6, 2025 (Cablecast show 16246), and that session is not reviewed here. Both figures are reported here; nothing is assumed about how the 5% was reached.

Sources: By-law 1.05 (subcommittees are advisory); Approved CSB minutes 1.7.25

OBSERVATION Pre-K was taken out of the draft before any board vote, on the committee’s discussion, and the record does not say where the identified children would be served

Henry: “I did take out pre-K because you guys had talked about that” (0:02:55). The committee took no vote on December 13 or here. Asked what the law requires, the room answered: “You do not have to have a preschool” (Henry, 1:52:53); “We’re just obligated to pay to the for the services that are tied to their IEP” (Pratt, 1:52:39). Federal rules make the placement question one for each child’s team: 34 CFR 300.116 applies to “a preschool child with a disability” and requires the placement to be made by a group including the parents, determined at least annually, and as close as possible to the child’s home.

The committee’s figure for the program was “$430,104.13” (0:08:02). The board moved the budget to hearing on January 7, 2025, after the chair said there would be “no reduction in services embedded in IEPs” and that the cut affected “nearly $500,000 to provide services to 23 identified students” (both quoted from the approved January 7 minutes). The record contains no plan for where those children’s services would be delivered. The board, not the committee, made the decision, as the by-laws provide.

Sources: 34 CFR 300.116 (placements, including preschool children); Approved CSB minutes 1.7.25

OBSERVATION The committee set its target without the default budget, and a member’s misstatement about the default was corrected on the record

Asked for the default budget, Henry said “I’m working on that tonight” and gave only a range (1:33:14, 1:33:17). That evening the board was told it is “currently $39,791,261” (approved December 18 minutes). RSA 40:13, XI(a) requires the default budget to be disclosed at the first budget hearing, so the committee stage carries no statutory duty; the effect is that the 4% target was chosen before anyone had the figure that controls if the budget fails.

Whitney said the deliberative session “can’t cut the budget below the default” (1:34:18). Henry and Crawford corrected her: “Yes they can. SB two you can” (1:34:26). The statute supports the correction. RSA 40:13, IV allows warrant articles to be amended at the first session and provides that “An amendment that changes the dollar amount of an appropriation in a warrant article shall not be deemed to violate this subparagraph”; XI(b) bars amending only the default amount itself.

Sources: RSA 40:13, IV and XI(a)–(b) (last amended 2019, 192:2); Approved CSB minutes 12.18.24

POSITIVE Tax effects were put into household terms on camera, and the full board was pointed to the recordings

The committee did its arithmetic aloud: the draft at “$97.27 per 100,000” of valuation (0:10:10), the teachers’ contract taking it to “$137.80 per 100,000” (0:11:16), each $100,000 of budget at “$0.08 on the tax rate” (1:39:02), and the effect on a $200,000 house (1:47:29). Sprague framed the televising as the point: “we will be talking about those on TV so that people have the sense that there was a process in these decisions” (0:01:15). Nothing in RSA 91-A requires a subcommittee to be televised. The practice is good; it does not replace the minutes the statute requires (flag 1) or the published documents the by-laws require (flag 2).

Sources: RSA 91-A:2, II (minutes are the statutory record)

Appendix: source files

Official and public sources

Project files

Working files this page was built from. The dialogue file is linked; the others are not published with the page.

Laws and rules cited on this page