“Frivolous” No More: District Responds to Green Suit

My case concerning the 2017/18 default budget got a long response yesterday afternoon.

Here is the Timberlane District’s argument:


We go before Judge Schulman next week on Wed., Jan. 18th at 9 am (approximate time). The public is welcome to attend.

Here is my original argument:  green-v-metzler-et-al-complaint-1


1 Comment

Filed under Sandown Issues

One response to ““Frivolous” No More: District Responds to Green Suit

  1. Mark Acciard

    Here are some of the problems with The response of Earl and his band of Merry Men. Also I note that while he prevaricates to the public that Ms. Green’s suit is “frivolous”, a Term with a specific legal meaning, he puts the lie to his comments, by and through his detailed yet fanciful response.

    1.) IT IS PUBLIC INFORMATION!!! PROVIDE IT!!! Earl, Buddy, why are you wasting taxpayer time and money to stonewall the production of information which you are prohibited by law from withholding? What have you to hide? Or, is it simply that this woman has been a thorn in your side, and you are going to waste resources to make her job on the SB as difficult as possible. Tell me Earl, if she were nothing more than another bobble head to your desires, like Mssrs. Collins and Bealo, would you be doing this?

    2.) Earl, has been complaining, about Ms. Greens request to produce the default budget calculations in a line item detail, and spreadsheet format. He claimed this does not exist, stating in his own response; “There is no dispute that “a default budget in function and object code does not exist” and that there is no document in existence which contains the information requested by Green.” and “Green has no right or authority to require the Defendants to create a document which does not exist” Yet in his memorandum, supporting his response, he states; “Prior to completing and submitting the default budget form, the Business Administrator, at the direction of the Superintendent, presents the School Board with the default budget data in a spreadsheet format. See Pl.’s Ex. #5 (the “Default Budget Spreadsheet”)” Ok, Earl, you can not complain about her requested format when you already use that format. Try honesty for once.

    3.) RSA 40:13, IX(b) precisely defines the process by which the default budget must be set. The statute reads: “Default budget” “as used in this subdivision means the amount of the same appropriations as contained in the operating budget authorized for the previous year, reduced and increased, as the case may be, by debt service, contracts, and other obligations previously incurred or mandated by law, and reduced by one-time expenditures contained in the operating budget. For the purposes of this paragraph, one-time expenditures shall be appropriations not likely to recur in the succeeding budget, as determined by the governing body”

    Yes, Earl, all you are required to send to DRA is the default budget worksheet, and not the line item detail, However it is impossible, to HONESTLY produce a default budget without going through the current operating budget to remove one time cost items and capital improvements. Hence, You should have the info she is requesting., That is if you followed the law.

    4.) The law requires Ms. Green as an SB member to certify the default budget. The verbiage she is swearing her assent with by signing reads; “SCHOOL BOARD OR BUDGET COMMITTEE CERTIFICATION
    Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined the information contained in this form and to the best of my belief it is true, correct and

    As a former chair of a municipal budcom, I, too, have had to sign the MS-DS in this fashion. Now, yes, I understand most will routinely sign this without a moments thought of the “legal mumbo-jumbo”, however, Given the current circumstances, NO ONE with a shred of honesty or integrity can attest to this certification, because Earl and his cronies have withheld the method of their calculations.

    As usual, Earl is acting in his extra legal manner, acting as if he is the potentate, not the employee. Perhaps it is time for the SB to fulfill their sworn duties, and reign in this employee from further frivolous legal expenditures to thwart the production of LEGALLY PUBLIC INFORMATION!

    This behavior is utterly despicable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s