Audit: article set reviewed for clarity and accuracy

I reviewed the three draft articles (phishing/fraud response; referendum planning; food-service audit) against the Issues Rules checklist (spelling, clarity, chronology, framing, misinformation, misidentification, out_of_context, quantitative precision, process clarity, context clarity, agency clarity, question emphasis, omission, bias, duplicate).

Findings (summary): - Spelling/Names: No major misspellings of named entities; normalized “Southern Door County School District.” - Clarity/Chronology: All articles maintain meeting order and separate agenda vs. public comment; clarified statutory deadlines and factual dates mentioned in the transcript. - Misidentification: Minor ambiguity exists in mapping transcript speaker numeric labels to named roll-call speakers. I flagged this for transparency and used only explicit name occurrences for attributions; where numeric-to-name mapping was unclear, the article uses functional labels (e.g., "Superintendent," "staff member"). - Quantitative precision: Where dollar amounts or per-pupil estimates appeared in the transcript (e.g., $2,200 per pupil, $71,000 adjustment), I reported the values and noted when they were illustrative or approximate. Where the transcript did not supply exact recovered-loss amounts or deductible totals, the articles state "not specified" or "minus the deductible." - Omission: Ensured the board’s roll-call votes, the corrected Act 118 figure and the July 23 workshop scheduling appear in the governance article; program pause for milk and the $71,000 adjustment are in the food-service article.

Severity: Issues were low-to-medium; none required removal of articles. Revisions made in final text addressed the minor mapping ambiguity, made monetary/temporal uncertainties explicit, and added precise provenance links to transcript segments.