Will anything come of probe by county attorney into city's school board chair?

Former school board member Karen Stokes, school board chair Shane Downs (Stokes/City of Rochester screenshot; Downs/Rochester Voice file photo)

While an investigation by the County Attorneys Office has yet to determine whether or not a Rochester school board chair who is also a city police officer has any exposure to criminal prosecution, the probe has roiled the city at the very least.
Former school board member Karen Stokes, who quit the board amid an ethics investigation into her own conduct, said during her recent resignation speech that she had forwarded possible criminal referrals to both the Attorney Generals Office and the Strafford County Attorneys Office regarding the actions of Shane Downs.
The AG's Office passed, but Strafford County Attorney Emily Garod confirmed earlier this month that the matter would be looked into.
"Ms. Stokes dropped off a citizen complaint letter asserting that Mr. Downs acted unlawfully and requested that we take action," Garod said. "Like every citizen complaint, I assigned it to an investigator to look into. It is currently in that process."
In her six-page letter detailing multiple specific allegations against Downs, two may rise to the level of potential criminal prosecution, but even if they don't, they'll stand as nothing less than an unsavory commentary on a months-long melodrama that ended with the departure of the city's former schools superintendent Annie Azarloza.
The two allegations made by Stokes against Downs that may come closest to reaching the criminal level include her accusation that Downs made "Deliberate misrepresentations and misleading conduct to influence decision making" and that he had a distinct "conflict of interest" in his position as school board chair while working as a sworn officer for the Rochester Police Department.
In her complaint Stokes argues that "On March 13 during a monthly full school board meeting, chair Downs falsely characterized an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) as a mandatory state requirement that cannot be altered, misleading the board to adopt it without scrutiny or alteration, despite the agreement being local and amendable."
The MOU was passed on a voice vote after Downs said it had been sent down by the state and "there's nothing we can do to change it."
Part of the MOU stated that all school and disciplinary policies "are not intended to nor shall it usurp the mandates and responsibilities of the SRO (school resource police officer), the Rochester Police Department and the Attorney Generals Office," theoretically giving ultimate authority to the RPD when it comes to disciplining special needs students for incidents on school grounds.
Regarding a "conflict of interest" accusation, according to a state RSA, a conflict of interest exists if an administrative official votes on a matter in which he has a direct personal and pecuniary interest.
And while many supporters of Downs would argue that he had no direct pecuniary interest in signing the MOU that gave the police ultimate authority to determine manifestation hearings, others would say the fact that he works for the Rochester Police Department is enough to constitute a viable "conflict" in and of itself.

It should be noted that the investigation by the county attorneys office will not chime in on any alleged administrative or ethical violations, only on possible criminal charges.

On Friday The Rochester Voice asked Rochester Poice Chief Gary Boudreau if Downs had been placed on administrative leave pending the investigation's completion. Boudreau said the department's practice is not to disclose personnel matters with the public.
As to whether or not anything could come of the investigation, one Seacoast attorney who asked not to be identified mused, "Hey, they wouldn't be investigating it if there weren't that possibility."