Newport
Spaulding alleges violations of law related to this year’s budget discussions.
Spaulding, who argues the defendants violated the Right-to-Know statute under RSA 91-A, is seeking to have the court “overturn” article 3 on the March school district warrant, which was the budget approved by voters.
In his five count complaint, Spaulding, as he did in an earlier court filing when he tried unsuccessfully to stop the March 14 annual school meeting vote, claims he was not given a “a full accounting of cost items” in the proposed contracts for teachers and support staff that was part of the budget.
He further states that 35 days after his request and following the annual deliberative session on Feb. 7, he was given only a “partial” accounting and another $100,000 was not adequately explained.
“By delaying its response until after the Newport School District Deliberative meeting the board deprived the petitioner and all other voters of the full disclosure of ‘cost items’ as required by law,” the petition states.
In his third complaint, Spaulding states the board met on Jan. 30 at a different time and place than what was posted, and in that meeting, it agreed to spend $1,365 on a flier about the budget mailed to 3,700 residents.
“While advocacy itself is protected free speech, the expenditure of public funds to support a political position is not,” Spaulding argues. He said the “unlawful” flier was “misleading” and did not have correct information.
Spaulding makes other allegations related to minutes of meetings. He claims the March 20 meeting was not properly noticed, the minutes of the Jan. 30 meeting were “non-compliant” and the public hearing and budget workshop mentioned in the minutes did not follow state law.
Spaulding also wants the school district to pay his court costs.
Patrick O’Grady can be reached at pogclmt@gmail.com.
