The voters of the MRSD have already rejected this contract once, but apparently that doesn’t matter to Judge Tucker.
August 7, 2008
Keene Sentinel
SWANZEY CENTER — The fight may not be over between Monadnock Regional School District officials and the Monadnock School Taxpayers Association.
But this round goes to the district.
School officials got a leg up against their taxpayers-association critics Tuesday when a Cheshire County Superior Court judge cleared the way for a September special meeting to consider a new teachers contract.
The meeting had recently been called into question by taxpayers association President Richard E. Bauries of Swanzey, who said scheduling issues would make the election illegal.
Superior Court Judge Brian T. Tucker disagreed with Bauries and has ordered the election go on as planned Sept. 9.
“It is a total and complete victory,” said district attorney Paul L. Apple. Tucker “adopted the schedule lock, stock and barrel.”
The Monadnock district’s journey to a special meeting began in April, when the school board ratified a new contract negotiated with teachers after voters rejected a proposed contract in March.
The new, four-year contract includes wage and benefit increases amounting to $680,306 in the first year and shifts teachers toward paying a greater share of their health insurance.
About 200 teachers work in the district’s eight schools, educating 2,386 students, according to the most current statistics provided by Marie Braley, administrative assistant to the superintendent.
The new contract offers more money for longevity payments — financial incentives to veteran teachers who stay in the district — and features a quicker, less-expensive phase out of the controversial teachers benefit of early retirement than the previous contract proposal.
Eager to bring the agreement before district voters, but requiring a judge’s order to do so before the next annual meeting, the school board then directed Apple to petition the Superior Court to grant the district permission to hold a special election.
In a petition — submitted and signed by Apple, Superintendent Kenneth R. Dassau and school board Chairman Eugene M. White 3rd in May — district officials said labor unrest, teacher-retention problems and wages frozen without a new contract constituted the emergency situation required by law to hold a special meeting.
This was challenged by three groups — Fitzwilliam selectmen, Sullivan selectmen and the taxpayers association, through Bauries — who all argued against the special meeting in a June 12 Superior Court hearing.
Among their arguments were that the district’s problems had not, in fact, reached the level of “emergency” and that a special meeting would see decreased participation from the public.
But against their objections, Tucker ordered the special meeting to go forward. In his decision, dated July 14, Tucker set the election for Sept. 9 at 7:30 p.m. at Monadnock Regional High School.
This presented a problem since the Monadnock district operates under an official-ballot voting system instead of a traditional town meeting form of government, and residents cast their votes at all-day polls in each of the district’s seven towns.
Bauries latched onto this snag as he filed a motion in July asking the judge to reconsider his order.
In the document, Bauries also contended the time frame between the judge’s decision and the Aug. 9 official-ballot first session wasn’t long enough to legally notice and hold the first required public hearing.
When the district held the public hearing on July 24 — followed by a school board meeting at which the warrant was signed — Bauries filed two additional motions, contending both of those meetings were illegal.
Apple predicted the matter would have to be resolved in court, which was a tricky prospect as time dwindled before the second required public hearing — the official-ballot first session — slated for Saturday.
In the meantime, Apple filed an objection to Bauries’ motion for reconsideration, arguing the district stood on firm legal ground.
“The same amount of time is given here for the actual public hearing — one week — as was given in the regular election earlier this year and last year,” Apple wrote in an Aug. 1 motion.
“The (Monadnock School Taxpayers Association) has not and cannot object to those elections.”
Tucker sided with Apple in his decision Tuesday, referencing Apple’s arguments while calling the claims made by the taxpayers association “unfounded.”
Tucker also backed the district by granting Apple’s request to revise his order to allow for all-day voting in each of the district’s towns rather than requiring officials to take the matter back to court.
“It’s a very, very good development for the district,” Apple said Tuesday. “I was concerned that we would be delayed because of a (court) hearing.”
Dassau similarly voiced his support of the judge’s decision.
“It certainly vindicates the actions of the district,” the superintendent said, “and it again negates the doom-and-gloom, ‘sky is falling’ histrionics of the taxpayers association.”
From the opposite side of the ring, Bauries said he disagrees with Tucker’s decision and thinks the judge should have been more specific about why he denied the taxpayers association’s claims.
Still, he said, “Even though I disagree with the judge, I respect the judge. … We would not do anything to go against (his) order.”
But that doesn’t mean the taxpayers association is quite ready to wave a white flag, either.
While not specifying exactly what the association might do next, he said, “If we want to appeal Judge Tucker’s decision, we have to cross all the t’s and dot all the i’s.”