Letter: ORCSD Treasurer Chosen in "Back-Room Deal"

Durham resident Jenna Roberts has asked that we post the following, which she also sent to the School Board:

Members of the ORCSD School Board:

The transparency of the District is called into question with the actions of the District staff and School Board regarding the appointment of the Board Officers last Wednesday. Most of these appointments are legally required and specify that any registered voter living in the District may quality for the positions (except staff and Board members). These positions are given a stipend and are required to have defined terms. Yet these positions have been secretly selected for many years and the practice continues. Here are the problems that must be addressed:

• 
  The positions are not made public.


• 
  There is no application process.


• 
  The criteria and qualifications of the positions are not defined.


• 
  The compensation and terms of the positions are not public.


• 
  The roles, responsibilities, expectations and relationship/accountability to the Board is undefined.


• The selection process is not conducted in public (required by law and case law established in 2007, see DOJ memo).

The only position that had more than one applicant was the Treasurer and ultimately that was decided behind closed doors, too, which is not legal under RSA 91-A. The public has no way to know what criteria was used to determine the best candidate for the job. This is not open and transparent government.

If multiple candidates apply, people should be chosen based on the requirements/criteria for the position and the qualifications of the candidates. Finally, the selection process should be done transparently and openly as required by law. Given the way that this process took place, in non-public, it literally became a back-room deal.

Per your SB policy, I formally request that this topic be added to the next Board meeting agenda with the hope of developing a plan to remedy this situation and mitigate more legal action against this District.

Sincerely,

Jenna Roberts

Durham

Letter: ORCSD Board Engaged in Illegal Non-Public Session at Last Meeting

Durham Resident Jenna Roberts sent the following to the School Board today, and also asked that we post it here:

Members of the ORCSD School Board:

The actions of the Board last Wednesday violated RSA 91A:2 and immediately call into question the process and the validity of the vote from that session.

Every non-public session requires a public notice. A non-public meeting was not posted. The appointment of the officers was on the agenda and no provision was made for that discussion to be in non-public. The Chair cannot simply call for a non-public session during a meeting of the Board. Therefore, the action of the Chair to call for a non-public session was a violation of RSA 91-A:2 (see below) [Editor's note: emphasis added by author is in italics].

It was the practice of the Board a few years ago to discuss members of the public they did not like or whom they wished to discredit in non-public, but that is not protected by law. Speaking to the merits, credentials and expertise of one person or another for a Board appointed position does not "likely affect adversely the reputation of any person" as specified in RSA 91-A. Even if it was allowable under the law, a notice of the session is required before the Board can move into non-public.

Perhaps the Board should develop a simple checklist before non-public meetings to avoid this infraction in the future to publicly verify that the posting was posted in 2 places, 24 hours before the session. I hope you will be more attentive to the not only the letter of the law but also the intent and judicial interpretations of RSA 91-A going forward.

Sincerely,
Jenna Roberts,
Durham


91-A:2 Meetings Open to Public. –
I. For the purpose of this chapter, a "meeting'' means the convening of a quorum of the membership of a public body, as defined in RSA 91-A:1-a, VI, or the majority of the members of such public body if the rules of that body define "quorum'' as more than a majority of its members, whether in person, by means of telephone or electronic communication, or in any other manner such that all participating members are able to communicate with each other contemporaneously, subject to the provisions set forth in RSA 91-A:2, III, for the purpose of discussing or acting upon a matter or matters over which the public body has supervision, control, jurisdiction, or advisory power. A chance, social, or other encounter not convened for the purpose of discussing or acting upon such matters shall not constitute a meeting if no decisions are made regarding such matters. "Meeting'' shall also not include:
(a) Strategy or negotiations with respect to collective bargaining;
(b) Consultation with legal counsel; (c) A caucus consisting of elected members of a public body of the same political party who were elected on a partisan basis at a state general election or elected on a partisan basis by a town or city which has adopted a partisan ballot system pursuant to RSA 669:12 or RSA 44:2; or
(d) Circulation of draft documents which, when finalized, are intended only to formalize decisions previously made in a meeting; provided, that nothing in this subparagraph shall be construed to alter or affect the application of any other section of RSA 91-A to such documents or related communications.
II. Subject to the provisions of RSA 91-A:3, all meetings, whether held in person, by means of telephone or electronic communication, or in any other manner, shall be open to the public. Except for town meetings, school district meetings, and elections, no vote while in open session may be taken by secret ballot. Any person shall be permitted to use recording devices, including, but not limited to, tape recorders, cameras, and videotape equipment, at such meetings. Minutes of all such meetings, including names of members, persons appearing before the public bodies, and a brief description of the subject matter discussed and final decisions, shall be promptly recorded and open to public inspection not more than 5 business days after the meeting, except as provided in RSA 91-A:6, and shall be treated as permanent records of any public body, or any subordinate body thereof, without exception. Except in an emergency or when there is a meeting of a legislative committee, a notice of the time and place of each such meeting, including a nonpublic session, shall be posted in 2 appropriate places one of which may be the public body's Internet website, if such exists, or shall be printed in a newspaper of general circulation in the city or town at least 24 hours, excluding Sundays and legal holidays, prior to such meetings. An emergency shall mean a situation where immediate undelayed action is deemed to be imperative by the chairman or presiding officer of the public body, who shall post a notice of the time and place of such meeting as soon as practicable, and shall employ whatever further means are reasonably available to inform the public that a meeting is to be held. The minutes of the meeting shall clearly spell out the need for the emergency meeting. When a meeting of a legislative committee is held, publication made pursuant to the rules of the house of representatives or the senate, whichever rules are appropriate, shall be sufficient notice. If the charter of any city or town or guidelines or rules of order of any public body require a broader public access to official meetings and records than herein described, such charter provisions or guidelines or rules of order shall take precedence over the requirements of this chapter. For the purposes of this paragraph, a business day means the hours of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding national and state holidays.
III. A public body may, but is not required to, allow one or more members of the body to participate in a meeting by electronic or other means of communication for the benefit of the public and the governing body, subject to the provisions of this paragraph.
(a) A member of the public body may participate in a meeting other than by attendance in person at the location of the meeting only when such attendance is not reasonably practical. Any reason that such attendance is not reasonably practical shall be stated in the minutes of the meeting.
(b) Except in an emergency, a quorum of the public body shall be physically present at the location specified in the meeting notice as the location of the meeting. For purposes of this subparagraph, an "emergency'' means that immediate action is imperative and the physical presence of a quorum is not reasonably practical within the period of time requiring action. The determination that an emergency exists shall be made by the chairman or presiding officer of the public body, and the facts upon which that determination is based shall be included in the minutes of the meeting.
(c) Each part of a meeting required to be open to the public shall be audible or otherwise discernable to the public at the location specified in the meeting notice as the location of the meeting. Each member participating electronically or otherwise must be able to simultaneously hear each other and speak to each other during the meeting, and shall be audible or otherwise discernable to the public in attendance at the meeting's location. Any member participating in such fashion shall identify the persons present in the location from which the member is participating. No meeting shall be conducted by electronic mail or any other form of communication that does not permit the public to hear, read, or otherwise discern meeting discussion contemporaneously at the meeting location specified in the meeting notice.
(d) Any meeting held pursuant to the terms of this paragraph shall comply with all of the requirements of this chapter relating to public meetings, and shall not circumvent the spirit and purpose of this chapter as expressed in RSA 91-A:1.
(e) A member participating in a meeting by the means described in this paragraph is deemed to be present at the meeting for purposes of voting. All votes taken during such a meeting shall be by roll call vote.

Source. 1967, 251:1. 1969, 482:1. 1971, 327:2. 1975, 383:1. 1977, 540:3. 1983, 279:1. 1986, 83:3. 1991, 217:2, eff. Jan. 1, 1992. 2003, 287:7, eff. July 18, 2003. 2007, 59:2, eff. July 31, 2007. 2008, 278:2, eff. July 1, 2008 at 12:01 a.m.; 303:4, eff. July 1, 2008.

91-A:3 Nonpublic Sessions. –
I. (a) Public bodies shall not meet in nonpublic session, except for one of the purposes set out in paragraph II. No session at which evidence, information, or testimony in any form is received shall be closed to the public, except as provided in paragraph II. No public body may enter nonpublic session, except pursuant to a motion properly made and seconded.
(b) Any motion to enter nonpublic session shall state on its face the specific exemption under paragraph II which is relied upon as foundation for the nonpublic session. The vote on any such motion shall be by roll call, and shall require the affirmative vote of the majority of members present.
(c) All discussions held and decisions made during nonpublic session shall be confined to the matters set out in the motion.
II. Only the following matters shall be considered or acted upon in nonpublic session:
(a) The dismissal, promotion, or compensation of any public employee or the disciplining of such employee, or the investigation of any charges against him or her, unless the employee affected (1) has a right to a meeting and (2) requests that the meeting be open, in which case the request shall be granted.
(b) The hiring of any person as a public employee.
(c) Matters which, if discussed in public, would likely affect adversely the reputation of any person, other than a member of the public body itself, unless such person requests an open meeting. This exemption shall extend to any application for assistance or tax abatement or waiver of a fee, fine, or other levy, if based on inability to pay or poverty of the applicant.
(d) Consideration of the acquisition, sale, or lease of real or personal property which, if discussed in public, would likely benefit a party or parties whose interests are adverse to those of the general community.
(e) Consideration or negotiation of pending claims or litigation which has been threatened in writing or filed against the public body or any subdivision thereof, or against any member thereof because of his or her membership in such public body, until the claim or litigation has been fully adjudicated or otherwise settled. Any application filed for tax abatement, pursuant to law, with any body or board shall not constitute a threatened or filed litigation against any public body for the purposes of this subparagraph.
(f) Consideration of applications by the adult parole board under RSA 651-A.
(g) Consideration of security-related issues bearing on the immediate safety of security personnel or inmates at the county correctional facilities by county correctional superintendents or their designees.
(h) Consideration of applications by the business finance authority under RSA 162-A:7-10 and 162-A:13, where consideration of an application in public session would cause harm to the applicant or would inhibit full discussion of the application.
(i) Consideration of matters relating to the preparation for and the carrying out of emergency functions, including training to carry out such functions, developed by local or state safety officials that are directly intended to thwart a deliberate act that is intended to result in widespread or severe damage to property or widespread injury or loss of life.
(j) Consideration of confidential, commercial, or financial information that is exempt from public disclosure under RSA 91-A:5, IV in an adjudicative proceeding pursuant to RSA 541 or RSA 541-A.
III. Minutes of meetings in nonpublic session shall be kept and the record of all actions shall be promptly made available for public inspection, except as provided in this section. Minutes and decisions reached in nonpublic session shall be publicly disclosed within 72 hours of the meeting, unless, by recorded vote of 2/3 of the members present, it is determined that divulgence of the information likely would affect adversely the reputation of any person other than a member of the public body itself, or render the proposed action ineffective, or pertain to terrorism, more specifically, to matters relating to the preparation for and the carrying out of all emergency functions, developed by local or state safety officials that are directly intended to thwart a deliberate act that is intended to result in widespread or severe damage to property or widespread injury or loss of life. This shall include training to carry out such functions. In the event of such circumstances, information may be withheld until, in the opinion of a majority of members, the aforesaid circumstances no longer apply.

Source. 1967, 251:1. 1969, 482:2. 1971, 327:3. 1977, 540:4. 1983, 184:1. 1986, 83:4. 1991, 217:3. 1992, 34:1, 2. 1993, 46:1, eff. June 7, 1993; 335:16, eff. June 29, 1993. 2002, 222:2, 3, eff. Jan. 1, 2003. 2004, 42:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2005. 2008, 303:4, eff. July 1, 2008. 2010, 206:1, eff. June 22, 2010.

Volunteers Needed for Habitat Restoration Work in Durham, Dover, Lee

The New Hampshire Fish and Game Department sent the following news release:

CONCORD, N.H. -- If you are interested in helping conserve one of New Hampshire's endangered species and promote native plants – and are able to spend a Saturday or two doing physical outdoor work, consider volunteering to help out with the New England cottontail project in the seacoast region of New Hampshire this spring.

Volunteers are needed to help plant native shrubs on several properties in seacoast New Hampshire (Durham, Dover and Lee) to restore habitat for the endangered New England cottontail rabbit -- a great volunteer and learning opportunity!

Volunteers should come prepared to work hard, and wear appropriate clothing and boots that will hold up well in mud and dirt; bring work gloves, water, and lunch! Snacks will be provided.

Choose from one (or more) of the following work dates:

• Saturday, April 21, 2012: 9 a.m. - 2 p.m.


• Saturday, April 28, 2012: 9 a.m. - 2 p.m.


• Saturday, May 5, 2012: 9 a.m. - 2 p.m.

To register as a volunteer, choose a date and email emma.carcagno@unh.edu. If you have questions, please contact Emma Carcagno at 603-862-2512.

New England cottontail work in New Hampshire is a cooperative effort of the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the University of New Hampshire, the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the N.H. Association of Conservation Districts.

Once common in our state, the New England cottontail population has dwindled over the last 50 years, so that today this unique native mammal faces possible extinction. Learn more at http://newenglandcottontail.org.

To learn more about this and other volunteer opportunities with the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department visit http://www.wildnh.com/Education/volunteer_news_opportunities.htm.

Yard Sale to Benefit ORHS Russian Exchange

Brian Ryan requested that we post the following flyer for tomorrow's community yard sale to benefit the high school Russian exchange trip.

Former Board Member Ann Wright on Morse Contract: "More Than He is Worth"

Former School Board member Ann Wright has asked that we post the following, which has also been sent to the current Board as well as to FORE and ORCSD Clean Slate for publication:

Dear ORCSD School Board,

I have recently discovered the details of the contract the former board unanimously agreed to with Mr. James Morse, and, frankly, I am appalled. A salary of $145,500, is highly excessive, considering our current Superintendent, who is just as qualified as Mr. Morse, is earning only $125,000. As a matter of fact, this salary, $145,500, will make Mr. Morse the second highest paid superintendent in the State of NH. Why would the ORCSD merit this distinction? We are not the second largest district, nor are we one where the superintendent must deal with multiple boards. Mr. Morse was earning $131,000 this year as the Superintendent of the Portland School District, which is much larger and more complex than ours. Did he truly deserve a raise of $14,000 to move to an easier job? I also see that the former board has given Mr. Morse six weeks paid vacation, far in excess of what our current or past superintendents received.

This past budget season teachers and administrators were begging the board to keep vital positions, and the board responded, that it was time, "we tightened our belts" (Ann Lane), even suggesting that students cobble together their own furniture in wood shop to save the district a few dollars (Ann Lane). Suddenly the purse strings spring open and our new superintendent is given a contract worth far more than we can afford, than we budgeted for, and than he is worth. Yet our bus drivers and paraprofessionals were asked to make salary and benefit concessions because "we need to all tighten our belts".

I am stunned by the poor judgment of the former board, and the three remaining members. If this sweetheart contract now threatens to affect jobs, services and programs in our schools, I will hold all seven of you accountable, as well as our Interim Superintendent. The poor judgment of a few should absolutely not affect the education of our children.

Sincerely,

Ann Wright

ORCSD School Board Chair and Vice Chair

The School Board tonight elected Maria Barth Chair, and Tom Newkirk Vice Chair.

Oyster River Takes Top Honors in Math Competition

Oyster River High School students won their category at the 40th Annual New Hampshire High School Mathematics Competition--congratulations!

For details, click here: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2012/03/20/40th_annual_nh_math_competition_draws_nearly_600/

An Open Letter to the OR Community

Durham resident Phil Isenberg has asked that we post the following:

I am writing to support the letter of Jayson Seaman (see comments to “ORSCD Election Results: Unofficial Totals”, March 13, 2012) and to repeat his call for an end to anonymous (and pseudonymous) entries in this blog. I feel that such a step would go a long way to reduce the nasty name-calling and empty posturing that sometimes appears here, and help a return to civil discourse on the issues facing this community.

I’m sure that all members of the Oyster River community would agree that this past year or two have been a very contentious and difficult time. The effort to work toward resolution of strongly-felt and often emotional arguments has frequently been undermined by questionable statements or accusations put forward on this blog by people who have chosen not to be recognized by name. Obviously, not all anonymous entries have been harmful, but there have certainly been a few people (one cannot tell how many) who have used the opportunity to post here to incite bitter and divisive attitudes without having to take any responsibility for their words. Such posts are equivalent to expressing disagreement with another person by walking up to their house, throwing a rock through their window, and then running away. Such actions are sneaky, cowardly, and ultimately no better than vandalism. They should have no place in a blog that purports to be a community forum.

Tom Bebbington has replied to Mr. Seaman’s letter, saying that their current policy of allowing pseudonyms is “the best we can do”, given limitations of time and technology. He also states concerns of censorship, claiming that he does not want to delete posts simply because they contain “things we may not like”. Maybe so, but perhaps the rest of the community can help him in this task.

I suggest, in the absence of the ability of the administrators to sufficiently monitor this blog, that those of us who deplore the tactics of hidden provocateurs simply refuse to recognize the posts that are not signed by the writer’s full name and town of residence. Anonymous posts would simply be challanged with a “Who are you?” Meanwhile the content of the post would be ignored unless and until the writer claims ownership and responsibility for the words he or she insisted on sharing. This policy cannot be confused with censorship, since the content is not considered at all. If people feel strongly enough to write in, and are willing to stand by their words through clearly identifying themselves, a reasonable dialogue is much more likely to result.

Who is “Sore Loser”? Who is “OR”? Who is “StopDavidTaylor”? Why are you hiding? If you want to make a positive contribution rather than continuing to be part of the problem, stop throwing rocks and join the conversation.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Phil Isenberg
Durham

Letter in Fosters

The following letter appeared in Fosters on Saturday, March 17, and is republished here with their kind permission.

With civility

To the editor: I am writing to thank all of those in the Oyster River Cooperative School District who helped with my campaign. I will do my best to be worthy of your great loyalty. And I want to thank all of the voters who came out on a beautiful Tuesday to cast their votes for me and those I ran with. I see this vote as a mandate to conduct school business openly and with civility. When we disagree — as we will — let it be on issues, based in fact, and not about personalities. I also see the close vote on the budget as a clear message that we need to be vigilant on costs: to be willing to ask hard questions, and make hard decisions. I look forward to this challenge.

Tom Newkirk
Durham

Humble Brag

Hey, we just hit 250 "likes" on Facebook!

Can't help myself...

--Tom Bebbington

Faux News on the ORCSD Clean Slate Blog

ORCSD resident Marion Kelley asked that we post the following:

On his self-proclaimed "totally biased" website, Orcsdcleanslate, Dean Rubine published a doctored photo (Editor's note: it is included above) of the recently defeated Jim Kach as a criminal behind bars. This attempt at humor is in poor taste and questionable, considering the repeated posturing from the Rubine/Sample household concerning the need for exemplary role modeling for our District's children. The answer begs the question: If a middle school student in our district were to post on Facebook a doctored photo of a child they have publiclyand repeatedly denounced, would this student be censored by the school? Would it be OK for this child to post a mean picture if he or she felt morally justified in his or her disagreement? Apparently, in some circles and some households, this is the accepted standard. As Dean has pointed out, our children learn acceptable and unacceptable behavior from adults. And as has been noted, this district really does have an adult problem.

ORCSD Election Results, Unofficial Totals

Article 3 – Oyster River Paraprofessionals & Support Staff Contract Ratification
Yes – 2072
No – 1024

Article 4 – Oyster River Bus Drivers’ Association Contract Ratification
Yes – 2309
No – 797

Article 5 – Approval of various Oyster River Sustainability Committee Initiatives
Yes – 1972
No - 1089

Article 6 – Shall we continue the Oyster River Sustainability Committee?
Yes – 2147
No - 900

Article 7 – Approval of the Oyster River School District Operational Budget
Yes – 1675
No- 1332

ORCSD Election Results: Unofficial Totals

Moderator: Richard Laughton: 2345 votes

School Board, Durham: Al Howland: 2228 votes

School Board, Lee: Maria Barth, 2020; Henry Brackett, 835

School Board, Madbury: Ed Charle, 1953; Jim Kach, 822

School Board, At Large: Tom Newkirk, 2441; Peter MacDonald, 413

Unofficial Results: ORCSD School Board elections

Unofficial reports indicate that Tom Newkirk, Ed Charle, Maria Barth, and Al Howland have won seats on the Oyster River School Board, defeating incumbents Jim Kach and Henry Brackett.

The same reports also indicate that all warrant articles passed.

Updates will be provided as they become available.

UPDATE: Unofficial Report: DPL Bond PASSES

Unofficial totals: 1424 in favor, 481 opposed.

Earlier report below:

Unofficial reports indicate that the bond for the new Durham Public Library has passed by a 3-1 margin.

I will report additional details as I receive them.

--Tom Bebbington

Letter in Fosters

The following letter appeared today in Fosters; it is republished here with their kind permission:

Brackett, Kach

To the editor:

Elections for the ORCSD School Board will take place on Tuesday, March 13. I urge residents of the district to consider all the current board has done in the past year to help improve the education of the students; create a sustainable budget; and build working relationships among the district's leadership team, the superintendent, and themselves.

Two current board members are running for re-election to the School Board: current Chairman Henry Brackett and my husband, Jim Kach. I urge you to vote for these gentlemen to allow them to continue the positive direction in which the board finds itself.

Change takes time and under Henry Brackett's leadership and the current board members including Jim Kach, the district has made many positive moves toward that change. This has been accomplished despite distractions by a vocal group of residents. Please visit Jim Kach's web site at http://www.jimkach.blogspot.com and read about these accomplishments.

Both my husband, Jim Kach, and I would like to thank those residents who have taken the time and effort to call, email, or greet him at places around the district. It has been reassuring to hear the appreciation for the board and Jim and Henry in particular that the board is moving in the right direction.

To all residents of the ORCSD — please vote on the 13th and thank you for considering Jim Kach and Henry Brackett as returning board members.

Nancy Kach

Madbury

Tom, Ed, Al and Maria are not beholden to FORE

NOTE: Dean Rubine asked that this be posted to the blog.  It is gladly reprinted below in its entirety.  Thank you Dean for the contribution.

There’s been some talk that Tom Newkirk, Ed Charle, Al Howland, and Maria Barth are the candidates from FORE, or have some special relationship to FORE, or in some other way are a continuation of past boards that were dominated by FORE members.   I want to state in no uncertain terms that they are not – they are independent from FORE and have stated many times that they will tru ly listen to all factions within the community.  Each of them has expressed the desire to reduce the burden on taxpayers while maintaining excellent education.  I know Dr. Charle has expressed support for a plan to give the superintendent wide latitude to reduce or hold the budget flat.

I first met Dr. Ed Charle after he put in his name in to run.   When I asked him, he had only the vaguest idea of what FORE was, and didn't really have much of an idea of the recent history of the school board at all.   It’s ludicrous to think that somehow he’s in cahoots with FORE, or owes them anything, or whatever other silly notions are being bandied about. .  Dr. Charle is a fresh face, with no stake in the battles of the past.  He is committed to looking at school board issues objectively from all angles.

The same goes for Maria Barth.   She’s my neighbor, and I talked to her shortly after she decided to run.  She didn't know who or what a FORE was.  I asked her why she wanted to run.  She said she’d recently become aware of some of the questionable doings of the current board, and said, “Someone ought to do something about this.”  She said whenever she told her mother “someone ought to do something” her mother would reply “if you really mean it, that someone should be you.”  This simple idea has led Maria to a life of public service, including 11 years as chairman of the Kittery school board.  Luckily for us, she's running for our board this time.   She too has no stake in the battles of the past, and will bring a fresh, experienced perspective to our issues.   I know that she has initiated meetings with members of the community from all sides of the debate.  I am certain she brings no agenda to the table beyond doing what is best for the schools and the community.

I’ve met Al Howland and Tom Newkirk a couple of times, but I’ve never asked them, so I can’t comment in detail about their relationship with FORE.  I checked the FORE website, and neither of them are members.   I’ve heard both talk passionately about listening to all of the community, of healing the community, of bringing us together, and so on.   I am confident that they are not lackeys for FORE or any other group.

As I hope people know by now, I call all four candidates the T.E.A.M. – Tom, Ed, Al, and Maria.   I repeat it over and over because in the voting booth I want voters to be able to recall their names, or at least their first initials to match against the choices.   I’m assuming many voters are like I was last year – I was oblivious the entire year, and on Election Day I spent a few minutes on the Internet figuring out who and what to vote for.    Anything that helps voters remember who's who is good.

Many members of the community, including members of FORE, are justifiably concerned with the poor judgment shown by the incumbents, whether it be the divisive tweets, the lawbreaking, or any of the myriad of actions that have given rise to so much angst this past year.   It’s only natural that members of FORE, who have been quite vocal when they perceive injustice, would support the candidates running against the incumbents.  It helps that those candidates happen to be a great group, and I am really hopeful they can get the district back on track.   Many people support the T.E.A.M., so I don’t think anything in particular should be read into the fact that some members of FORE also support them.

Let me also say that I myself have nothing to with FORE, other than occasionally reading a post.   I’m not a member.   My wife is not a member.   I’ve been trying to remember if I've ever commented on a FORE post – I can’t recall any in particular, but maybe once or twice.  I've commented far more frequently here on oysterrivercommunity.blogsplot.com.   I am my own person, and I have my own issues with the board.   My main concern is Mr. Kach’s tweets - I think they are vile and divisive, and unworthy of a representative of our district.  I am hopeful that Tuesday (that may be today, readers) the voters will agree.   Similarly, Chairman Brackett’s failure to condemning the tweets is a serious failure of leadership, right up there with his serial lawbreaking when he engaged a secret lawyer who sent secret bills to his house, and he held secret meetings and secret votes to do a secret buyout, the public’s right to know be damned.   This is not my idle speculation, but the decisions of two New Hampshire judges in two separate cases.  Election Day is the day we get to replace them with the T.E.A.M. – vote for Tom, Ed, Al and Maria.

So, rather than a whisper campaign about this candidate being part of that group, let’s make the election about the very serious issues facing the board.   Whether you like the current board or not, I think we can all agree that last year has been difficult.  Mr. Kach and Mr. Brackett have had their chance, and now everybody’s mad and nobody trusts each other.  I think the best hope for the district is to put all that behind us and move ahead with fresh faces.

Whatever the outcome of the election, I for one am looking forward to never again typing another word about Jim Kach’s tweets or the board’s lawsuits.   One way or another, the community will decide on Election Day, and I will respect that decision.   Until then, there’s still time for voters to read more of my musings on the school board and the election at ORCSDcleanslate.org.    Thanks for reading this far everybody, and don’t forget to VOTE.

Very truly yours,

                       

Dean Rubine, Lee

Letters in Fosters

The following letters were published in Fosters on March 12; they are republished here with their kind permission.

The facts

To the editor:

I was on the Oyster River School Board in August of 2010, when Jim Kach was appointed to fill a vacated seat. His easy going, friendly demeanor and his claim of having no agenda other than to serve his community convinced me to give him a chance. Before he had barely time to interact with the superintendent he voted against a nomination the superintendent put forth. This vote of no confidence was unusual for a newcomer just stepping up to the plate.

At the Candidates Forum in 2011, Mr. Kach stated he would support the hiring of a permanent principal for the high school. But on April 14, just after his election, he voted no on the nomination that came forward, a vote that directly led to the need to hire an interim.In June of 2011 Mr. Kach declared that every dollar of the unreserved fund balance should be returned to the voters. At the very next meeting (June 30), he voted to spend $185K to buy out the last year of Superintendent Howard Colter's contract. The money came from the unreserved fund balance.

Mr. Kach says he supports technology and yet on Dec. 7, 2011, after approving cuts in technology hardware for our teachers and students, he voted to cut even further. Mr. Kach does not follow the will of the voters. On September 21st, 2012, he voted no to expend the $15K that voters approved to help heal the tension in the district. I've watched Mr. Kach minimize concerns about his or the Board's behavior. About his personal tweets that offended many in the community: they were attempts humor and he didn't mean to offend. And of the first of two lawsuits against the Board: merely a matter of 3000 emails. When asked how he would prevent this from happening in the future, he quipped, "Hire a better lawyer."Such attempts at humor are fine for shooting the breeze over a cup of coffee, but they are not what one seeks from an elected school official. We need awareness of and responsibility for the impact of one's actions on others.

Voters in all three communities can cast a vote for the Madbury race between Jim Kach and Ed Charle. Eighteen months ago I gave Jim Kach my vote. This time my vote will go to Ed Charle, a civic-minded individual who sees the facts and knows our community deserves better.

JoAnn Portalupi
Lee

For Charle

To the editor:

This is a letter of support for Edwin Charle, M.D., for his interest in and application for the Oyster River School Board. I have known Dr. Charle for over 25 years and have had the privilege to work directly with him for the past six years. He is a competent and caring physician caregiver who started and managed Salmon Falls Family Health since 1989. He is a Board Certified Family Practitioner with sub specialties in gerontology — caring for the elderly and used to complicated medical management problems. How does this relate to our school board elected officials? We need good and thoughtful listeners. We need Ed's patience to ferret out complicated school board issues and to show the same kind of respect for teachers and administrators that has been clearly lacking in recent months. He understands and expresses humility and compassion. He has administrated a successful and respected family medical practice with many professional employees and support staff. Despite lack of knowledge of all school board related issues, he is a quick learner and earnest in his desire to digest all the issues. I believe that his common sense approach to problem solving is the right type of leadership quality we desperately need at this time. Please support Dr. Ed Charle by voting March 13th at Oyster River High School. You will never regret your choice in voting for this well-educated, yet humble and thoughtful resident of Madbury, New Hampshire.

Richard Renner

Durham


For OR board

To the editor:

It is time to gather around our shared commitment to the education and well-being of the young people in our community and bring a fresh and disciplined perspective to the Oyster River school board. Please vote for Tom Newkirk, Maria Barth, Ed Charlé, and Al Howland on Tuesday, March 13. They are the candidates who will be responsive to the diverse voices within our school community and who can restore the trust and discipline necessary to foster a climate of stability, productive dialogue, creative energy, and fiscal responsibility in the district.

Tom Schram

Durham

Letters in Fosters

The following letters were published in Fosters on Sunday, March 11, and are republished here with their kind permission.

For Charlé

To the editor:

I want to ask the voters of Oyster River to support Ed Charlé as a candidate for the OR school board. Ed has been a friend of mine for many years. He has the energy to work hard, the curiosity to learn quickly as a new member of the board, the patience to thoroughly explore the issues he will face, and the tolerance to listen respectfully to all points of view — and then to thoughtfully consider them as he participates in school board duties. These are the same skills he puts to effective use in his career as a physician in family practice. During my 30 years as a teacher at the Oyster River Middle School, I had numerous occasions to discuss educational topics with Ed. He has always shown a sincere interest in how the school district operates, and he has frequently offered insightful contributions to conversations about how we could do things more effectively.

I have seen Ed work with kids and adults — from all walks of life. He has the ability to talk with people of varying ages and backgrounds and to do so with interest and concern, but without condescension. Since school board members represent the entire range of students and taxpayers in this district, board members have to be flexible, responsive, and humane. They also need to be able to interact with each other and with members of the public in a consistently courteous manner.

Running a school district, while balancing the needs of students with the burdens of taxpayers, is a huge job. Ed Charlé can work hard to effectively represent us. Let's give him the chance.

John Parsons

Durham


Vote for Maria

To the editor:

I am writing to urge you to vote for Maria Barth to represent Lee on the Oyster River School Board in the upcoming election, March 13.

She brings 17 years experience of leadership on the Kittery Town Council and School Board there. Also, Maria is no newcomer to the Oyster River district, having educated her children in the Oyster River schools while she and her husband lived in Durham. She is an advocate for public education, stating that it is the foundation of our democracy. It provides the people and innovation we need to sustain our competitiveness in the world.

Maria will strive for fairness, openness, civility and adherence to the law in performance of all board functions. Maria will oversee an educational system that helps students acquire the necessary skills to address the challenging demands of an ever-changing world.

Vote for Maria Barth for Oyster River School Board and help to increase the confidence of the community in our schools, teachers and students.

Sharon Meeker

Lee


Yes to Kach

To the editor:

According to the Oyster River Cooperative School District (ORCSD), the cost per student, and therefore, property taxes in Durham, Lee, and Madbury are going up again while enrollment in our schools is declining. I urge all voters to go to the polls on Tuesday, March 13 and vote "no" on Articles 5, 6, and 7. Please vote "Yes" to re-elect Henry Brackett and Jim Kach, the only candidates focused on reversing these trends.

Those who support raising taxes in our district have been quite vocal about an old, meaningless, Twitter account. They are also publicly expressing resentment at School Board meetings to reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to our country's flag; comparing it to Nazi Germany's forced salute to Hitler (a refusal to salute Hitler would have resulted in immediate death). These two items are intentional distractions from the financial mess created in our school district over the past 12 years.

The rising school budget is not sustainable while enrollments continue to drop. More families are moving out of our school district than are moving in. According to our own district's projections, 400 fewer students will be enrolled in ORCSD in ten years.

Please vote "no" to the school budget. Say "no" to higher taxes. Vote "yes" to re-elect Henry Brackett and Jim Kach.

Keith Mistretta

Durham


About FORE

To the editor:

People and organizations can claim anything, but the proof is in the results of their actions. FORE claims to be for education, for the students. The results of their efforts do not support their claims.

The ORHS has lost about 140 students in the last 10 years, yet added 10 more teachers. The high school is now rated as # 4 or 6 depending on the source.

The student teacher ratio is 15:1. The top three high schools in the state have student teacher ratios of 18/19:1. Oyster River spends over $15,000 per student per year, but (including food and transportation that totals more than $19,000). The top three high schools spend between $12,000, and $13,000.

FORE says it is for education, but they say nothing about affordable education. They ignore the fact that the school board faces two distinct issues ¨C education, and affordability. The board has a responsibility to the land owners/taxpayers to protect their interests by providing the best education that the tax payers can afford.

The most blatant display of FORE ignorance is that they always ignore facts. In fact they seem to enjoy flouting their opinions in total disregard of any factual material. They could be effective if they could contribute something positive to the real education of our students instead of constantly being negative.

Jeff Kolter

Durham


Follow RTK

To the editor:

Two judges have ruled that the Oyster River School Board under Chairman Henry Brackett violated the Right-to-Know (RTK) law. At recent candidate forums, Henry Brackett and Jim Kach refused to acknowledge their guilt.

Because of these repeated violations, the judge enjoined the board. Future RTK violations risk contempt of court and possible jail time, confirming these are not frivolous technical issues. Both decisions detail over 40 pages of violations: http://www.orol.org/rtk/

Instead of admitting his guilt, Brackett said the first case had been appealed. That was patently untrue. Though they avoided answering the question, their true sentiments shone through.

Brackett and Kach said they just followed expert advice. But, last April the board entered nonpublic session against explicit legal advice. And, no experts were involved in illegal interim superintendent interviews. Just Brackett, Kach and Megan Turnbull breaking the law.

At the forum, Kach quipped that they should "hire a better lawyer." He didn't mention that they failed to do just that. Even though Ann Wright suggested lawyers with school law expertise, the Board chose a friend of Brackett for the superintendent buyout. Even worse, Brackett had the lawyer and a PR firm send invoices to his home, hiding them from RTK requests.

Jim Kach did admit that Brackett delayed searching emails until after he was sued. They did not admit they violated RTK laws when they decided Colter's buyout at meetings held with lawyers. Neither acknowledged the secret interviews of candidates at the Police Station were illegal. In fact, in June Brackett outright denied he held these interviews.

I expected to settle out of court. The board decided to fight the suit in court, wasting about $60,000, which is in addition to the $185,000 already wasted to buy out one remaining year of Superintendent Colter's contract.

It is time for the voters to elect a Board that will work for the community, not hide from it. Vote March 13 for four new candidates who pledge to follow RTK: Maria Barth, Tom Newkirk, Ed Charlé and Al Howland.

David K. Taylor

Durham


Vote for Ed Charlé

To the editor:

On March 13, residents in the Oyster River School District will elect candidates to fill the four available seats on the School Board. I would like to encourage voters in Durham, Lee, and Madbury to consider casting their vote for Ed Charlé for the open Madbury seat. His experiences and fresh perspective make him an ideal candidate at this critical point in time.

Ed Charlé's career as a family physician brings him in contact with patients of all ages. Over his career he has treated many children and young adults. His medical background will not only help inform the board's decisions when evaluating school district health policy and programs, but will assist in communicating this information to the broader school community. His knowledge of physical health and nutrition will be useful as the ORCSD finalizes its wellness policy.

Through his practice and work at Langdon Place and Riverside Rest Home, Dr. Charlé works with many patients who are on a fixed income and he is keenly aware of the need to be cost conscious. He will be a careful steward of our financial resources, mindful of both quality and cost.

Most importantly, Ed Charlé is a respectful listener who takes time to understand situations. He works with people of different ages, genders, and backgrounds, accepting their life choices and thinking carefully about what they have to say. He is an advocate for his patients and will be an advocate for our schools. He comes with no preset agendas or notions.

Ed is untainted by any of the recent disagreements surrounding our school district, and is a person who will listen to all of the people in our community and consider their concerns and suggestions with an open mind. I urge you to vote for him.

Lorna Jacobsen

Madbury


Strong schools

To the editor:

It is vital that citizens in the Oyster River School District turn out to vote to support and strengthen our schools on March 13. We need a new, fresh School Board as well as continuity in funding for vital school services.

There is a move afoot to reject the proposed school budget (Article 7). Without a budget in place, however, our district will be thrown into chaos, and who will suffer above all?

The children, of course. It is important to know that the budget on the ballot is not an increase — it is a flat budget, which means that the schools actually have less to work with than last year due to fixed costs. This flat or reduced budget is the result of a compromise, forged in response to vocal demands for budget cutting, and later validated by voters at the deliberative session a few weeks ago.

Whether you are in favor of increasing funding for basic district needs and new initiatives, or you want to slash the schools' funding, we all must unite to pass the budget on the ballot.

The alternative is grim and will only result in more rancor in the community as well as lost opportunities for our children. Vote yes on Article 7.

Julia Rodriguez

Durham

Letters in Fosters

The following letters were published in Fosters on Saturday, March 10, and are republished here with their kind permission.

Political ad

To the editor: Ms. Bulfinch could never be confused with a reporter, nor a journalist. She makes an excellent propagandist filling her columns with innuendo. Her typical propaganda filled blurb in Thursday's Foster's, claims contentiousness in the ORCSD board. It is nothing of the kind. The board has worked well, and hard to work in a business like manner creating an atmosphere conducive to growth of our education system. The contentiousness has come from outside forces such as David Taylor, who for selfish reasons is an enemy of education, taken it upon himself to be a bully, and thorn in the side of progress, and FORE which has done everything in their power to inhibit the smooth work of the board.

Past boards supported by FORE are responsible for not having a Clerk of the Works to protect the district during the over sized $26 million expansion of the high school, and resulting in us taxpayers spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to correct sloppy workmanship and poor design. The same boards, and board members, while the high school was declining in enrollment by 140 or so students increased the number of faculty by 10.

The true purpose of Ms Bulfinch's article is made clear in her last sentence. It is a blatant negative political ad against incumbent board members. If you do not want to see your property taxes continue to soar, and want to reap the fruits of the efforts of this foreword looking board, you have to re-elect Henry Bracket, and Jim Kach

Shelley Sanborn
Lee

Keep improving!

To the editor: Henry Brackett and the new board of the Oyster River School has done a great job since 2009 in moving the schools management forward and has found a great new Superintendent to start this summer. The Board has opened up the lines of communication, been open in their operation and moving to far more responsible practices. To let the old board come back to take control will put us back to the previous irresponsible spending and lack of accountability that we had for the years before 2009. The voters can't complain if they let the clock be turned back to the old days, it's up to them to keep Henry Brackett and keep moving forward.

Roger Rice
Lee

Brackett, Kach

To the editor: As a long time resident of Lee, I have watched as past school boards opted to go the easy route when it came to responsible oversight of the fiduciary responsibilities. Over the years, budget after budget, monies were allocated without a clearly articulated plan on how the spending would result in a better school for our children. Instead, these past boards seemed to follow a simplistic tax and spend approach to the budget, where more of both is better. Each one of us clearly sees the result of this in our tax bills. It seemed that this was the inevitable outcome, as a very small but organized, vocal group had become very adept at influencing the board and the budget, primarily at the deliberative session.

Clearly this focus on increased spending year after year is not sustainable, especially as student enrollment continues to decline. Equally clear, the taxpayers of Lee, Durham and Madbury have finally elected a board which has proved itself to be responsible both to our students and to our taxpayers. This board presented a budget that was lower than last year's budget, a necessary first step for a school system with fewer students going forward. Unfortunately at the last deliberative session, that small but organized group had the votes to overturn the responsible budget, and added unnecessary spending back to the budget, undermining the good work of the current board.

Remember this when you vote between the default budget and the inflated budget, neither of which was proposed by our current board, both which are higher than what the board proposed. Most importantly however, vote to continue the work of a fiscally responsible board. Vote for Henry Brackett and James Kach.

Howie Hoff
Lee

Vote for Barth

To the editor: I moved to Lee in 2006 after living in Kittery for 20 years. My two sons spent their early years in the Kittery Schools, but both have since graduated from ORHS. I have been following the ORCSD school board with growing disappointment and concern. I am dismayed to see the current board conduct itself in a less than positive manner that emanates an air of divisiveness. This not only affects the students and staff, but the entire community. It hurts as all: the children going to school and property owners whose home values will be negatively impacted when the school system is not regarded with respect.

The school board has the charge of promoting excellence in education through thoughtful decision-making, open and respectful communication and being able to view the issues at an arms length. Maria Barth served as chair of the Kittery School board for eleven years. When I saw that she was entering the realm of public service once again, I was thrilled. Many in the community may not know what a wonderful choice they have in Maria Barth. I ask you all to take a few moments to visit www.mariabarth.org. She will bring an unpretentious dignity, vast knowledge of the workings of committees and an ability to communicate with others. Most importantly, she has a solid core of values committed to public education and the skills needed to help our district prepare our children to succeed in the new world we live in. I stand behind Maria Barth with total confidence and support her with a great sense of pride in knowing her history of public service.

Blair LaBella
Lee

Deceptive

To the editor: I am writing to inform you of what I believe are the deceptive practices of OR board member Jim Kach. Mr. Kach is operating a personal web site with a domain name "orcsd.net." As you know, the official district web site is orcsd.org. Anyone who accidentally types the .net instead of .org will be directed to a Mr. Kach's site. Since he is currently on the board, this gives the impression that his personal site represents the district. The tiny link to the "ORCSD Official Site" hardly corrects the matter.

In addition, Mr. Kach's personal web site is deceptive as it represents itself as a news site ("Oyster River School Board Election News,") when it is in fact Mr. Kach's re-election campaign site, and contains no news about the district — or about the school board elections. It contains only propaganda promoting Mr. Kach's re-election. Furthermore, it is hardly "news" since it does not even contain the first return when one Google's Mr. Kach: his infamous, bigoted, disgusting twitter feed.

This is not news; it is not news about the school board elections; and it is not about ORCSD. It is propaganda promoting Mr. Kach.

I ask you to investigate this matter to see whether Mr. Kach's conduct is in compliance with board policy regarding the conduct of its members, including your own code of ethics. The current board has been convicted by the New Hampshire courts twice of deceiving the public by violating our Right-to-Know laws when it conducted secret meetings to buy out the former superintendent, and when it conducted a secret ballot that is explicitly prohibited by law. More deception is a disservice to the community, and Mr. Kach needs to stop it now. Please ask Mr. Kach to change his domain name to something more appropriate.

Ruth Sample
Lee

About Barth

To the editor: I would like to take this opportunity to show my strong support for Maria Barth for Oyster River School Board. We have known Maria since she moved to Lee. She is an extremely generous woman who has opened her home and farm to our family. When you meet Maria you are instantly impressed by her open mind and honesty. Maria is never quick to judge and always encourages people to listen to all sides of any issue. She is clearly a dedicated individual devoted to the causes of public education and the environment. One only needs to look to the town of Kittery to see what phenomenal contributions she brought to the town with her years of school board experience and volunteer work. Recently it was brought to my attention that current school board member Jim Kach's campaign website is orcsd.net. The district's website is orcsd.org. You don't need to go far to draw the conclusion that our current school board members resort to tactics of deception and it is time to draw the line against this type of behavior. Please vote for Maria Barth on Tuesday, March 13.

Selvi Lampman
Lee

In response

To the editor: Mr. Mosher may think his arguments logical, which they are not, and he omits many vital ingredients. One vital ingredient — affordable.

Can we as taxpayers afford to expand the programs offered in the high school? Can we afford to have classes such as video games with only four students? The answer to that last question is a resounding — no. This type of class is something for a club, not taking up classroom/very expensive teacher time just because the school was way oversized despite demographers projections, and has wasted space. Another ingredient — Class size has nothing to do with academic success. There is more than adequate proof of this all over the world.

Yet another ingredient — How can Mr. Mosher contest the projections of the demographers. We only have 636 in district students in the high school now.

Where's the logic in denying the declining enrollment? The first grade class that came in this year is smaller than the one before it, and based on current preschool students the one to enter next year will be smaller than the one this year.

Uninformed comments are hardly grounds for an argument.

Arthur Bradbury
Lee

Cost of Taylor Lawsuit: $58,516.53. Defense of Principle: Priceless.

Well, now we know exactly what it cost to defend against the FORE/Taylor lawsuit: $58,516.53. That figure has been helpfully provided by David Taylor himself, with a detailed accounting available on his website (http://www.orol.org/rtk/buyout/events/invoices.html).

Taylor notes that "most of these costs could have been saved if the Board was willing to settle. Prior to September, the case was moving to settle, however the Board decided unilaterally to go to court..."

Leaving aside the fact that it is a logical impossibility for the defendant in a lawsuit to "unilaterally" decide to go to court, I'd argue this was money well-spent. The sole intent of the Taylor suit, and of FORE's full-throated support of it, was to derail the Superintendent hiring process. This they failed to do, which is a win for our children, their parents, and indeed everyone except that disaffected minority who believe that they have the right to run the District as they, and they alone, see fit.

Thank goodness our elected officials did decide to go to court, thus denying FORE veto power over decisions rightfully reserved for the people's elected representatives. In the grand scheme of things, $58,516.53 is a small price to pay to ensure that our District remains a democracy, rather than becoming an oligarchy.

--Tom Bebbington

Letters in Fosters

Today's edition of Foster's contains a number of letters relating to the upcoming School Board elections; they are republished here with the kind permission of the editor:

OR, wake up

To the editor: Get Kim Clark's Community Commentary which appeared in Foster's on Feb. 17. Tell everyone you know to read it. She exposes David Taylor for what he is.

Mr. Taylor served on the Oyster River School Board for 12 years. Those years were the most fiscally irresponsible years in the history of the Oyster River School System. From 2000 to 2009, the cost per student increased from $374 about the state average to $3,472 over the state average, nearly a 1000% increase. And with all those funds expended the number of our seniors going on to four-year colleges did not increase one single percent.

Did you know that during the decade between 2000 and 2009 the Oyster River School Board spent $48 million of taxpayer money over the state average? And this expenditure happened while our student enrollment was declining, not increasing.

With this unexplainable and terrible waste of money, our test scores and school system rank among the State schools did not increase.

I have talked with school systems all over the country, from California, to Michigan, to Florida, to Maryland, and they are unanimously astounded at our cost, which is now $19,000 per student per year.

Since 2009, the School Board has worked to slow the financial bleeding, without reducing the quality of our school system. Changes have been made and a tighter ship has been established.

Do not support the FORE candidates. FORE is the brainchild of David Taylor and if their candidates gain control of the Board it will return to the same fiscal irresponsibility that marked Mr. Taylor's tenure on the Board.

In all the published commentary, none of the FORE people have ever justified the wasted money. They use distraction, innuendos and rationalization rather than facts. The one thing they return to over and over are the Right-to Know violations by the present School Board. As Mrs. Clark stated in her commentary, "There were many instances of Right to Know violations when Mr. Taylor was a part of the Board". But, no one took any of those violations to court. However, Mr. Taylor knew where the weak spots were, so went after them. Don't his law suits make you wonder? Has anyone asked about the processes used during the previous years from 2000 to 2009 in selecting School Administrators?

With improved leadership in the hands of the new Superintendent, Dr. Morse, keep the School Board moving in the direction of fiscal integrity by re-electing Henry Brackett and Jim Kach.

Roger Speidel
Durham

Time for thanks

To the editor: It is time to thank every member of the current Oyster River School Board for their hard work and dedication, serving the students, teachers, staff and citizens of the district. They deserve our appreciation for what they have accomplished despite the countless, vitriolic efforts of a small group of disgruntled citizens to discredit them. Not one of them knowingly violated the law and all of them have worked tirelessly for the good of the district. They have guided us through a transition period with excellent new administrators — interim superintendent, high school principal, director of instruction/SpEd, and director of food services. They initiated the following: 1) transportation study to increase the efficiency and cost effectiveness of our district transportation; 2) facilities study to enable the district to develop a 5-year plan for necessary improvements to district facilities; 3) energy audit of the high school which revealed many areas in need of improvement. They actively participated in the budget process, seeking cost containment and reductions that reflect declining enrollments. However, they were overruled by those present at the budget deliberative session on February 7, when $150,500 was added to the FY13 General Fund, increasing the proposed budget to $38,360,788. Finally, they have successfully hired a new superintendent who will bring valuable experience and new vision to serve everyone effectively.

Jocelyn O'Quinn, stepping down after three years, tirelessly voiced need for a long-range strategic plan to guide the district with any new programs and declining enrollments. Ann Wright resigned in January after two years trying to preserve reason on the Board. Jim Kach and Henry Brackett seek re-election, demonstrating their willingness to continue to protect the high quality of the district's education programs while serving the needs of ALL its students — they deserve your votes March 13. Krista Butts, Ann Lane, and Megan Turnbull intend to continue preserving our excellent district programs, helping develop a strategic education plan, while making the district more fiscally responsible. Please take time to shake the hand of every school board member while saying, "Thank you!"
Anne Knight
Durham

Letters in Fosters

Today's edition of Foster's contains a number of letters relating to the upcoming School Board elections; they are republished here with the kind permission of the editor:

Kach writes of accomplishments

To the editor: Over the past year, the Oyster River School Board has made significant positive achievements. I have served on the board during this time, and speaking as an individual board member, I would like to share some of the many accomplishments of this board.

— The board made several important decisions regarding leadership in the district this past year. An interim superintendent, Leon Levesque, started working for the district in July. Todd Allen, the interim high school principal was named permanent principal. A new Director of Instruction and Special Education Programs, Phyllis Schlichter, was hired. With Leon Levesque, I have seen a new spirit of cooperation and civility within the board, with our administrators, and residents. This is despite the legal challenges with which the board has dealt.

— The board has controlled the budget while maintaining programs and educational quality

— The completion of the district's facilities report and an energy audit on the ORHS. The board is now addressing deficiencies existing at the school since the 2004 construction.

— A discussion of more effective implementation of technology within the schools has been raised. An example is the creation of a Disaster Recovery Plan as recommended by the District Audit.

— In coordination with Mr. Levesque and Ms. Caswell, the district's business manager, improved business practices were reflected in a favorable district financial audit.

— A comprehensive policy review has been conducted during the current board's tenure. The board is also in the process of contacting the New Hampshire School Board Association for a further policy update and cross referencing review.

— The district's transportation software program has been analyzed. The resultant report will maximize the use of district's equipment and personnel resulting in cost savings.

I am very optimistic for the future of our district, especially in our choice of our new superintendent, Dr. James Morse.

I am running for re-election. Please vote for me, Jim Kach, on March 13. You can also contact me at orcsdschoolboard@gmail.com. Or view my website at www.orcsd.net.

Jim Kach
Durham

For Barth

To the editor: I had the pleasure of meeting ORCSD School Board candidate, Maria Barth, at the Mohariment Winter Carnival a few weeks ago.

Maria introduced herself and chatted with me about our experiences with the school district and explained her vision for our Oyster River students. She also spoke of the importance of following laws and procedure in this role. This was very important to hear given the court judgments against members of the sitting board who are up for reelection. We need new positive and informed people working on behalf of our students on our school board. It is time for a change of climate and direction in how the ORSB does this important work. Please support an experienced, informed and positive influence on our school board.

Vote Maria Barth on March 13.

Nancy Bulkley
Durham

Barth endorsed

To the editor: I am writing to enthusiastically endorse the candidacy of Maria Barth for a seat on the Oyster River School Board. I have known her since her sons and our daughters were students together at Oyster River in the late 1970s. When elected Maria will work for excellence in all our schools while conducting herself with civility and courtesy and adherence to the law. She has a wealth of experience having served both on the Town Council and as Chair of the School Board while living in Kittery. She is a consensus builder who will reach out to the community and listen to the concerns of students, teachers, parents and taxpayers. She is partly moved to run for the school board because her grandchildren have been Oyster River students since kindergarten and are now attending ORHS; additionally she firmly believes that excellent education is necessary for a well functioning society. Please cast a vote for Maria Barth on March 13, 2012.

Dudley Dudley
Durham

For Newkirk

To the editor: Tom Newkirk is an excellent candidate for the Oyster River School Board. As a professor of English at UNH, founder and director of Learning Through Teaching (an in-service program for teachers), director of the NH Summer Literacy Institute, and a published author, he is an expert on educational issues and practice and highly qualified to provide outstanding guidance and leadership to the district. As a taxpayer, he understands the need for sound budgeting practices. As the parent of three Oyster River graduates, he is committed to maintaining high educational standards in the district. Tom's particular expertise in literacy and teacher training will be invaluable assets. We are fortunate to have a candidate of his caliber.

Emma Rous
Durham

Keep OR board

To the editor: A bit of history gives an excellent example of why we need to keep this school board.

When the addition was made to the high school, demographers projected that the school population was declining and, and would continue decline. This meant that the addition which was designed for a high school of 850 would never be filled. The demographers were correct. We now have a high school population of some 680 students 44 of which come from Barrington. To support the declining student population past boards have seen fit to hire an additional 10 teachers to handle the decreased enrollment.

The board during construction did not hire a "clerk of the works" whose responsibility is to see the plans make sense, and that the construction process follows the plans and good construction practices. The clerk of the works serves as the on site representative of the owner. He/she must be familiar with all aspects of construction.

See the NH Dept of Education for the responsibilities of a clerk of the works.http://www.education.nh.gov/program/school_approval/cofworks.htm

The results of the misguided choice of no clerk are revealed in the recent building audit of the high school, thankfully initiated by the present board, and will cost us much more than any insignificant savings found by eliminating the clerk. A gross and ignorant decision which left us the owners with no protection.

Today, the current board reduced the surplus in the school budget by over $1 million.

Arthur Bradbury
Lee

Vote Newkirk

To the editor: The parents and students of the Oyster River School District, as well as the taxpayers of the District, are most fortunate to have, running on their behalf, Dr. Thomas Newkirk of Durham for an at-large seat on the Oyster River School Board. Tom has devoted his life to education and to how students learn. He is author of the recently published book The Art of Slow Reading, and has done much earlier work on K-12 education and the learning process.

Tom will bring his great wealth of expertise and a great sense of stability and respect to the Oyster River School Board and to the teachers of the District, to the administrators who serve them, and to the staff employees. If the need arises, he is highly capable of chairing the Oyster River School Board, of becoming the face of the District, and of maintaining and advancing the integrity of the Oyster River schools.

I urge all District voters to vote on March 13 for Thomas Newkirk for Oyster River School Board.

John E. Carroll
Durham

ORCSD’s Lobster Trap

The following was published today in Fosters as "Community Commentary" and is republished here at the request of the author:

Patent pending: one size-large lobster trap. A gift graciously provided to the Oyster River School Board by intrepid guardians of our best interests. It features a standard shape, standard frame, standard netting, and standard entryway—at first glance it appears to be like any of countless traps we see around the seacoast. However, upon closer inspection, it does seem to include a few oddities.

This trap is large enough for people to walk into. It has a spring-loaded, hinged rear panel. The rear panel can be winched open by a chain extending up to a posh, stately adorned throne. Also, what is the gizmo that looks like an inverted periscope, with an eyepiece situated in front of the throne? It is designed for someone using their discriminating stare to observe and judge the actions and decisions of our elected School Board members. Instead of chum for bait, the only lure is a sincere desire by community members who care and want to serve our district. They thus must pass inspection before entering, even after being duly elected by the people.

Don’t bother asking questions about why this trap is situated at the entrance to the boardroom of the ORSB. Don’t bother being concerned this might have the illusion of impropriety. There are a select few who control our district, who know better than anyone else what is best for the schools, the administration, and the taxpayers. They are now empowered to determine at their very whim when to spring the trap, and slam the rear panel closed. Ensnared board members, who are now enjoined by the courts, could face contempt, and possibly jail time, at the slightest hint of a violation of Right-to-Know law.

Who might we ask to sit on this lofty perch? It would have to be someone with years of experience on the board. Only that person would have enough knowledge, and a track record from his own previous transgressions, to be in a position to judge when an unsuspecting victim that he determines has crossed him, or is not leading this district in a direction he opines is correct, to warrant his torrid judgment. We’ll call him our new RTK Manager! We will add a new line item to our budget for monthly payment, called, “RTK avoidance fees, for services rendered.” (In the big cities, we call this protection money). This will be to safeguard our district from future violations, because surely without his approval and guidance, there will be many, despite some people who contend that it is child’s play. We need someone of self-ordained noble character, and the enamored and alluring gaze of an adoring public.

The current board was accused of over 300 violations of RTK and board policy within the first three months after the last election. This was until the superior court judge directed that the list be culled down to the top 20. Even while the judge took over 2 months to decide a verdict from one lawsuit, the board continued to unwittingly violate policies and RTK law. This invited a second lawsuit. How could this be possible? Could it be that the board repeatedly kept doing things it didn’t think was against the law? Was the district supposed to suspend all business waiting with bated breath for a decision? The first verdict was handed down on January 17, 2012. How is it right that the board be enjoined for continued violations that occurred during the interim period? The board must rely on the professionals around them to stay between the guardrails. They rely heavily on past practice when making decisions. The current board had a superintendent who was first resistant and insubordinate, then wanted out (Yes, testimony at the first RTK trial revealed he approached the board for his sweet little buyout, not the other way around). Then they were dealing with an interim, probably who was no more familiar with policies in this district than they were. It is not outside the realm of possibility that this board did not get much help from the administration. It is unfair and unrealistic to believe there was malicious intent when the consulting firm, or superintendent, or the board or whoever, came up with an idea for a secret ballot for part of a search committee, if the reason they acted was to be fair to a vocal segment of the district, and respond to accusations of “cronyism.”

Ignorance is no excuse, we’ve all heard that. The buck has to stop with the board. However, am I the only one who sees a problem with regular citizens being elected to a School Board, then having a three-ring binder dropped in their lap as thick as a dictionary, with a pat on the back and encouragement that goes something like, “you’ve got it, now don’t screw up.” If anyone thinks past boards were spit-and-polish and didn’t violate RTK, then they have succumbed to the evil genius of cunning minds as notorious as The Joker, The Riddler, and The Penguin.

I will go on record to say I have only praise for someone who sincerely tries to improve openness and honesty with communication between representative government and the people. In my opinion, this board was leaps and bounds ahead of past boards. The people have a right to know, what they have a right to know. There are, however, things like personnel confidentiality, and privacy laws as well. Sometimes the lines are blurred. Pandora’s Box was pried open, and this board was found to violate RTK and board policy on several occasions. OK, but this case is not about open communication. It is about vengeance. It is about a few people snubbing their noses at the district, saying, “There, take that! We know better than you.” It is about ex-board members using their insider knowledge, and their own painful indoctrinations, to maliciously apply RTK laws to get their way. They have figured out how to win, even after they lose an election.

Now Jafar has spoken, and we are all beholden to him. We must beware staring into his viper’s staff too long, lest we all begin to drink his Kool-Aid, and accept the idea that he is the only one who can decide what’s best for our district.

Why bother to have a School Board at all at this point? People complained the current board did not, “proceed with caution.” That’s not what these people care about; they just want everyone to think like they do! How could we let the superintendent go they were so cozy with, but who lacked the vision to produce a strategic plan for the district during his five-year tenure? How could this board try to cut money from an out-of-control budget? After years of annual increases, it has become like a fix for junkies strung out on taxpayers’ money.

We don’t have to worry about a change in direction for this district. Now the only people who will have the inclination to run for School Board, will be those endorsed by Jafar himself! Who wants to serve the community if it could expose them to jail time? But we shouldn’t worry our heads about such things; the district is now in good, capable hands. I think I hear the rear panel of the trap being winched open. Good luck to the ORSB, happy trails.

Calvin Jarvis

Durham