In case you haven’t heard, Senate Education was supposed to have an executive session and vote on the Ruth Ward amendment with the whole Senate voting on October 23. Interestingly, when the committee returned from a short recess following Tuesday’s hearing, Ruth announced that the executive session would be rescheduled to “sometime before January.”
A few things are worth keeping in mind, as being distracted by newer things is part of the human condition. The next meeting of the legislature following October 23 is Veto Day on December 17, and “Opening Day 2026” is January 7. Our Senate enjoys many exemptions from transparency that I call “Upper Chamber Privileges,” including later LSR deadlines and “secret LSRs” that remain hidden from public scrutiny until later. Another way the Senate evades transparency is by having “surprise executive sessions” that YouTube subscribers and followers get no notice of. With all that said, it’s up to We the People to stay alert and check the Senate meeting schedule on NH.gov regularly.
When I looked in the comments to my recent rebuttal to Iron Marshal’s piece (in which he argued for saying “yes” to Claremont), I saw a new comment from Mr McGuire, and he said the following:
The problem with this analogy is that it uses the word “Claremont” as though it was a single individual who should bear the consequences for his actions. In this case those most responsible, the superintendent and financial people, have resigned or been fired and may face charges. Maybe we should also vacate the school board which was supposed to perform oversight, but failed.
Now we are dealing with the new people hired to clean up the mess. They are basically asking to be allowed to recover from the problems over five years, rather than one. Maybe five years is too long, but fundamentally it’s not an unreasonable request.”
I will start with some details and disclosure. Mr McGuire is a respected member of House Finance and the vice chair of House Education Funding, and he recently became my rep. I mention the latter because he’s a vast improvement over swamp rat Mr Newman, an NTU useful idiot. Have you ever heard something said that just “hits you in the funny bone,” to use Alderman Moron’s words, but it came from the mouth (or keyboard) of someone well respected? I can think of times when I said to that person, “If I heard the same thing said by a stranger, I would immediately dismiss them for their mental acuity, but since YOU are the one saying it, I’ll give it some respectful thought.”
For me, this is one of those situations. If Mr Newman said what Mr McGuire said, I would dismiss his words without delay, but I consider Mr McGuire worthy of a “courtesy review” in my thoughts. I am still a big NO on this Claremont thing because it sets a bad precedent for other communities plagued by serial wreckage created by one or more bad actors elected, appointed, or hired to serve the public. Alderman Dowd, who represents Mr&Mrs Newman at City Hall, lost track of $4.5M of ESSER funds in 2023 and was able to keep that blunder a secret until after he was reelected and he still kept his leadership positions in Finance and the JSSB, so you better believe he’s paying close attention and salivating over a Claremont outcome that would please Nashua.
I will conclude by echoing the sentiments of Ian Underwood and others who have recently expressed similar views. If this Claremont “arrangement” moves forward, there’s an opportunity to attach some strings. Better yet, those strings could instead be cable twine, the kind used for building suspension bridges. Ensure Claremont agrees to strict austerity for the next several academic years, with caveats that include improving their numbers, such as the percentage of students achieving reading and math proficiency.
Realistic goals can be set, similar to those in a private sector employee’s probation period, often referred to as a “performance improvement plan.” Oh, and don’t forget the TU contracts. This is an opportunity to force in conditions on new hires, filling future vacancies, who gets a raise, and how much. Just some food for thought, especially for a troubled school district that probably serves a lot of those free and subsidized lunches at the federal taxpayers’ expense.
