News

Refresher on meeting rules, help with superintendent search for Newport schools

By BILL CHAISSON
[email protected]
NEWPORT — Will Phillips and Barrett Christina of the New Hampshire School Boards Association (NHSBA) visited the Newport School Board for a workshop on April 30. The board members received a refresher course in the regulations associated with the state Right to Know law and some guidance on the impending search for a new superintendent.

Phillips focused on the rules surrounding nonpublic sessions and so-called “nonmeetings.”

“Committees are covered the Right to Know law too,” Phillips said. Whether it is the full board or a committee, for a meeting to take place there should be a quorum of the body, and there should be communication that allows “contemporaneous communication,” which includes email. “It is not about whether you did,” Phillips emphasized, “but whether you can.”

If the assembled group begins to discuss topics that are within their “jurisdiction of advisory power,” then it constitutes a meeting. The jurisdiction of a committee is narrower than that of a board. “Keep in mind,” Phillips said, “who you are talking to, when you are talking, and what you are talking about.”

It is important for board members to be conscious of what constitutes a meeting because there are requirements for what constitutes a legal meeting, including providing public notice ahead of time, making sure it takes place where the public may attend, and the public must be able to be present when the board makes decisions.

Phillips called the nonmeeting an “odd animal” that was not in the regulations, but instead had come into existence as a result of case law. These are assemblies that do not have to comply with the requirements to post notice or be accessible to the public. It is permitted to hold them over the phone and no minutes are required to be taken.

The NHSBA representative described four types: (1) unintended, inconsequential social discussions; (2) strategy sessions or negotiations that are related to collective bargaining; (3) consultation with legal counsel; and (4) the circulation of draft documents. In this last instance, board members may not make substantial changes to the substance of the documents outside a meeting and may only suggest changes to spelling, grammar or punctuation. Any substantive changes must be made during a scheduled meeting.

Returning to the subject of actual meetings, Phillips reminded the board that meeting minutes must be available to the general public within five days of a meeting. These are necessarily a draft, as the board members have not approved them yet (which must be done during a meeting). Minutes of a nonpublic meeting must be made available within three days, unless the board votes to seal the contents of the meeting.

Phillips then went through the various common reasons for a board to enter a nonpublic session. These are listed in the Right to Know law (RSA 91-A:3), but not every one on the list applies to school boards. Board members are bound by the law to announce in open session which reason on this list they are invoking to go into a closed session. The ones most often used include (a) dismissal, compensation, or disciplining of any public employee (an employee may, however, request a public discussion).

Board vice chair Virginia Irwin asked Phillips, “What if we have five English teachers, for example, and we have to get rid of one because we can’t afford them?” Phillips and Christina said that would be a topic for an public session because it is about the budget rather than about a particular person. Phillips added that the board will not usually be talking about specific people unless the name is brought to them by a district administrator.

“Should we inform someone if we are talking about them in a nonpublic session?” Irwin asked. 

“No,” said Christina, “not if you are just talking about them. If it is a hearing, the affected individual has the right to make it either public or nonpublic. In a hearing the board is serving as a judge and a jury. We expect our juries not to prejudge a case or the person.”

Another reason (b) for entering nonpublic session is to discuss hiring a person as a public employee.

A more controversial reason (c) is to discuss matters that would affect the reputation of a person who is not a school board member. This, Phillips said, often includes people like coaches or vendors to the district.

Discussions of litigation (d) should also be nonpublic when legal proceedings reach “the document stage.” The litigation can be either brought by or against the district and legal counsel does not have to have been retained.

Letter (i) on the list refers to discussions about the preparation of emergency plans. Phillips was explicit that this refers to serious matters like terrorism and shooter drills, “a substantial threat, not shoving in the lunch room.”

Letter (k) addresses discussing whether to enter into or renew a tuition contract. Discussion of problems with an active contract must be discussed in open session. The difference is that an advantage to the district is lost if a strategy is discussed in public. As it relates to tuition contracts, this is an economic advantage. As it relates to terrorism, it is related to safety.

By law the board must cite one of these reasons very specifically before going into non public session. Simply referring generally to the Right to Know law by its RSA number is not enough, said Phillips. “There can be more than one reason,” he said, “but you must keep separate minutes for each topic and there should be no ‘issue creep.’” He encouraged them to formally go in and out of nonpublic session in order to keep the discussions distinct.

On the subject of minutes, in general, Phillips told the board that they need only record who is present, including people who make presentations to the board, and decisions must be listed and there should be short summary of the discussion that preceded it. A recent addition to the law, Phillips said, is the requirement to record who makes each motion and who seconds it. The rules regarding the minutes of nonpublic sessions are similar, but they most include the time that the board or committee emerges from the session. In addition, if the minutes are sealed, the reason must be included in the minutes and the law has a list of appropriate justifications.

 

Superintendent search: interim and permanent

Christina assumed the lead in the discussion of this topic. “Do you have an advertisement out for the interim in New Hampshire and adjacent states,” he asked, “and have you discussed the process for screening the candidates?” Board member Ann Spencer, who is heading up the search committee told Christina that those things had been done already.

Christina urged them to begin interviewing people as soon as they identified qualified candidates and not to wait for the submission deadline to pass. He said they should interview at least three candidates for the interim position.

“Double-check that they are certified or eligible to be certified [to be a superintendent]” Christina said. “There is not reciprocity with other states.” He said that he has learned that the state department of education does not move forward certification paperwork as quickly as one might hope.

Christina advised Spencer to “keep the committee tight.” She said that the district’s building adminstrators are going to pick a member, interim finance director George Caccavero will be a member, as will an administrative assistant at the SAU office. She and new board member Russ Medbery will represent the school board.

On May 3 she and Medbery met to make a “matrix of the criteria listed in the job description” and to put aside submissions that were incomplete. On May 13 the committee is scheduled to meet to select candidates to interview for the interim position. On May 17 they would invite people and interview them on May 20 and 21. 

Christina immediately told Spencer that she should move up the schedule by a week. “You should try to wrap it up by May 24, if you can,” he said, “and definitely by May 31.” He told them if they didn’t adhere to that timetable, they would miss out on the best candidates. “Essentially,” Christina said, “you need a body by July 1.”

The full-time superintendent search has a longer wavelength. The search committee will convene in mid-September and job description will go out by the end of September with interviews occurring in November. “It should be wrapped up by the first or second week of December,” Christina said. “If you’re not crazy about the people in the first pool, then you can re-open the search in January [2020]. There are better candidates in the spring, but there is more competition for them.”

Returning to the subject of the interim, chair Linda Wadensten asked, “What if we don’t find [an interim] by July 1?” Christina asked if anyone employed by the district—perhaps a building principal—had certification? Wadensten did not think so. “You might get the high school principal approved on an emergency basis,” he said. “I don’t think we should worry about this until the middle of June.”

Avatar photo

As your daily newspaper, we are committed to providing you with important local news coverage for Sullivan County and the surrounding areas.