In what is very likely to be my final entry in this series (I really can’t imagine, after nearly seven years, that there is much more out there for me to discover), I will be sharing various documents that I’ve found and collected over the years showing Sandy Hook Elementary School to be in continuous operation between 2008 and 2012. While some have already appeared on the site, the majority have not as they’ve just never really fit in anywhere. I have chosen not to share the nearly one hundred issues of the Sandy Hook Connection newsletter in my possession as they are rife with personal information such as the names and e-mail addresses of teachers and volunteers. Large files that may cause performance issues with your browser will be linked for download rather than embedded and sources will be provided when possible.

Strategic school profile, 2007-2008:

strategic_school_profile_2007-2008

Source: http://edsight.ct.gov/ssp/2007-2008/97-02.pdf

For a detailed description of the information available within Connecticut’s Strategic School Profiles, click here.

Sandy Hook PTA short form return of organization exempt from income tax form, 2008 (Download PDF, sixteen pages)

Strategic school profile, 2008-2009:

strategic_school_profile_2008-2009

Source: http://edsight.ct.gov/ssp/2008-2009/97-02.pdf

Sandy Hook PTA short form return of organization exempt from income tax form, 2009 (Download PDF, sixteen pages)

Speech/language pathologist job posting, August 30th, 2009:

Source: Hartford Courant, August 30th, 2009

Strategic school profile, 2009-2010:

strategic_school_profile_2009-2010

Source: http://edsight.ct.gov/ssp/2009-2010/097-02.pdf

“No Child Left Behind” report card, 2009-2010:

nclb_report_card_2009-2010

Source: http://ctayp.emetric.net/Content/ReportCards/2010/100971051_2010.PDF

These NCLB report cards provide information on a school’s “Achievement, Accountability, Other Indicators and Highly Qualified Teachers”. You can read more about the No Child Left Behind Act here.

Sandy Hook PTA short form return of organization exempt from income tax form, 2010 (Download PDF, fifteen pages)

Fundraising gala invitation, 2010:

fundraising_invitation_2010

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20100401013128/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us:80/shs/site/files/invitation.pdf

Principal job posting, March 28th, 2010:

Source: Hartford Courant, March 28th, 2010

4th grade concert and music information, September 14th, 2010:

fourth_grade_concert_music_information_2010

Letter to all parents, September 14th, 2010:

letter_to_all_parents_2010

Library media specialist job posting, December 12th, 2010:

Source: Hartford Courant, December 12th, 2010

Strategic school profile, 2010-2011:

strategic_school_profile_2010-2011

Source: http://edsight.ct.gov/ssp/2010-2011/097-02.pdf

“No Child Left Behind” report card, 2010-2011:

nclb_report_card_2010-2011

Source: http://ctayp.emetric.net/Content/ReportCards/2011/100971002_2011.PDF

Newtown Board of Education approved budget, 2010-2011 (Download PDF, 106 pages)

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20140709193551/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/BOARD%20OF%20EDUCATION/BOE%20Budgets/boe.apprv.bdgt2010-2011.pdf

At over one hundred pages, there’s obviously a lot to sort through, but you can skip to page twenty-four (page thirty-one in your PDF reader) for a three page breakdown of Sandy Hook’s $3,146,300 budget for the 2010-2011 school year:

Compare that to Hawley (page twenty-one, or twenty-eight in your PDF reader), a school which no one has ever suggested was closed at any point in time yet was budgeted nearly one million dollars less.

The Sandy Hook budget also includes total school student population (594) as well as total teaching staff (36.70) for the year. Skip to page ninety-six (ninety-nine in your PDF reader) to get a look at the school’s approved building and site improvements, which includes adding HVAC to the computer room, carpet replacement, gym line repainting, irrigation, and more:

That’s a lot of money, staff, and work for a school alleged (though by no one with any sort of credibility whatsoever) to have been closed to two years by this point.

School handbook, 2010-2011 (Download PDF, thirty-four pages)

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20120407201345/http://newtown.sandyhook.schooldesk.net/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=KSkLZ-fxuvQ%3D&tabid=17843

Sandy Hook PTA short form return of organization exempt from income tax form, 2011 (Download PDF, thirteen pages)

Fourth grade teacher job posting, June 13th, 2011:

sandy_hook_job_posting_2011-02

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20110626144552/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us:80/site/files/sh.grd4teacher6-11.pdf

School facilities survey, August, 2011:

sandy_hook_school_facilities_survey_2011

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20140714130545/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/Facilities/School%20Facilities%20Survey/ED050-SANDY%20HOOK.pdf

Educational assistant job posting, October 7th, 2011:

sandy_hook_job_posting_2011

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20111018105540/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us:80/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/Human%20Resources/Employment%20positions/SH/SH.EA.10-7-11.pdf

Strategic school profile, 2011-2012:

strategic_school_profile_2011-2012

Source: http://edsight.ct.gov/ssp/2011-2012/097-02.pdf

Newtown Board of Education approved budget, 2011-2012 (Download PDF, seventy-four pages)

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20140709193629/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/BOARD%20OF%20EDUCATION/BOE%20Budgets/BOE.%20approv.budget%202011-2012.pdf

Detailed on page eight (page sixteen in your PDF reader), Sandy Hook’s budget for the 2011-2012 school year is roughly $107k less than the previous year, likely due to declining enrollment and the loss of two teachers. And while plenty of money was budgeted for routine maintenance at the school (including emergency generators, HVAC, playground safety inspections, and more), there are no building and site maintenance projects listed for Sandy Hook for the year (page thirty-nine, or page forty-seven in your PDF reader). Seeing as how there are also no projects listed for Middle Gate or Head O’ Meadow, that’s not all that strange.

Sandy Hook sock hop invitation, 2012:

sock_hop_2012

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20140114045147/http://newtown.sandyhook.schooldesk.net/Portals/Newtown/Sandyhook/docs/SHS%20Sock%20Hop%202012.doc

Sandy Hook spirit week, 2012:

spirit_week_2012

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20131216144237/http://newtown.sandyhook.schooldesk.net/Portals/Newtown/Sandyhook/docs/Spirit%20Week%202012.doc

Superintendent’s newsletter, February, 2012:

superintendents_newsletter_02-2012

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20120206104654/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/Newsletters/Febnewsletter.final.pdf

Page four includes an article on Sandy Hook’s Kindle program, originally published on “The Digital Shift” in December of 2011. For more on the school’s Kindle program, click here and here. Page five includes the dates of Sandy Hook’s kindergarten registration for the 2012-2013 school year.

Board of education ad hoc facilities subcommittee, March 6th, 2012 (Download PDF, twenty-seven pages)

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20140709193525/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/BOARD%20OF%20EDUCATION/BOE%20Presentations/2011-2012%20presentations/Rec%20of%20BoE%20Ad%20Hoc%20Facilities%20Subcomm.pdf

The above document is described as “a summary overview of recommendation to the board of education by the ad hoc facilities subcommittee”. That’s certainly a mouthful, but it’s their words, not mine. This ad hoc facilities subcommittee, formed in November of 2010 and made up of “people from across the town’s government”, was established by Newtown’s board of education to “examine the enrollment projections, develop options, analyze their potential impact, and make recommendations for future action”. This committee worked to consider changes that “may provide cost savings while maintaining or improving education quality”. While not members of the committee, the principals from Newtown’s elementary and middle schools were invited to join in on the discussion, and that included Sandy Hook principal and shooting victim Dawn Hochsprung:

While the description of the document makes it sound like an absolute bore, full of the kind of bureaucratic gobbledygook that would instantly put most people to sleep (and it mostly is), there are pieces of information scattered throughout useful in further debunking some ancient denier myths. First and foremost, along with Mrs. Hochsprung, the school’s inclusion in this discussion alone should be sufficient proof that it was open at the time this document was written, which was in March of 2012. Additionally, as seen on page nine, one of the school consolidation configurations considered by the committee (but not followed through with) was to close Sandy Hook:

I can’t believe I need to even say this, but obviously you cannot consider closing a school that has (as always, allegedly) already been closed for four years.

And while it may not be as obvious, another oft-repeated denier claim is dealt a serious blow on page twelve:

At least in March of 2012, Hawley and Newtown Middle School – both open, operating schools – were not ADA compliant. This is significant because both James Fetzer and Wolfgang Halbig (as well as nearly all of their flunkies) have repeatedly claimed that Sandy Hook not ADA compliant at the time of the shooting (and that is wholly possible, though it is not mentioned in the subcommittee’s summary, possibly because the school did not fit any of the likely configuration scenarios and therefore its ADA compliant status was irrelevant), and as such it could not have possibly been in operation. This is of course bogus; there are plenty of older public schools and other buildings that are still open in spite of not being ADA compliant. Just as an example, back in 2015, 83% of public elementary schools in New York City were not fully accessible to people with disabilities. Like Hawley, if Sandy Hook were not ADA compliant, it would only have to be if “reopened or for use as a public building”. This is why Sandy Hook’s ADA status became a factor in the debate surrounding whether to repair the school or demolish it and build a new one; a reopening would have meant bringing it up to code.

Educational assistant job posting, March 6th, 2012:

sandy_hook_job_posting_2012

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20120324072136/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us:80/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/Human%20Resources/Employment%20positions/SH/SH.EA3-6-12.pdf

ABA tutor job posting, March 19th, 2012:

sandy_hook_job_posting_2012-02

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20111018105540/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us:80/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/Human%20Resources/Employment%20positions/SH/SH.EA.10-7-11.pdf

Seems awfully strange to hire educational assistants and tutors for a non-existent elementary school, doesn’t it? It’s almost like the school was actually open the whole time.

One School, One Read family homework guide, March, 2012:

shs_one_school_hw_2012

There’s nothing all that interesting here, but this is further corroboration of information found here and here.

Newtown Bee’s back to school supplement, August 17th, 2012 (Download PDF, fifty-six pages)

In addition to the Sandy Hook bus routes on pages 45-48, the school is pictured and its address and website given on page eleven. Sandy Hook’s hours are also listed on page sixteen.

Science Center field trip, September, 2012:

science_center_field_trip_2012

Strategic school profile, 2012-2013:

strategic_school_profile_2012-2013

Source: http://edsight.ct.gov/ssp/2012-2013/097-02.pdf

Newtown Board of Education approved budget, 2012-2013 (Download PDF, forty-three pages)

Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20140709193720/http://www.newtown.k12.ct.us/Portals/Newtown/District/docs/BOARD%20OF%20EDUCATION/BOE%20Budgets/2012-2013%20Budgets/2012-13%20Approved%20Budget7-12-12.pdf

Sandy Hook’s budget summary begins on page eight (nine in your PDF reader), this time showing a loss of around $4,500 for the year. And while enrollment continues to decline across all four of Newtown’s elementary schools, only Head O’ Meadow manages to avoid having its budget slashed. That said, at nearly $3M, Sandy Hook is still the most well-funded of the bunch:

Gee, that’s a whole lot of money to spend on a “toxic waste dump” (according to Wolfgang Halbig) that is somehow also being used as storage (according to Maria Hsia Chang).

Newtown before and after school programs, 2012-2013:

ed_conn_2012-2013

Project Eagle service pledge, 2012-2013:

project_eagle_service_pledge_2012-2013

Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20120804113931/http://newtown.sandyhook.schooldesk.net:80/Portals/Newtown/Sandyhook/docs/PTA/PE.service_pledge_form.docx

Part One: The Lobby
Part Two: The Obstinate Pen
Part Three: Holiday Decorations And Calendars
Part Four: SMART Technologies
Part Five: Dawn Hochsprung’s Twitter Feed
Part Six: The 2011-2012 Scrapbook
Part Seven: Children’s Authors Visit Sandy Hook
Part Eight: Charitable Causes
Part Nine: The Library
Part Ten: 92 More Photos From Sandy Hook School
Part Eleven: Over 195 Articles Referencing Sandy Hook School, Written Between 2008-2012
Part Twelve: The Glass Display Cases
Part Thirteen: Google Earth
Part Fourteen: The November 2012 Scholastic Book Fair
Part Fifteen: Sandy Hook School Enrollment For 2008-2017
Part Sixteen: School Documents From 2008-2012

12 Thoughts on “Sandy Hook Elementary Was Open, Part Sixteen: School Documents From 2008-2012

  1. Thank you for your great work ,

  2. moderndude1990 on November 10, 2019 at 1:02 pm said:

    Hello, Shill Murray

    Love the work that you do around here and appreciate that you were able to debunk the fraudulent book. Will you still be in the comment section debunking idiots that come and claim stupid stuff (stuff that hasn’t been said before or rarely said)? I’ve been hearing that some people are threatening to come into these comment sections and trying to “expose” you.

  3. Sir, can you completely debunk the latest nonsense Fetzer’s peddling here: https://jamesfetzer.org/2019/12/alison-sunny-maynard-j-d-sandy-hook-no-burial-for-the-dead-boy/

    • Shill Murray on January 3, 2020 at 8:43 pm said:

      It’s funny that Maynard (aka Sonja Mullerin) says she’s been “assisting” Fetzer in the Pozner lawsuit (which Fetzer of course lost), as she is not licensed to practice law in Wisconsin, and as such was told that she “may not give assistance in the preparation of pleadings, briefs, or other documents to be filed in Wisconsin courts until and unless she is licensed in the state.” Whoops.

      Anyway, if I’m reading correctly, Maynard’s argument boils down to “I don’t have the burial permit, therefore there is no burial permit, therefore there was no burial, therefore Noah Pozner never died”. That is… quite a leap. Of course she provides no evidence whatsoever of her claim that she was told there was no burial permit, so I guess we’re just supposed to take her word for it. This is pretty rich as she accused Samuel Green of hearsay earlier in her entry.

      So is there a burial permit? I would certainly bet that there is, but I guess we’ll find out eventually as I’ve asked someone to order a copy for me. I’m not sure how long that’ll take, but I will update accordingly once I’ve gotten word either way. Meanwhile, I guess we’re expected to believe that “they” were willing to fabricate Noah’s death certificate as well as erect a tombstone for a body that doesn’t exist at B’nai Israel Cemetery, but they couldn’t bother to print up a fake burial permit? Come on.

      As for the rest of the entry, it’s a bit of a Gish gallop. I’m not about to go down some rabbit hole looking into cemetery sextons (which she spends an awful lot of time prattling on about), but there are a couple of other things that I’d like to address: her claim that Samuel Green is licensed only as an embalmer and not a funeral director in the state of Connecticut? Yeah, if she had bothered to read the Connecticut General Statutes for Embalmers and Funeral Directors, then she would know that embalmers may act as funeral directors (section 20-223):

      Sec. 20-223. Embalmers may act as funeral directors. Any embalmer’s license issued by the Department of Public Health shall entitle the holder thereof to act as a funeral director or embalmer, provided owners of establishments operating a funeral service business shall comply with the provisions of section 20-222.

      This was later confirmed by actually talking to Mr. Green himself. It’s incredible what you can learn by actually asking people stuff.

      Then there’s this…

      Green also doesn’t know the name of his own business. He said it was “Abraham L. Green & Sons Funeral Home.” In fact, it is “A.L. Green & Son Funeral Home.” That’s why the name he gave in his affidavit comes up “not found” when you put it into the Connecticut license lookup.

      This is just silly. The actual, full name of the business is obviously “Abraham L. Green & Son Funeral Home” as that is how it is listed in literally every corner of the Internet; on the actual, physical signage in front of the home; in the Connecticut Funeral Directors Association directory; on the list of Independent Jewish Funeral Chapels; by the International Cemetery, Cremation & Funeral Association, etc. It is clearly being abbreviated in Connecticut’s license lookup system. She should be embarrassed to have included this.

      Lastly, asking for Lenny Pozner to produce a receipt for his six year-old son’s coffin? For a burial that happened over seven years ago? Who in their right mind would keep such a thing? Just absurd.

    • Shill Murray on January 28, 2020 at 7:58 pm said:

      Strap yourself into your seat and staple your socks to your calves, because I’m about to deliver the shock of a lifetime: as it turns out, Alison “Sunny” Maynard (aka Sonja Mullerin) is either a liar or totally incompetent, because I had no issue receiving the burial permit:

      (Actual plot location censored by me for what should be obvious reasons)

      Maybe Maynard/Mullerin didn’t want to spend the dollar fee? You’d think with all of the money she’s saved by cutting her own hair that she’d have plenty of it.

      P.S. – Notice the “ISSUED TO” is listed as “Abraham L. Green & Son, F.H.”, which further debunks Maynard/Mullerin’s silly claim that Samuel Green doesn’t know the name of his own funeral home.

  4. Nunnayo Bidnez on January 7, 2020 at 2:23 pm said:

    I read rule #5, but I’ll need you to debunk this one. In this link, Fetzer claims that Lenny Pozner has been using HONR as a cash cow since the year 2005.

    https://jamesfetzer.org/2019/04/lenny-pozners-honr-network-there-is-no-honor-among-thieves/

    • Shill Murray on January 29, 2020 at 4:14 pm said:

      I read rule #5

      Great! You may actually be the first, so thank you. But you’re in the clear; I haven’t debunked this one yet. I actually had never seen it before as I don’t stay up-to-date on Fetzer’s ramblings.

      In this link, Fetzer claims that Lenny Pozner has been using HONR as a cash cow since the year 2005.

      Lenny did in fact purchase the domain for Honr (which is not an acronym, for the record) back in 2005, seven or so years before it became a charity. That much is true. It was one of a few domains he had purchased around that time while working as the CTO of a hotel development project in Manhattan. That hotel was Hotel on Rivington… or “H on R”. HonR. Get it? Anyway, the company ultimately chose HotelOnRivington.com over HonR.com, but Pozner decided to hold onto it as it was a four letter domain and he thought maybe he could flip it at some point, though nobody ever bit.

      As for the idea that he’s used it as a “cash cow” since registering it, there’s absolutely no evidence of that. Honr – the actual organization – isn’t even a cash cow now. It didn’t receive its tax-free designation until 2018 and even now its income is listed as less than $50k a year. As for the domain, you can use the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine to see that it sat parked for years, so there was no money being made off of it. At one point it forwarded to another domain that Lenny used to sell remote PC repair services. After the shooting, it simply forwarded to noahpozner.org. Two important things to note here: 1) noahpozner.org (which, unlike honr.com, directly references the shooting) was not registered until 12/18/2012. If it had been registered beforehand, that would certainly be much more noteworthy. 2) Lenny originally solicited for cards and donations through “Noah’s Ark of Hope Fund” and not Honr, so obviously the idea to use the honr.com domain for that purpose hadn’t yet occurred to him (if the Wayback Machine is any indication, that didn’t take place until late 2014).

      Honestly, I’m not even sure what Fetzer is implying here. Does he really think that Lenny Pozner registered honr.com for a charity that wouldn’t exist and a shooting that wouldn’t occur for another seven years? And that he chose a name that literally has nothing to do with his son or Sandy Hook? And that he didn’t bother to register a much more relevant and significant domain name (in noahpozner.org) until much, much later?

  5. For someone who allegedly wants to debunk those nasty SH skeptics, you have a LOT of conditions for comments — honestly, it looks like you’re more interested in censorship/blocking input than open discussion.

    “5) Asking questions that have already been answered/making claims that have already been debunked.”

    The above is *particularly laughable*.

    “4) Requests for photos of dead children.”

    How about a foto of the dead Adam Lanza? — protecting the feelings of SH parents (after more than 7 years?) is often given as a reason for not releasing fotos of the (allegedly) deceased kids (such a foto is not something I would ever request), but it’s not clear what harm a foto of the dead Adam Lanza would do, compared to the *incalculable value* that would have in silencing most SH skeptics, right?

Please read before commenting.

Comment policy: Comments from previously unapproved guests will remain in moderation until I manually approve them. Honest questions and reasonable comments from all types of folks are allowed and encouraged but will sometimes remain in moderation until I can properly reply to them, which may occasionally take a little while. Contrary to what some of you think, losing your patience during this time and leaving another comment in which you insult me won't do much to speed up that process. If you don't like it, go somewhere else.

The types of comments that will no longer be approved include the following:

1) Off-topic comments. An entry about The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine are not the place to ask about Hillary's e-mails or pizza shop sex dungeons. Stay on topic.
2) Gish Gallops. Don't know what a Gish Gallop is? Educate yourself. And then don't engage in them. They are an infuriating waste of everyone's time and there is no faster way to have your comment deleted.
3) Yearbook requests. Like I told the fifty other folks asking for them: I don't have them, and even if I did, I wouldn't post them. I'm not about to turn my site into some sort of eBay for weirdos, so just stop asking.
4) Requests for photos of dead children. See above. And then seek professional help, because you're fucked up. These items are unavailable to the public; exempt from FOIA requests; and in violation of Amendment 14 of the US Constitution, Article 1 Section 8b of the Connecticut State Constriction, and Connecticut Public Act # 13-311.
5) Asking questions that have already been answered/making claims that have already been debunked. If you want to have a discussion, don't make it painfully obvious that you haven't bothered to read the site by asking a question that I've already spent a significant amount of time answering. I'll allow a little leeway here if you're otherwise well-behaved, but please, read the site. There's a search function and it works fairly well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Navigation