You may remember that I challenged SAU 55 and the Timberlane Regional School District in New Hampshire’s Superior court in order to obtain a line-item default budget. Unfortunately, I was not successful and Timberlane taxpayers had to suffer once again with a default budget HIGHER than the proposed budget which is contrary to the legislative intent of default budgets. Since the default budget is what the district must run on if the proposed budget is rejected by voters, it is imperative to know how the default budget is constructed.
Even with the limited information provided, earlier this year Arthur Green demonstrated that Timberlane voters were deprived of an honest default budget because Timberlane’s default budget illegally included additional staffing positions. You can read his trenchant analysis here: Default Budget: Exposing the Shakedown
There was more dishonesty in this budget but difficult to prove emphatically because the default budget given to Timberlane representatives and citizens is a high level summary that makes it impossible to know exactly what was put in and taken out. Some districts do provide detailed information but not at Timberlane where things financial are disclosed only with the claw marks of a growling administration.
This is where your elected officials should jump in to impose a policy that requires transparency in default budgets. Linked below is a policy based on one that had been adopted by the Milford School Board. (Sadly it is no longer in force because Milford’s elected officials abandoned their taxpayers in favor of the school administration, something Timberlane taxpayers experience all too often.)
Will Timberlane’s board adopt this policy, or will they continue to take lightly their duty, under penalty of perjury, to declare the default budget accurate and truthful?
timberlaneandsandown 
Pingback: Default Budgets: Anybody with the Guts to Fix Them? | The New Media Militia