LEE — The owner of Gauthier's 125 Restaurant disputes one of the claim's made by the former Oyster River School Board chair in a controversial e-mail chain released earlier this week.
In the e-mail chain former Board Chair Mark Townsend alleged he was eating breakfast with Henry Brackett when the owner of the restaurant confronted Brackett about him talking School Board business at her restaurant.
"The owner came to the table just as I received coffee and informed Henry Brackett that he needed to stop discussing school board business in her diner (we hadn't begun to talk yet.) She informed Henry that customers were complaining about the impropriety of it and warned Henry that people were also purposely sitting close so they could learn of school district issues."
Restaurant Owner Misty Gauthier said that while Brackett has been to her restaurant before, neither she nor anyone on her staff has ever confronted him about talking about School Board issues at the restaurant.
She said Brackett has discussed School Board business with others at the restaurant and there have been occasions where customers have moved away from him because they didn't want to hear about it.
"In my experience, they've never been obnoxious," she said.
She said there have also been occasions where customers have approached Brackett to discuss School Board issues.
Brackett hasn't been in the restaurant recently, Gauthier said.
Townsend's e-mail chain was a result of him seeking a legal opinion about Brackett's actions at a Lee Board of Selectmen's meeting in May where Brackett, as private citizen, spoke about School Board issues and gave opinions.
Townsend said Brackett did this without board authorization.
Barrett Christina, staff attorney for the New Hampshire School Boards Association, told Townsend via e-mail that while it appears Brackett may have violated School Board policy, there wasn't enough information to determine if any laws were broken.
He told the board to seek common ground on whatever issues they have.
Townsend resigned from the board on June 7.
So let's see...first Mark Townsend claims that he didn't recall writing a series of e-mails that include irrelevant/insulting details about a fellow Board member's personal life.
ReplyDeleteNow another person named in the e-mails comes forward to say that one of the central claims in his narrative is utterly false.
Is there any end to the lies that Townsend spews?
Wow. Just wow. How many times has mark Townsend lied to us? This is unacceptable. It really is slander against the board and its representatives. Regardless of whether or not you support this board, I hope we can all agree that Mr Townsend was the antithesis of a good board member.
ReplyDeleteIf I were Henry, I'd sue him.
So will Mark ever come out of hiding and make a statement? He is from Madbury. Wonder if he will show his face in public again? I wouldn't.
ReplyDeleteWhat reason would be have to come out to make a statement? Doesn't anyone remember President Clinton or John Edwards or Newt or any of the other cheaters--people may forgive you for your misdeed but they will not forget or forgive the lie to cover it up. Like the Chief of Staff for Edwards, Mark was Howard's pawn and then they get kicked to the curb. It is not the people on this blob who are the problem. This blog was essential to shine a light on the true sources on the problem. If you read this blog, you can no longer feign ignorant bliss. Sometimes I wish I could return to the day...
ReplyDeleteBut, once the blinders come off, there is no going back. I imagine there will be more pain before healing because the Superintendent divides instead of unites. Whether you like him or not is precisely the point. There are distinct camps and he makes no attempts to bridge the divide. In fact, he conceives of ways to divide. You need look no farther than this e-mail string. He is the puppet master and he must go. The Board MUST STAND UP TO THE PUPPET MASTER!
Mark Townsend was becoming part of Howard Colter's "good ol boys club." It didn't quite turn out the way either of them expected and now, their biggest threat, Henry Brackett, is chairing the board.
ReplyDeleteHoward Colter has been around a long time and he could have prevented Mark from acting unethically. Instead, he partnered up with him. They failed to separate their personal politics from board responsibilities; failing our children and our community.
Joanne P. has been re-elected repeatedly and her political agenda has grown over time. She has aligned herself with Howard Colter and ,at this point, her need for power has taken precedence over any genuine commitment to put student matters first. Pleasing Howard Colter appears to be her only agenda. In addition to a budget committee, our school board needs to have an ethical advisory committee.
It probably all seemed so simple. Manufacture a "scandal" and then force the object of that "scandal" to resign, then regain the balance of power with a new member.
ReplyDeleteLife's a funny old dog sometimes, ain't it?
Joanne Portalupi also acted outside her authority when she was Chair. Back in 2008, she released a memo that purported to be from the entire Board, declaring that they had made a determination that administrators had not violated purchasing policies with regards to the purchase of computer networking equipment.
ReplyDeleteNot only was that claim false (i.e., administrators had violated policy) but so was the premise of the memo--which was from the pen of the one and only Joanne Portalupi, and was not the opinion of the Board as a whole. Once this was pointed out, the memo mysteriously disappeared from the District's web site.
What the difference between then and now? Thousands of people following the SB's every move through this blog. That kind of B.S. doesn't go undetected anymore.
But what hasn't changed? Joanne's slavish devotion to Howard Colter, that's what.
ReplyDeleteMarch elections can't come soon enough...
The article in no way concludes that Mark lied; in fact one could see that the owners claim could support what MArk had said. It all depends how one wants to look at it and once again, this blog shows the mean and narrow attitudes that participate. The transparency in this regard is SO obvious! What the article showed me is that Henry Brackett thinks of himself as a School Board Body of one and pontificates in public whenever and where ever he pleases, which goes against Board Policy by the way. After reading the article, I Am more upset with Henry's actions than I am with MArk's. How about some fair and balanced critiques here; and I don't mean the Fox News type.
ReplyDeleteMark said in his email that the owner directly confronted Henry. In the Fosters article she says she didn't while not denying that some people would move away from Henry while others would move closer. Sorry, but I don't see how that supports what Mark said.
ReplyDeleteBut none of us were there, were we? Only Henry, Mark and the owner really know.
I want to know more about the "backroom deals" Mark alluded to.
Hopefully Fosters will keep investigating. Call it "mean and narrow" if you want, but this is about how the district is run.
I want to know more about "backroom deals" as well. It is really upsetting how the people we have elected behave and can be unethical. I have lost much trust.
ReplyDeleteOn May 28 Mark wrote to Attorney Barrett and stated:
ReplyDelete"Ive come to the determination that while we may not be able to change that one persons actions or behaviors, there still remains a chance to show new board members, this is not a normal board practice." .......His comment appears to be disclosure of an intent to intimidate the newcomers.
On May 28, Attorney Barrett stated the following: "Last, I would like to state that because NHSBA represents the board as a whole, I cannot take particular sides in a conflict within the board or among board members." She also stated:"My advice and information here is intended to be along the lines of best practices for the entire board."
On 6/2/10, Attorney Barret wrote to Howard Colter and Mark Townsend, stating the following: " NHSBA does not take sides with certain individuals or factions when school board members have disagreements." She also prefaced her advice with: "Given my conversation with Mark last week." ..... She is indicating that what advice she is giving them is based on best practice and not intended to be a legal opinion about Henry's actions.
On his June 2, 2010, in an e-mail to fellow school board members, Mark Townsend stated that he: "Sought the advice of the NHSBA staff attorney to provide an opinion to the board regarding the Lee minutes." He also stated: "We need to function as a board and set aside pre-formed opinions."
Everyone knows that readings from meeting minutes are notoriously inaccurate and, at times, deliberately "adjusted" by officials. Only video /audio recordings reveal what actually happened at some public meetings. Why then would Howard Colter and Mark Townsend proceed to solicit board legal advice before communicating with the board? It appears that Townsend and Colter had already formulated a verdict.
The e-mail that Townsend sent on May 27th to Attorney Barrett was juvenile. First of all, as a representative of our district, he should address her as Attorney Barrett rather than, "Christina." Even if he knows her on a personal level, he is supposed to be representing our town. If I had received that e-mail from Mark Townsend, I would have mistrusted his motives and the motives of Superintendent Colter immediately. In the e-mail sent out to Attorney Upton on May 27, he again addresses an attorney on a first name basis, "Matt." The tone in that letter is more damning, the fate of Henry Brackett, signed, sealed and scheduled for delivery on 6/2/2010.
The school board has been plagued by controversy and accusations of backroom deals. We need to completely reform our school based management. I'm tired of the special interest school employees who bully their way through the budget deliberations meeting year after year, using emotional rhetoric to try and scare parents into voting in more increases in the budget while the student population continues to decline. This school system needs reform and stop acting like the taxpayers have unlimited tolerance for abuse of their money.
I wish that we could get an accounting of Colter's involvement with Townsend in this whole mess. Someone described Colter as a puppet master. That is the truth. He pits one group against another & has no interest in everyone working collaboratively. He is a thorn in the side of Oyster River. The sooner that is realized, the sooner we can get rid of him.
ReplyDeleteIn the corporate world you can get rid of employees who are a problem. Why isn't this true of public school administrators?
ReplyDeleteI have to agree. Why does the school board put up with Colter's nonsense? He apparently isn't a good leader and even if he is in pockets, he still divides this community. While you can't please everyone, I think Superintendent Carrol was far superior to Colter. What is going on here is that Joann Portalupi hired him so it's her reputation on the line. She stops at nothing to defend this administration EVEN WHEN the outside auditors say that we should have an audit committee and contracted personnel shouldn't sign purchase orders. It is just best business practice FOR A SCHOOL DISTRICT!!!
ReplyDeleteIn addition, a previous poster was correct, Joann has done the SAME THINGS as Henry yet Howard didn't slap her on the wrist! Wonder why.
As for Mark, well he should stay under his rock for a long time. The public backlash at what he has done is apparent and Fosters, who doesn't really report all that well on ORCSD, has taken a big interest in us now. We are newsworthy for the completely wrong reasons and Mark is the source.
I also call for Howard to resign. He has broken trust in this community, overstepped his authority, CUT POSITIONS NOT NEEDING TO BE CUT, and CREATED MEANINGLESS POSITIONS to protect his own.
Howard appears to have set this whole thing in motion. He needs to go.
ReplyDeleteThey say that things happen in threes -- Resignations -- Townsend, Cox, and Colter(?)
the three has already added up...don't forget the other quitter...Kim Clark. But of course this fair and balanced blog would never consider one of their own in the same pool with all the others...because of a clear lack of open-mindedness
ReplyDeleteGee, you made an entry, so you must be one of "their own." Actually, not everyone who writes on this blog agrees. Don't look for a conspiracy theory.
ReplyDeleteOn December 12, 2009, Aaron Sanborn from Foster’s Daily Democrat reported the following regarding Kim Clark’s resignation letter and false allegations of a right to know violation.
ReplyDelete“Clark's letter said this incident was another example of accusations being made in the middle of a meeting that turn out to be false, which disrupts the flow of the meeting and distracts the board from the important work at hand.”
Leadership continues to play games and divert attention away from talk about a budget committee. Kim Clark did her best and I commend her work. Imagine how difficult it must be to be on that board? I commend them!
The town is beginning to tune into the ugly politics going on and educated enough to draw their own conclusions. The blog provides a forum to voice concerns that members in the community have about leadership. Anyone watching the reality T.V. soap opera, "As the Oyster River school Board Turns," knows full well who is directing the show.
And when will someone pull the curtain away & expose who is actually running Oz?
ReplyDeleteWhy can't we get rid of Superintendent Colter?