This audit reviews the draft articles and the supporting material against the meeting transcript and the reporting standards required by the committee.

Findings (high-level):
- Numeric inconsistency: The meeting transcript uses both $250 and $2.50 figures when referring to per-concert marketing allocations; the draft must not correct or conflate these numbers without direct evidence. The draft reports the per-concert amount exactly as found in the transcript and flags the inconsistency for staff follow-up.
- Attribution gaps: Several motions were recorded in the transcript without a clearly identified mover or seconder. The articles mark these movers as "not specified" rather than invent names or roles.
- Clarity/agency: The committee discussed raffle/lottery legality but did not cite a specific ordinance; the article avoids inventing the legal citation and reports the committee’s statement that additional legal approvals would be required.
- Chronology/ordering: The articles preserve the order of substantive business items and explicitly note which decisions were informational versus formal votes.

Audit categories and issues (select):
- Spelling: []
- Clarity: [ {"type":"ambiguous_amount","description":"Transcript alternates between $250 and $2.50 for per-concert marketing; article flags and preserves transcript wording.","severity":"major"} ]
- Chronology: []
- Framing: []
- Misinformation: [ {"type":"numeric_inconsistency","description":"Draft must not reconcile $2.50 and $250 without evidence; maintained transcript wording and noted the inconsistency.","severity":"major"} ]
- Misidentification: [ {"type":"missing_mover_second","description":"Motions approved/seconded in the meeting lack named individuals in the transcript; articles mark mover/second as 'not specified'.","severity":"major"} ]
- Out_of_context: []
- Quantitative precision: [ {"type":"approximation_needed","description":"Budget line-item references (e.g., 'marketing now 6,000') are reported as discussed but the article asks staff to confirm exact allocations and reporting metrics.","severity":"medium"} ]
- Process clarity: [ {"type":"decision_vs_direction","description":"Ensure articles distinguish between formal votes (sponsorship package approval) and direction/requested follow-ups (staff asked to share communications metrics).","severity":"medium"} ]
- Context clarity: [ {"type":"town_authority_limits","description":"Articles avoid attributing town-run raffle authority without citation; reporter notes the town's legal constraints were cited without a specific ordinance reference.","severity":"medium"} ]
- Agency clarity: []
- Question emphasis: []
- Omission: []
- Bias: []
- Duplicate: []

Action taken: The article texts were revised to preserve transcript wording for contested numeric items, to avoid inventing attributions, and to flag follow-up tasks for staff to supply clarifying numbers and metrics.