Residents Protest Default Budget;
Superintendent Calls Police

By Thomas P. Caldwell

BRISTOL — A contingent of selectmen and residents of the Newfound Area School District took the school board to task for placing $712,300 in new capital expenditures into the district’s default budget, with their anger prompting the superintendent to seek police assistance on March 12.

Residents already upset at Chairman Jeff Levesque of Groton for his refusal to call a special meeting to address the complaint became angrier when they had to wait 45 minutes while the board conferred in nonpublic session.

During a subsequent public comment period, Groton Selectman John Rescigno asked for an explanation of the budget. Levesque responded, “We’re here to listen to you. It’s time for you to express an opinion, not for us to answer questions.”

Rescigno said that, after waiting for the school board for 45 minutes, he was ready to continue waiting until someone provided the answers he sought. After his allotted five-minute period for comment, Levesque told him, “It’s time to sit down.”

Levesque told the audience, “No member of this board is inclined to have an emergency meeting on this issue,” prompting Rescigno to chastised him, “You’re showing a disrespect for every person in every town. We will see you in court.”

During the exchange, Superintendent Stacy Buckley summoned Bristol police who entered the room a short time later, causing another halt in the meeting while she conferred with the officer.

When the school board reached the point in the agenda to discuss the default budget, Vincent Paul Migliore of Bridgewater said that he had been in favor of holding a special meeting, but had been rebuffed.

He noted that Bristol resident Archie Auger, who discovered that funding for capital improvement projects had been included in the default budget, had served the school district for more than three decades, “so he knows of what he speaks.”

The Dispute

Auger had agreed with the school board that it had the right to include the money in its proposed operating budget, but he said the default budget, which takes effect if voters turn down the operating budget, is intended to keep the district operational by continuing the prior year’s funding, minus any one-time expenditures and with adjustments for contractual obligations.

At last year’s deliberative session, Auger had amended the budget to add $800,000 for replacement of the leaking high school roof — a need the school board said was critical but was unable to place into the budget because of the limits imposed by the district’s tax cap. Auger’s amendment to add the money to the operating budget set the base amount for calculating the coming year’s tax cap $800,000 higher.

Despite the expressed urgency for the roof replacement, the district has not made the repairs, but the fiscal year will not end until June 30. Board member Suzanne Cheney of Alexandria said at the meeting on the 12th that the work will be done this year.

The dispute over the default budget arose when Auger realized that the administration had put $712,300 in new capital expenditures into the default budget as well as the operational budget. When he brought his concerns to the administration, Buckley maintained that it was proper to include the money because the roof replacement had been identified in the district’s capital improvement project plan and, therefore, capital improvements were not one-time expenditures.

Levesque agreed and said the school board was confident in its decision.

Auger notified the selectmen of each of the towns making up the school district, prompting Buckley to follow up with a letter of her own, saying, “Our legal opinion has noted that the amount appropriated last year should be included in this year’s default budget. … [T]he starting point for the default budget is the amount of last year’s appropriations.”

She maintained, “The $800,000 is not a one-time expenditure, because it is the first of a 10-year capital improvement plan and because the district spends money each year on plant operations and maintenance.”

Auger argued that, although the school board approved the capital improvement plan, voters had never been asked to approve it. Even with an approved capital improvement plan, the only time an item would be considered a contractual obligation that could be carried forward through future years would be if voters approved the expenditure by a 60 percent affirmative vote, according to RSA 32:7-a.

Levesque’s decision to delay any discussion of Auger’s concerns until the regularly scheduled school board meeting meant the board could not correct the budget before the March 13 vote, and Auger was away on the date of the meeting.

Migliore told the school board on the 12th, “We should first hear his concerns and allow him to articulate them before we take official action,” and made a motion to table the discussion.

The motion passed.

‘Appalled’

During the second public comment session, at the end of the meeting, Rescigno stood again to call the School Board “cowardly” for not answering questions and wasting taxpayers’ money by calling in the police when someone wanted answers to a legitimate question.

Bristol Selectman Don Milbrand agreed, saying, “I’m disappointed and, quite frankly, appalled.”

Referring to the superintendent’s earlier discussion about ways to make up for lost staff time due to snow days by having employees attend a School Board barbecue, Milbrand called it “a big free for all.”

“When the public is here with legitimate concerns and you sit here stone-faced and arrogant, you should reflect a little bit. Take a little responsibility. The way that gentleman was treated was beyond deplorable.”

Milbrand also called the default budget “appalling” and said, “It’s disingenuous at best,” and “it will be fought.”

“My opinion is not going to matter,” Milbrand said, “and your twisted opinion is not going to matter. It’s going to come down to the opinion of the judge, and I hope he is very smart and realizes you’ve just twisted things.”

Bridgewater Selectman Terry Murphy said he had spoken to two attorneys who agreed that the district had erred in setting its default budget.

“I can’t tell you the things you’ve done,” Murphy chastised the board. “If you can’t step outside the box and answer a lousy question, and instead stick to the rules so rigidly, it insults people.”

He cited a court ruling that found that having the police present can chill free speech.

“I’m really concerned about what it will do in the long term.”

Bristol resident Paul Simard told the board, “I think you’re going to find yourselves in violation of the New Hampshire Constitution. … You have bypassed the people and set yourselves up above the taxpayers and above the citizens. You need to take a look at what you’re doing and reverse course.”

Rescigno returned for a final comment. “The taxpayers will throw everything out and you’ll lose all the progress you’ve made so far. … Not only are you going to lose, but the students are going to lose. You’re right now at the critical area of a child’s education and where life will lead them to. You’ve now put that in jeopardy by causing the taxpayers not to trust you in the future.”

13 March 2018