MVSD School Board Annual Meeting March 5, 2026

0014 minutes. But, it'll be it'll be nice. >> Hey folks, uh it's 6:59. Please take a seat. If you are in the queue to vote on the official ballot, uh pre- please proceed as uh uh quickly as possible. All right. It's now 7:00 p.m. Thank you for attending the 2026 annual meeting of the Merrimack Valley School District. At this point, I've asked Officer Schnieble of the Concord Police Department to please get in the voting line. If you're in front of Officer Schnieble, you can still continue to vote. He's right there in the door. And there doesn't appear to be anyone behind him, so that's great. Thank you, everyone, for arriving on time this this evening. Uh, we avoided a lot of the chaos that uh characterized the beginning of the meeting last year, and I

002very much appreciate your your cooperation. Yeah. Okay. Um Do you guys happen to have the morning up? Say "And have I can display Uh, not usually, cuz it's disconnected right now. Um and you can If you want somebody to sing it, or No. you want somebody to just do it Pledge of Allegiance is fine. Pledge of Allegiance Okay. Pledge is fine. Okay. Thank Thank you, sir. Um So, as soon as uh voters complete the voting process, assistant moderator Rodney Phillips of the town of Loudon will preside over the tabulation of votes on articles 1 and 2. That process will take place at these tables right here. He'll be assisted by election officials, ballot clerks, and supervisors in that process. At this time, I would like to recognize retiring facilities director of the Merrimack Valley School

003District, Fred Reagan, >> [applause] >> to lead us in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Fred. As is our practice in the school district at this annual meeting, I'd now like to recognize all members of the armed services, active reserve and guard, for service of their country and please ask them to stand and be recognized by the body. >> [applause] [applause] >> And let's let's also take a moment and perhaps a moment of silence and pay homage to past veterans of these armed services and also those who are in harm's way at this time around the the globe. Please. Thank you. I'd also like

004to take a moment to uh recognize John Hebert, who served the school district very ably for, I think, 7 or 8 years as assistant moderator. John was from the town of Salisbury, and he passed away in 2025. Please uh take a moment and join me in recognizing John. Thank you. All right, just a just a few quick recognitions. Rodney Phillips of Loudon is uh serving as assistant moderator this year. Thank you, Rodney. Um Chris Berry has also been deputized as an assistant moderator, and will be helping with me with the conduct of the meeting. I'd also like like to recognize district clerk Candy Lamper, who is uh serving as clerk for the district for the first time this year, and also recognize Kristen Bean Warren, who served as clerk of the school district for 6

005or 7 years. Kristen, are you somewhere in the room here? Anyway, uh thank you. >> [applause] >> And thank you uh especially to the supervisors and ballot clerks from the five sending communities, who uh very ably assist me in conducting the meeting every year. Thank you. >> [applause] >> Okay. Fred uh Fred wanted me to make sure that everyone understands that if we do have to evacuate the room for some reason, we do so through those two doors, go left or right. Okay? Fred, anything you want to add to that? No. Let's go. Good. All right. Um you all have or should have picked up on your way in a copy of the rules of procedure for the meeting. It's this blue sheet. Essentially, the same rules that I prepare every year. Um I'm going

006to paraphrase them very briefly. I'm not going to read them, but I do encourage you to take a few moments to skim through them so that you understand the the way that I have come to conduct this meeting in the years that I've been doing this. >> [clears throat] >> I want to make clear that I do not follow Robert's Rules. Although many of the provisions that I do incorporate into the conduct of the meeting uh utilize elements of Robert's Rules. Unless requested by a voter otherwise and adopted by voice vote, I will read the articles before deliberation. So, if someone cares to make a motion or a point of order to dispense with the reading of the articles, I'm going to read them. If you wish to speak, please do so at the single

007microphone in the center aisle on the floor here. I will not recognize comments or motions from the floor except for a point of order. Please state your name and town before you speak. Please do so clearly so that the clerk can record your name accurately. If you wish to move the question, you must do so at the microphone, not as a point of order from the floor. Anyone standing in line when a motion to move the question is in order will be allowed to speak before I will recognize that motion. Please limit comments or questions to the pending motion and I will remind folks as we proceed which motion is pending on the floor. Often times there are amendments to amendments and it can get a bit confusing. I will allow anyone to speak for

008a first time before I recognize someone to speak for a second time. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes unless you're introducing the article in which case uh you'll have up to 10 minutes to present on that particular article. Although I would encourage everyone to try to be as brief as possible. Do not repeat what has already been said but strive to add new information or perspective in your comments. All voting this year will be by voice vote unless a paper ballot is requested or in the case of Article 3 required by statute. If in my judgment the majority is not clear by a voice vote I will move to a standing count of cards. One supervisor or ballot clerk from each of the five towns will assist with counting by sections. Uh this year

009in the event that we do have paper ballots and we know we have at least one we're going to vote by section and starting with the far right hand section in this bank of bleachers, my right your left if you're looking at me. Uh beyond the the center aisle that's that is section one. This is section two. The floor and head table are section three. That bank of bleachers to the left of the aisle is section four. And the far bank uh of bleachers on the left is section five. Uh if you do proceed uh to a paper ballot vote, please go right to the entrance to the voting area, which is on the left side, my left, your right. There will be uh gatekeepers, so to speak, who will check your wristband and put

010a number on your wristband for each uh for each uh paper ballot vote. Paper ballot votes will each be colored separately in the event that we have more than one. You proceed, you grab your paper ballot, mark your ballot, proceed directly to the ballot box. Rodney, uh in the green lime green shirt, you can't miss that shirt, will be uh presiding over the ballot box and um and and then organizing the tabulation of of vote results. Is everyone clear on the process for any paper ballot votes? Is that a Okay, thumb up. Good, thank you. Um Okay. If there is a request for a secret ballot, pursuant to RSA 40:4A, I will recognize the request if requested by five of voters present at the meeting in writing prior to a voice vote. Everyone should know

011the drill by now. If you want a secret ballot vote on something that's uh on a pending motion, you have to approach the microphone, indicate that you have the names of five registered voters in the district who are present at the meeting, uh provide that in writing to me. I will read the names, ask those individuals to stand before I will recognize a secret ballot vote. Please make sure when you write the names down there is they're legible. Uh that without saying. And then voting will proceed by section as I just described. Uh, a ruling of the moderator can be overturned by the meeting by majority vote. That's the sacred, uh, cardinal point of the traditional town meeting in the state of New Hampshire. If you don't like something that I've decided, you can overrule

012me by simple majority vote. Any action on an article may be reconsidered later in the meeting unless reconsideration is restricted pursuant to RSA 40:10. If reconsideration is restricted, a motion may be made to reconsider, but reconsideration can only occur at a duly warned meeting at least 7 days later. And it goes without saying, and I say it every year, please be civil and respectful to one another. Uh, we're good at this in this district. And even people with whom you may disagree, I simply ask you to listen respectfully. Try to refrain from outward expressions of emotion, and please no heckling. Please no heckling. We're better than that. Are there any questions on the rules of the meeting? If you have a question about meeting procedure, you may pose that question by point of order at

013any time in the meeting. If there are no questions, may I have a motion to adopt these as the rules rules of the meeting? Motion's been made, duly seconded. All in favor of adopting the blue sheet as the rules of the meeting, please say aye. Opposed, nay. And the rules are adopted. Uh one last item before I turn the meeting over to school board chair Tracy Brickey. We did process 13 absentee ballots earlier in the day. Um this is something I haven't done in the past, but I've been advised it's standard practice in many school districts and town meetings to read the names of the individuals whose absentee ballots were cast. From Penacook, William Jewel, Margaret Lynch, Terry Pike, Pat Pike, Marilyn Davis, Dewitt Davis. From Boscawen, Ray Fisher. From Loudon, Bobby Jo Michael, Chris

014Michael, Lisa Laughlin, Tamara Chalifour. From Salisbury, Theodore Andrus. From Webster, Nancy Rideout. And at this time I'd like to recognize school board chair Tracy Brickey Brickey for some introductions and opening remarks. Thank you. Thank you, Charlie. Um so I would like to start by introducing the board. Um I'll start to my right in the back, Lorna Carlisle, who is our board member from Salisbury. Sally Hersch Dickinson, who is our board member from Penacook. Stacy Jarvis, our board member from Boscawen. Jessica Wheeler Russell, our board member at large. David Nesbitt, our board member from Wes Webster. Tom Liberty, our board member from Boscawen. Amanda York, our board member from Loudon. Julia Jones, our board member from Salisbury. And excuse me. And Laura Vincent, our board member from Loudon. Um I am Tracy Brickey, board member from

015Penacook. Um Melissa Mussey, sorry. Board member from Webster. Do I have somebody else? No, that's it. Um, I would like to recognize uh our administrators here today. Uh Randy, our superintendent. Randy Wormald, sorry. >> [laughter] >> Catherine Masterson, our assistant superintendent. And our BA, Sam York. And we've already met um Fred. Oops, I forgot Julia Julie who is our um director of uh special services. And um Kathleen Boucher, who is our HR director. Um I would also like to before we proceed with our formal agenda, like to take a moment to recognize a pillar of our community who is celebrating an incredible milestone. For over 30 years, Dr. Ram Randy Wormald has dedicated his life to the mission of public education. For the past 8 years, we have been fortunate enough to have him at

016the helm of Merrimack Valley School District. First as our assistant superintendent and then as our superintendent. Randy, your tenure has been defined by three things that have kept this district moving forward. Stability, positivity, and inspiration. In an era where education has faced unprecedented challenges, you have been our steady hand. You haven't just managed through difficult times, you have led through them with a contagious optimism that reminds us why we do this work. Beyond the titles and the logistics, Randy's legacy is built on two unwavering commitments. For all our students, every decision he makes starts and ends with the question what is in their best interest? For our staff, he has been a tireless advocate for our educators, ensuring they have the support and respect they need to thrive. Randy, thank you for three decades of

017service, your leadership, and your heart. We are a stronger district because of you. We wish you well in your retirement. >> [applause] [applause] >> And I did that without breaking down. I'd also like to recognize school board member Sally Hirsch Dickinson. She is stepping down from the board after 9 years of dedicated service. Sally's contributions have been extensive, including serving on many key committees, such as policy, negotiations, curriculum, student ethics, and more. Applying her sharp editorial eye, affectionately known as the grammar police, which has not only ensured clarity in our minutes and communications, but has also provided valuable lessons for all of us. I'm glad that I'm reading this because there is bound to be a grammatical error error, and I know Sally would catch it. We will certainly miss your unwavering conviction and dedicated

018support for both students and faculty, which have been hallmarks of your tenure. Thank you for all you've done for MV. >> [applause] [applause] >> Just one more. As you all know, um Randy is retiring. Our new superintendent next year will be Katherine Masterson, our current assistant superintendent. >> [applause] >> And our new assistant superintendent will be Jen Moore, our current Penacook Elementary principal. >> [applause] >> Thank you, Charlie. All right, everybody ready? Okay, let's go. Article 1 and 2. Now, Article 1 and 2 is voting on the moderator and school board seats. Those votes are being tabulated by our intrepid team under the leadership of Rodney Phillips as we speak, so we will pass over reading of the results of voting on Article 1 and 2 until they're available to me. Article 3. Shall we

019adopt the provisions of RSA 40:13, known as SB 2, to allow official ballot voting on all issues before the Merrimack Valley School District on the second Tuesday in March? This article is submitted by petition. It requires a 3/5 majority vote. By statute, it also requires a paper ballot vote. We must hold the polls open for 1 hour. However, to be clear, as as in past practice, we can continue with other action on the warrant while the polls remain open for voting on Article 3. Do I have a motion on Article 3? It's been moved. Is there a second to the motion? It's been seconded. I will recognize a lead petitioner, and I recognize Louise Andrews to speak to Article 3, and a reminder that uh anyone speaking as a lead petitioner or school board member

020uh to introduce an article is limited in time to 10 minutes. Thank you, Louise. Thank you, Charlie. Louise Andrews from Salisbury. I put in the petition for SB2. I think it's time that we modernize. Many years ago when the school district started to have everybody come in to Penacook was great. Today it's not. Everybody's busy. I know parents in my town, I spoke with them, that wanted to come tonight, but it's hard to find a babysitter and only one could come. What we need to do is pass SB2. I mean, we have a public hearing, we have a deliberative session, and then you vote in your own town at your own leisure. It's all day for school board members and the warrant. And I'm hoping that everybody here tonight will vote for it. I mean,

021for people in Penacook it's easy. They just would walk in to here and vote. The rest of us from Salisbury, Webster, Loudon, we drive 20 minutes to a half an hour depending on the weather. And like tonight, we're all hoping it doesn't snow or rain before we get to go home. So, I think it would just be nice if we could all vote in our own town. Thank you. Further discussion on article three. My name is Curtis Rude, R U D E of Loudon. I'm not in favor of this proposal. It's been voted on previously. I think it's important that the citizens in all of our communities get the opportunity and and avoid and avail themselves of the opportunity to participate by the process that we have in place now. This has been voted on

022before and voted down. I think that we need to have people more engaged and passing this would not help in get the engagement of people to come here to the same amount uh to the same frequency that what we're seeing. Thank you. Further discussion on Article 3. Uh yes. And I just a reminder, if anyone has difficulty rising and getting to the microphone, we will come to you with a mobile mic. Okay. Just raise your hand and let us know. Alyssa Lehár, um from Loudon. I just have a clarifying question. I'm hearing from the audience some people saying that at a deliberative session, if we were to switch to SB2, people would be able to raise amendments and possibly change the budget the budget at a deliberative session, and then that would be voted on.

023Is that what the new procedure would be? Or would be in the deliberative session, would those be up for amendment or not? Uh I'm going to uh defer to Jim O'Shaughnessy, the school district's legal counsel, to respond to that question. Thank you. No, it's it's not muted. It's working. Is this working? All right. Um in an SB2 district, there's a deliberative session uh in typically it's the end of January or February, and then there's a voting session which is the second Tuesday in March. At the deliberative session, you have a warrant article which contains a proposed operating budget and a default budget. The The deliberative session legislative body, this body, can amend the proposed operating budget. Um, they cannot amend the default budget. That number is statutory. That number that is amended then gets put

024on the ballot that is voted on on the second Tuesday in March. Make sense? Yes, thank you. Further discussion on Article 3. There being none, are you ready for the vote? Okay, this is a paper ballot vote. I'd ask our three gatekeepers to get ready. Uh, a reminder that you're entering the voting area on the left side, my left, your right. We're starting with group one, section one, which is the far right-hand side of the bleachers, beyond the center aisle. Please proceed. And then go immediately to your seats as soon as you're done voting. And I'll note that it is 7:25. We will hold the poll open for voting on Article 3 until 8:25 p.m. However, as I indicated earlier, we will proceed with other business on the warrant while we're waiting. Uh, number one.

025So, we're going to put a little mark on your wristband uh, just to make clear that you have entered the voting area for voting on Article 3 with with a number one, first vote, first paper ballot vote. >> Group two. Group two, you can now proceed. You can leave it on here. It's going to pick up their conversations, their conversations, their conversations. I'm >> Mhm. >> Okay. Group three the floor and the head table can now get in line to vote. Just a reminder to uh as soon as you've done voting, just please proceed back to your seat. Thank you. All right, group four. Why don't you start getting in line now? That's everyone on the left bank of bleachers to the left of the center aisle. >> Yeah, please take your seats if you've

026already voted. Charlie. Yeah. I know you're not needed, so I'm stepping back here. So, we have a spare mic. General run, if you see somebody out here that needs something, I'll run out with the mic. Okay, I just wanted you to know we have one ready to go. >> All right, group five, the last group, the far left bleacher bank. >> If you have uh If you've uh voted on Article 3, please proceed your seat. And once it's clear to me that almost everyone who intends to vote on Article 3 has done so, we'll get going on Article 4. >> Okay, it looks like 99.9% of those intending to vote on Article 3 have done so. As I indicated by statute, the poll must remain open for voting on Article 3 for 1 hour. When

027we hit 8:25 p.m., I will remind folks that they have an opportunity if they have not voted on Article 3 to do so. Uh we can't tabulate the results of Article 3 until after 8:25 p.m. So, at this point, we will proceed to further action on the warrant and take up Article 4. Article 4. To see if the school district will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of 51 million 893,330 for the support of schools, the salaries of school district officials and agents, and for the payment of statutory obligations of said district. This article does not include appropriations voted on uh voting in other warrant articles. A majority vote is required. The school board recommends this article. And I recognize uh a motion to move Article 4. Is there a motion? It's been moved

028by several school board members. Is there a second to the motion? It's been moved by other school board members. And at this point, I would like to recognize Tom LaLiberty to speak to article 4. So, thank you very much. I appreciate it. I just like to remind everybody this budget was presented at February on February 4th at the public Yeah, I can hear it. Oh boy, it's not where I wanted it. Okay. Um it was presented on February 4th at the public hearing. So, if you didn't see that, if you get on your phone or if you brought a tablet you can get into the Merrimack Valley School District webpage and if you scroll down a little bit there, you will see a updated public hearing presentation and that is dated on February 17th. So,

029there was some changes made or a change made and that one has the updated numbers. So, if you would like to follow along, I'm pretty much just going to follow that as I present the budget. But before I do that, I just want to say a few things. I remember sitting in the audience last year and I remember a couple statements that rang true with me. One of the statement was, "Where is our money going? And why did you pick the amounts that you picked?" And that was a little bit of my mantra. I had the opportunity to chair the finance committee and for us, it certainly was our mission to bring clarity to the budget and the process that we used to develop it. We wanted to provide you more information than you actually

030need. We wanted to present it in a manner that could be understood and we understand that some of you don't agree with that with the numbers are right now and it's fine and it's our democratic process but we wanted everybody in this room to be well informed about our budget. So, I will talk a little bit about it, but just a a little stat about it. There are 806 lines in the budget. 85% of those are 708 of them are level funded, meaning they didn't go up or they didn't go down. And then 15 only 15% of them either had an increase or decrease. And really, the bulk of this conversation is going to be on those lines. So, I'll talk about the operating budget, um kind of the big uh 500-ft view. The operating

031budget is 51 million 893,300. That's an increase of 1,697,000. I'm sorry, 1,697,406. That's a 3.3% increase to last year's adjusted budget. So, what is the operating budget? That is the amount of money that the school district needs to operate its schools. That 51.8 million does not include revenues and it does not include state aid, um which is subtracted. So, the amount of money that is to be apportioned or taxed is 33 million 832, 577. So, some of the drivers that caused the increase. So, the biggest one was health and dental. So, that was 1,143,000 uh increase. That's a 14.2% increase. The health was 9.8% and the dental was 4.4. So, 1.1 million out of the 1.6 was health insurance. So, there was a $475,000 increase in food service. So, that line had been budgeted consistently

032at a quarter uh 3/4 of a million dollars for a few years, but we were actually spending $1.2 million. So, we needed to increase that budget line to try to match the amount of money that it costs to feed the kids as we were budgeting. There was $322,000 increase in contractual um obligations from the teacher contracts. And mostly that is workshops and graduate level courses as a result of the uh decrease in the budget last year. Uh the teachers um gave up some of those things. And those are back in. There's $222,000 increase in curriculum and programs, so a lot of resources and some summer support for kids. $159,000 increase in technology. That's an alarm system, security cameras, Chromebooks, computers, and licenses. $145,000 in NHRS and FICA. NHRS is the retirement system, which the school

033district is obligated to uh participate in. And uh FICA is uh social security and Medicare. There was $80,000 restored in facilities. Last year, 100,000 was reduced. We increased it by $80,000 and didn't fully put that money back in. Utilities is another thing that's been historically under-budgeted. Um [snorts] this is $66,000 increase, so this is your uh wood pellets, oil, uh heat, electricity, and it's probably a few more, but when you added those all together for years, we've been under under-budgeting that. So, this $66,000 increase should get us to about where we are paying. And then we have $50,000 increase in the SAU. Decreases, um, $184,000 in separation pay. So, when teachers leave, there are fewer teachers that we expect to leave, so we don't have as much separation pay. $167,000 in middle school special ed

034transport I'm sorry, tuition. So, we have fewer, um, fewer students uh that need out of district placement. We got $50,000 in contract transportation for those students who need, uh, uh, transportation, special ed students. And $50,000 in vehicle replacement was reduced and that has to do with leases. So, the revenues, though there is a change. So, this is the big change. So, in February 4th at the public hearing, we said there was a revenue of $710,000 in federal grants. That was a mistake. And that had better added on. So, the updated presentation that I, uh, hope that many of you have linked on from February 17th has taken that, um, uh, revenue out and has adjusted all of the numbers that it affected. There is $750,000 from federal revenues, which includes Medicaid and child nutrition. There

035is $482,000 in state revenue, which includes special education aid, EFA phase-out grants, vocational transportation, and child nutrition. And there is $1,828,000 in local, excuse me, [clears throat] revenue and that includes, uh, end over tuition and, uh, Merrimack Valley Learning Center tuition, food sales, and charter school rent. Just a couple last things here. Labeled this one miscellaneous. Um, just so that you know, in this budget there is no new positions added. Um, last year with reductions in the budget, 19 positions were reduced. Two of those positions have been added, and those positions are library assistants at the middle school and the high school. And that's around, I think somewhere around 55, 60,000 dollars. And there are no unfilled positions in this budget, meaning there are no positions that we plan to have, uh, where we put

036a salary and benefits in and do not plan to put a person in it. So, Charlie, that's it in a nutshell. Yep. Thank you. Thank you, Tom. Uh, Article 4 has been moved and seconded and is open to further discussion, debate, and amendment. And I recognize you. Please state your name and town. Hi, I'm Christina Moore. I'm I'm Loudon element, uh, Loudon. Um, I Hold on, let me just pull up my notes. Public speaking's not my thing. Um, so I'm a Loudon resident. I'm a parent of four children in the Merrimack Valley School District, and I'm an employee of the district as of last year. Last year, many parents, educators, and staff came here to support our schools. But as the meeting went late into the night, many had to leave. So, they went home

037to be ready to serve our students the next day. Their voices were never counted or considered in the final vote. Tonight, I'm asking that we vote on the budget as it was thoughtfully developed by the professionals who know our schools and understand what our students need to succeed academically and prepare for their college or future careers. None of us enjoy paying taxes, but education in our community and our state is funded this way, and our children deserve our investment. By voting on the proposed budget now, we ensure that everyone here tonight has the opportunity to be heard and supported and support what's best for our schools and our students. Therefore, I move that the district budget budget as proposed be adopted as written. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Further discussion and debate on Article 4.

038Yes. Um so she just moved, don't we need >> Name name and town. >> Kelly Bogan, Loudon. Thank you. She moved to vote on it. >> already been moved, actually. >> Okay. Um so I just have a couple of things. Um in 2021 our tax rate was 12.46 and now we're looking at 16.55. I really appreciate the budget you guys put together this year. I actually understand it. Um and I appreciate what Tom has said and how thoughtful he was with going through the budget. Um I get that the teachers here work really hard, um but according to New Hampshire Department of Education, um the student-teacher ratio is 25 students per educator for K through 2, 30 students per educator for grades 3 through 12, and our district average is about 12 students per teacher,

039so that's far below the benchmarks. That suggests that we have opportunities to operate more efficiently. Our enrollment has declined by 66 students, yet we're being asked to approve almost 1.7 million more in spending. It just simply doesn't add up. Um there's also very high salaries throughout the district. Um the superintendent o- earns over $191,000, special ed admin 129,000, teachers over 90,000, and we're asking for more money. They work 180 classroom days a year, about 180 total. And then the Loudon the median income is 106 for an entire households and we have one teacher making more than that. It's just not sustainable. Um and despite all the spending, our academic outcomes are not where they should be. Current proficiency rates are around 37% in math, 32% in science, and 46% in reading. When taxes rise, enrollment

040declines, and results remain weak, it's fair for taxpayers to expect better stewardship of the money before approving another increase. For those reasons, I support reducing the proposed budget and asking the district to operate more efficiently. And I motion to amend Article 4 to replace the proposed budget amount to $51 million voted by secret ballot. That's the last year's budget plus 2.5 for inflation. And their enrollment is down by 3%. And I also have the five names and signatures. I will recognize that motion. A motion has been made to amend Article 4 to the bottom line figure of $51 million. And a request has also been made for secret ballot. Right. Uh The it it's acceptable to amend the the She didn't move the question. No, she said she said to move the amendment. Can I

041ask can I ask the speaker to clarify? Are you asking me or the woman before? Cuz I'm moving to amend that >> speaker asked to move the question? No, she didn't. She never asked to move the question. >> hear it. No, she didn't and I didn't either. >> I'm not going to recognize that motion because I don't believe that Article 4 has been given sufficient time to to be fully aired. Yeah. I didn't move it. Not call the question. She moved to adopt the budget as presented. Uh is the previous speaker present still? Can you come to the mic, please? She did not move the question. No, she didn't. Hello. Yes. Hi. Was it your intention to move the question or simply to register your support for Article 4 as introduced? So, I'm not clear

042on the specific language that I am supposed to use in order to start a vote and to make a vote happen. My intention was that as a community, we vote on the budget as it was written now before an amendment is suggested so that the community has an opportunity to vote on the budget that was created by a professional staff. I am not going to recognize that motion if in fact that that was your intent because I do not believe that Article 4, which is the operating budget of the school district, haven't been had been given sufficient opportunity for debate and discussion. And further, there were other people in line, one of whom already spoke, uh who did make a motion to amend. I will recognize that motion. That motion is in order. Uh to

043be clear, folks, if you want to move the question, say, "I move the question." And that that was not clear to me at all. Okay, so just to be clear, if I had worded it that I wanted >> No comments from the floor. Yes. >> If I had worded what I said that I wanted to amend the budget by decreasing it by $1 so that everyone has the opportunity to vote on the budget that was created by this professional staff, that would have been okay. But because I didn't decrease the budget by $1, my vote like my request is not going to be heard. No. No. The The The Article 4 had already been moved and seconded by members of the school board, was open to further discussion and debate. You made a a a

044statement, a presentation on your views on Article 4. Perfectly acceptable. You didn't say, "I now move the question." You did not say that. >> You're right. I have not taken a course on how to speak in the correct lingo here. That is true. All right. Where we're at Where we're at No No comments from the floor. You have to come to the mic if you have a question. What is your point of order? I don't think I cut her off. I I think I >> I've I'm I've made a decision here that in my judgment the previous speaker did not move the question, simply registered her support for Article 4 as introduced. Point of order. I'd like to make a motion to override that decision of the moderator. >> recognize that motion. I'll go ahead

045and make the motion as well to do that by a count of cards. All right, a motion has been made to overrule the moderator's decision. The decision that is being sought to be overridden is my belief that the previous speaker did not move the question. If you're in favor of the motion to overrule >> clarity, my motion was to override your decision to not recognize her motion to move the question. She came up and very clearly said that that was her intent. And the reason The reasoning I have for that >> thing. >> was the If that was the If that was her intent and if we're overriding your decision >> to proceed. that then that >> If you I I I believe I understand your intent. If you don't believe that I was correct

046in not recognizing the motion to move the question, you will vote yes, and by majority vote you can overrule that decision. If you disagree, you will vote no. Are you ready for the question? Okay. If you're in favor of this gentleman's motion, what What is what is your name, sir? Adam Russell Adam Russell from Penacook. I did also call for a card vote. >> of Adam Russell's motion to override the decision of the moderator to not recognize the apparent motion to move the question, you will vote yes. Let Let me clarify the motion that's on the floor, please. If you're not in favor of that motion to override, we will proceed to further action on Article 4 in a pending motion to amend Article 4. No. That one. Uh Mr. Russell, your intention is to

047override my decision to not recognize the motion to move the question, correct? Does everyone understand the pending motion? The motion is to override the decision of the moderator to not recognize the motion to move the question. Was that motion sufficiently seconded? Yes, it was. That motion is in order. And I will recognize uh I will bring it to a vote. And Yeah, Mr. Russell requested a card vote. Uh Rodney, do we have five people prepared to count cards in each of the five sections? Okay. If those people would proceed to each of the five sections A motion has been made to override the decision of the moderator to not recognize the motion to move the question. If you are if you vote yes, you are in favor of overriding the moderator. If you vote no,

048you are opposed to overriding the moderator. Are you ready for the question? All in favor, please raise your cards. Okay, if I could ask ask each of the counters to let me know the number of yes votes. 71 in section 1, section 2. 75. 95. Section 3. 54. Section four Section five Okay, if you are opposed to the motion to override the moderator, please raise your cards. And keep them raised high. I'm going to do some do some math here. Hold on. Are we done with counting? No. I'll set counters. Okay, section one Section one Section two 13 Section three Section four. 50. 5 0. Section five. 57. Give me a minute. 247 votes in the affirmative. votes in the negative. And the motion to override the moderator is adopted. We now move to the

049motion to move the question. Are you uh is there a second to the motion to move the question? That motion is non-debatable. Are you ready for the question? Point of order. I'm I'm not going to accept a motion from someone in line after a motion was made to move the question. We did with That happened last year, and if you recall last year, uh it just No. No, we're moving to the motion to move the question. Yes, sir, you have a point of order. Okay. The The motion to override was was clear, I think, to the voters. The vote in favor of overriding was to nullify uh my decision that the previous speaker had made a motion to move the question. The vote opposed to override was to allow that motion to be recognized uh

050is was to not allow that motion to be recognized. Therefore, I'm going to proceed to a motion to move the question which has been made by the previous speaker, and I'm sorry I don't remember your name, was seconded. It's a non-debatable motion, requires a 2/3 majority to be adopted. Per my rules. Yes, sir. I guess my my decision here is that the previous speaker, upon uh further comment, made clear the intent of her motion. If her wording wasn't precise, if her wording wasn't precise, and that wording is not prescribed in statute. It's not prescribed in statute. If her wording was not precise, it was subsequently made so by further debate around and points of order uh brought to the attention of the floor by previous speakers. At this point, I'm going to call for a

051vote on the motion to move the question. It requires a 2/3 majority to be adopted. I was a point of order over here. Yes, sir. >> Right. Right, but but the the decision made on Mr. Russell's motion essentially becomes the the dominant decision at this point in the meeting. No, I'm not going to recognize. There was a point of order here. Yes, sir. And the reason is I did not understand the prior speaker's intent. No, it doesn't matter. At this point, I'm going to call for a motion on the going to No, I'm not going to write recognize further points of order. At this point, I'm going to call for a vote on the motion to move the question. Requires a 2/3 majority to be adopted. Are you ready for the question? If you're in

052favor If you're in favor of moving the question, you will vote yes. If you're opposed to moving the question on the adoption of Article 4 as introduced, you will vote no. Requires a 2/3 majority to move the question. Are you ready for the question? Should we do a standing count vote? Okay. If you're in favor of the motion to move the question, please raise your card. >> Mhm. Right. Yeah. Okay. Almost set. All set? Section 1, please speak loudly when you read out your your uh vote count. Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 If you are opposed to the motion to move the question, please raise your cards. >> All set counters? Section 1? Section 2? Section 3? Section 4? Section 5? 57. Give me a minute. Okay. A total of 454 votes

053were cast. A 2/3 majority is 303. There were 332 votes in the affirmative and 122 votes in the negative. And the motion to move the question on the adoption of Article 4 is adopted. Article 4 is now open to vote on uh Article 4 as introduced. It's been moved and seconded. Are you ready for the question? What? No, it it's it was called. You mentioned very specifically that when question was called, those that were already in line would still get to speak. Okay. Fair enough. Who was in line at the time? Mr. Russell, was anyone else in line at the time? These two? No. Teresa was not in line at the time. No, she wasn't. >> [cheering] >> I Yes, I was. Yes, she was. I can confirm she was. No. The purpose of a

054point of order is not to argue with the moderator. If you have a procedural question, I'm open to it. What is your point of order? All right, well, that it Going forward, we will follow that practice, but I can't correct what just happened. Who was in line at the point at the time that the motion was made to move the question? I will recognize these three speakers to speak to the pending motion which is the adoption of Article 4. Go ahead, Mr. Russell. Hi, again. I'm Adam Russell. I'm from Penacook. The budget has been called and I am personally somewhat grateful for that. Um Last year, Tom just mentioned when going over the budget that last year due to the budget cuts that resulted um from uh uh the voters here uh that we lost

055a total of uh either directly as a result of the budget loss or in production of force sort of as a fallout of that, we lost to 19 members of staff and faculty. Is that the correct number, Tom? Um and as I understand it, two have been put back and the current budget doesn't put any more than that back. I've also done a lot of reading on the budget this year. Um it's not a growth budget. It's a budget that meets our contractual obligations. It meets our legal obligations. It meets the needs of the district. Um I've already mentioned it doesn't put any of those positions back. As I understand it, somewhere in the neighborhood of 75 to 80% of this budget is more or less fixed cost. We can't not pay that money. So,

056the remaining 20 to 25% of the budget in which we have any leeway to decide what to do, my understanding is that it boils down largely to people. It boils down to head count. We've already lost 17 members of faculty and staff. A significant number of those, as I recall, are teachers that we've already had to let go as a result of budget cuts. We don't have a lot of room in this budget for cuts. Further, uh I hear a lot of people talking about their tax burden, and I I do hear that. I am empathetic to that as a citizen in Penacook. If you're looking to fight a battle on taxes, there's there's really the there's no no other way to put it, you're in the wrong room. The way to fight your uh

057your education >> One one more minute, Mr. Russell. Thank you. The way to fight your education taxes is to get downtown and go talk to your state reps, talk to your state senators, talk to the Department of Education. Swept taxes are not being distributed properly >> uh across the the state of New Hampshire, and federal and state funding is not happening appropriately down down in uh the state house. They spend an awful lot of time arguing about adequate funding, specifically about the definition of the word adequate, and not the operative word funding. I have 30 seconds. Now, we're we are keeping track of the time. Please please complete your thought. >> to reduce your tax burden, I don't want to see the taxes from MVSD reduced because, frankly, of every tax that I pay on

058my property, I know every penny any of it from MVSD goes to educating my children. Okay. Thank you. >> Further question or comment on Article 4. Hi, Jen Mercer from Loudon. I first wanted to thank say thank you to Tom for all of his hard work on this budget, for the multiple meetings that were had, and for all the transparency. There were also other members of the board board that worked hard to make this everything were transparent. I'm very impressed with the amount of information on the website. It's all very appreciated. Um unfortunately, I didn't make the public hearing this year, so I couldn't ask questions. When you look at it quickly, the 3.38% increase is not so bad. But when you start to realize that enrollment dropped about 70 students, I started to look

059a little bit closer. And I just want to point out some non-academic expenditures that I find concerning, and then hopefully the board can look at it in the future to see if if we're going to sharpen our pencils and get these numbers down, maybe we should look at some of these. Jen, can I enter interrupt just for a moment? I want to point out it's 8:24. If anyone has not voted on Article 3 who wishes to do so by paper ballot, please proceed because we will close the voting on Article 3 at 8:25 p.m. Proceed. Sorry to interrupt you. >> That's okay. So, function 2120 is counseling services for $2 million. Function 2122 is drug and alcohol counseling for $42,000. I'm not sure why we're doing drug and alcohol counseling. 2130 is health services for

060$1 million. 2140 is psychological services for $366,000. 2149 is behavioral services for $367,000. 2190 is student support services for $1 million. There are 2319 is other school services, which has an advertising of $40,000. I don't know what we're advertising for. Um 2490 graduation services, which are important. I'm just wondering why last year it was 16,000 and this year it's 28,000. >> 1 minute left, Jen. Um function 2900 is the collective bargaining for 336,000. Last year this was 14,000. So, I'm not sure why it went up over 320,000 when there's also an additional article that has that. So, that's almost $5 million of non-academic funds. Yes, you need some of these services. So, say you need 3 million. Maybe you could cut 2 million. Maybe you could cut 1 million. But, it seems like these are

061non-academic. They're not teachers. That would be places to look. >> 30 seconds. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir. Hello, David Hemenway from Webster. I want to first start by saying thank you to the board and specifically Tom for making [clears throat] sure that all of these presentations for the budget and similar came out and were extremely professionally and clearly demonstrated to everybody. Uh that is the first point. I've come up here repeatedly in past past years to say, "Please do that." And it's wonderful to see it happen. The second thing I'll state is that I am extremely disappointed that we are playing the move the question game to shut down debate again. Uh that happened to me last year. Uh and I will leave that point there. Uh I am in support of the budget

062as presented, not as ex- people attempted to amend it. Uh however, I do have a question for two specific areas. I don't know if they can be answered easily or not. Uh one is that in transportation services for contract services, you said that went down, but was primarily for special education. I know that in uh maybe it's a different line item, but I know in previous years it had been discussed that we were having issues with trying to fulfill and maintain our current bus fleet. I- is that in a different line, and are we at any kind of issue with that? And my second question along those lines is with utilities. For the question along utilities not having been enough in the past. Current global events are of course likely to raise utility costs. How

063locked in are the costs that we have to go into this budget or are we expecting that that will come up soon and then maybe make the budget go over anyway? I will recognize administrator or uh business administrator York to speak to the question briefly. Questions briefly. Sure. Let's let's start with the second one first. Um We've locked in propane for the following year. Um that's been locked in. A lot of We have the wood chip plant, so we're not relying on oil. So, depending if wood chips are affected, then then that would drive those. Um but most of the utility increases that we've seen are just based on history. So, Will that also include electricity? Is that locked in yet? Um it's it's really dependent on on use. Right? So, we don't lock in

064a rate for electricity. Okay. Right, Fred? Be be brief, Fred. >> [laughter] >> If that's possible. >> [clears throat] >> That hurts, Charlie. >> [laughter] >> The electrical and the natural gas is locked in through Okay. December 27th at this point. Thank you. The bus question, so that line doesn't have anything to do with our our regular Ed bus fleet. Those are just a lot of out-of-district service students that we have to provide transportation for. So, are in that case >> Further question? Yes, sorry. Further question. So, in that case >> One more. What line does cover that and is the bus fleet okay or are we going to be paying exponentially more in the near future because it's decaying? The 2700 function is for for buses. Um and we are doing we're doing well.

065We have enough drivers. We've been able to to meet all of our obligations. Um, haven't had to cancel routes. Uh, specifically Uh, well, there's a bunch of them that they're doing with with salaries, but they're in the 2700 function, 2720, 2721. Those are the two things with salaries and benefits. Well, I I was speaking about the buses themselves. >> The the fleet themselves. So, we actually were able to decrease from 350,000 dollars in anticipated bus purchases down to 300,000 dollars based on our fleet and what we think we're going to replace for next year. Thank you very much. Okay, there are no further comments on the pending motion, which is the adoption of Article 4. Are you ready for the question? We'll do this by voice vote. All in favor of the adoption of Article

0664 as introduced, please say I. Opposed, nay. And I'll ask for a standing uh, count of cards. Hold on. All right, if you're in favor of the adoption of Article 4 as introduced, please raise your card. Don't let them drop. Keep them up, please. And and while we're waiting, uh, just to be clear, the polls for voting on Article 3 closed at 8:25 during discussion. And our tabulating team is hard at work tabulating the results of article three. Yeah, I know. I know. It's hard to read like that, you know? Come on. I know. All right. Uh section one. 89, section two. 113, section three. Section three. 99. Section four. 29. Section five. 22. Give me a sec. Okay, if you are opposed to the adoption of article four as introduced, please raise your cards.

067>> What's that? Okay, uh section one eight. Section two eight. Section three Section three Where is our section three counter? You can't count my uh call my counter away, Rodney. Okay. Those opposed to article Ah, Jesus Christ. The What? Yeah. Those opposed to article four as introduced in section three only and the head table, please raise your cards. Excuse me. Did you get the head table? And 11 section 4 section 5 352 votes in the affirmative and 104 votes in the negative and article 4 is adopted. Uh I recognize uh Carissa Coro Pennecott Thank you, Carissa. I would like to restrict reconsideration on article 4. All right. A motion has been made to to restrict reconsideration of the adoption of article 4 by majority vote. Is there a second to the motion? It's been duly

068seconded. Does everyone understand the effect of this motion? If you are in favor of restricting reconsideration further action on article 4 cannot happen at tonight's meeting. It can only happen at a duly warned meeting 7 days after this meeting. If you are opposed to restricting reconsideration article 4 may come up for further action later in the meeting. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of Article 4, please say I. I. Opposed, nay. The eyes have it, and the motion to restrict reconsideration is adopted. Article 5. To see if the school district will approve Oh, uh Do we have the results of voting on Articles 1 and 2, the official ballot, Rodney? Okay. Do we have the results of voting on Article 3? Okay. We'll proceed to Article 5 to see if the school

069district will approve the cost items included in the collective bargaining agreement reached between the Merrimack Valley School Board and the Merrimack Valley Education Association, which calls for the following estimated increases in salaries and benefits. 2026-2027, $765,708. 2027-2028, $692,098. 2028-2029, $667,602. And further, to raise and appropriate the sum of $765,708 for the 2026-2027 fiscal year, such sum representing the additional costs attributable to the increase in salaries and benefits required by the new agreement over those that would be paid at current staffing levels. A majority vote is required. The School Board recommends this article. Do I have a motion in on Article 5? It's been moved. Is there a second to the motion? It's been seconded by members of the School Board. And I recognize Jessica Wheeler Russell to speak to Article 5. Good [clears throat] evening.

070Um I'm happy to have the opportunity to speak with you about all of the educators who come under this agreement, from teachers to nurses to counselors and more. All of us here tonight are aware of the challenges attracting high-quality educators. With this in mind, Merrimack Valley School Board and the Merrimack Valley Education Association worked together to bring forward a collectively bargained agreement to MV voters. The primary goal with this 3-year proposal is simple, to attract and retain qualified educators by moving our salaries into a more competitive regional range. Currently, our district ranks seventh out of eight in starting salaries for teachers with bachelor's degrees. For those with master's degrees, we currently rank dead last. This agreement is a strategic step toward closing that gap. Uh, the overview of the '26 to '29 contract says, uh,

071the estimated investment of this 3-year agreement includes salary, New Hampshire Retirement System contributions, and FICA. Including the amounts for retirement and FICA is a new approach that brings us in line with best practices. So, the investment is structured as follows. For the year one, '26 to '27 school year, a 4.18% average increase, uh, $765,708 total cost, and that cost is made up of $603,000, excuse $603,490,000 for salaries, $116,051 for retirement, and $46,167 for FICA. Year two, uh, the '27 '28 school year, a 3.63% average increase, or $692,000,098 uh, $692,098 is total cost. The cost is made up of $545, $474 [clears throat] for salaries, $104,000, $895 for retirement, and $41, $729 [clears throat] for FICA. FICA is payroll tax. Year 3, the '28-'29 school year, a 3.3 % average increase, which is $667,602. The cost

072is made up of $526,000, $168 for salaries, $101,000, $182 for retirement, and $40,252 for FICA. This agreement represents steady progress, and while we still face a challenge in matching top-tier salaries of the region, this contract provides the stability and competitive growth necessary to keep our best educators in the Merrimack Valley School System. I now open the floor for feedback on Article 5, and thank you, and thank you to our teachers. Okay. Article 5 has been moved and seconded, and is open to debate and discussion. Yes, sir. Yes, my name is LG Goodwin from Loudon. So, first I have a question, and then I'll have a comment. The question is, why every year do we do a 3-year cost adjustment to the salaries? So, the one we did last year went for 3 years, and now

073you're adding on top of that for this year? Yeah. Jessica. Thank you. Last year's contracts that we voted on was for support staff, not teachers. They're two different unions and two separate contracts. Um, I can't cannot speak to the specifics of the union or anything like that, but in my experience, when I worked in a union, we negotiated contracts in in like bulk years like this. So, last year was an entirely group of different people. This year is teachers. Next year will be another group of people, administrators. And a comment. Um, so now that I understand how the game is played this year, I want to move the question, and I see two people behind me. Thank you. A motion has been made to move the question. I will recognize that motion. It's been seconded.

074It's not debatable. Before we vote on that motion, I will recognize the two individuals who were in line when the motion was placed to speak to the to article five. I'm not I'm not going back. I'm not This is how we're proceeding. Please proceed. David Hemenway, Webster again. Uh, so I have to this gentleman's point, uh, a question that will help clarify this. I I know you mentioned that this was teachers and nurses. I know that there are multiple unions of which, for example, there's administrators and others. Can you state specifically the full list of the types of staff that are included in this agreement with this union? And second, I know that the uh, basically the step values or the amounts at each level are changing uh, as part of this collective bargaining agreement.

075Does that apply to only the teachers and something different for the rest of the staff, or is it the same across all based on how long they've been there? I need if one of the administration could answer that. Okay. Uh uh uh Da- uh Sam or Okay, Sam. David, let's go with your second one again first. Um Which Which What was your second one? This should have written them down. Is it only for the teachers or is it the same across everything? >> it's it's anyone who's in the collective bargaining agreement. So, it's teachers, nurses, um counselors, basically everyone who's delivering education to the students either inside of the classroom or adjacent to the classroom like counselors, um nurses, the librarian, library media specialist, um all the folks. Th- There's a lot I'm going to

076leave some out. Are the paras included in that? What's that? The paraprofessionals? No, the paraprofessionals were in last year's contract. >> Okay, I thought so. Thank you. >> Yeah. What was your first question? You just answered both at the same time. >> got it. Okay. Make sure we got both of them. Further comment before we recognize the motion to move the question. Anna Glover, Penacook. Um I have been living here for 15 years. I've been a federal em- I was a federal employee for 30 years. My agency finally unionized this past year. I am sick and tired of people constantly debating and arguing about investment. This is our school. This is our kids future. My daughter graduated last year and she was in tears every every day of the past 6 7 years because there

077was one thing or another that caused her anxiety. The teachers didn't have enough resources. The school didn't have enough resources. There were not enough programs for the school. It was always it always ended up being not enough resource, not enough money. And a lot of it goes down to the state and and the federal, but there's also this problem here. This we need to stop thinking short-term. This is a long-term issue. We need to stop thinking start thinking long-term. What we're putting in now is going to be the beginning of an investment for our kids and our grandkids. Stop thinking small. Think big. This is how we're going to bring in more people, more investment, young families. Don't be so small. We are a big community. We can make ourselves a bigger family. Thank you.

078Okay. Please. There are no further questions or comments on Article 5. The motion to move the question has been made. And we're now ready to vote on Article 5 as introduced. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of Article 5 as introduced, please say I. Opposed, nay. The eyes have it and Article 5 is adopted. I will move to Article 6. Now, Article 6 is a contingent article necessary only if in the event that Article 5 fails. Therefore, I will recognize a motion to pass over Article 6. Do I have a motion? It's been made. Point of order. Come to the mic, please. That's not a point of order. You know, go ahead. I'm Warren Bosquin. I'd like to restrict reconsideration on that article. Motion has been made to restrict reconsideration on the

079affirmative vote on the adoption of Article 5. Everyone understand the question? Is there a second to the motion? It's been seconded. If you're in favor of restricting reconsideration, please say I. Opposed, nay. The eyes have it and the motion to restrict reconsideration on the adoption of Article 5 is approved. Uh, we'll get back to Article 6 now. We had a motion to pass over. It was moved and seconded. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of passing over Article 6, please say I. Opposed, nay. And Article 6 is passed over. Before we move to Article 7, I have the results of voting on Article 3. This was the article to adopt SB2. It requires a 3/5 majority to be approved. There were 468 votes cast, 158 in the in the affirmative, and 310

080in the negative. A 3/5 majority vote would have required 281 votes. Therefore, Article 3 is voted down. We'll move to Article 7. Article 7. To see if the school district will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $500,000 to be added to the special education expendable trust fund. Adam Russell from Penacook, I'd like to restrict uh Article 3. Okay, motion has been made to restrict reconsideration on Article 3 and I'm sorry I didn't see you at the mic. Is there a second to that motion? It's been seconded. Everyone understand the question? If you're in favor of restricting reconsideration on the uh negative vote on Article 3, please say I. Opposed, say nay. The eyes have it, and the motion to restrict reconsideration of the vote on Article 3 is adopted. Article 7, I had

081uh begun reading it, but I'll start it over again. To see if the school district will vote to raise and appropriate the sum of $500,000 to be added to the special education expendable trust fund previously established for the purposes of supporting student services. A majority vote is required. The school board recommends this article. And do I have a motion on Article 7? Uh it's been moved by Tracy Birkey. Is there a second? Jessica Wheeler. And I recognize Tom LaLiberty to speak to Article 7. Thank you. Sorry. Um So, first of all, just what is an expendable [clears throat] trust? It's an account um that is for specific purposes for the maintenance and operation of our schools. Does require a public hearing if funds withdrawn from it uh for schools. And uh it is intended to

082save money for high-cost, unpredictable expenses to help stabilize yearly funding. So, there's been a shift. Previously, this was funded through a fund balance, so the amount of money we uh Yeah. I haven't said maintenance yet, I don't think. No, okay. I'm going to go on. Um So, uh So, previously, uh these were funded through uh fund balances, so the amount of money that we have left at the end of the year. Um thing with fund balances are they're very difficult to predict. And we know that fund balances that we have in the upcoming years are going to help pay off the deficit, which is somewhere around 900,000 to a million dollars. So, we're not going to have these. So, what we've done is we put them out as warrant articles, um and uh we feel

083that having specific warrants uh for both special education and maintenance is very clear to the voters. It's very specific in the amount of money we're asking for, and it's very transparent. So, the special ed expendable trust is for half a million dollars. Currently, there is no money in that expendable trust. Um there is uh or there was a half a million dollars withdrawn last year to help pay off some of the um deficit. So, this money will replace what was withdrawn last year. Okay, further question or comment on article seven. If not, are you ready for the question? All in favor of article seven as introduced, please say I. Opposed, nay. The eyes have it, and article seven is adopted. Article eight, to see if the school district will vote to raise and appropriate the

084sum of $200,000 to be added to the maintenance expendable trust fund previously established for the purposes of maintaining school buildings and grounds. A majority vote is required. The school board recommends this article. Do I have a motion on Article 8? Point of order before that motion is I carried out, I'd like to restrict Article 7. Uh motion has been made to restrict reconsideration of the affirmative vote on Article 7. Is there a second to the motion? It's been duly seconded. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of restricting reconsideration of the affirmative vote on Article 7, please say I. I. Opposed, nay. And the eyes have it, and the motion to restrict reconsideration is adopted on Article 7. I read Article 8. It was moved and seconded, and it's now uh open to

085presentation, and I recognize Pamela Liberty. Yep. So, right now this expendable trust has uh $800,000 in it. Um the budget does have $600,000 for building and site maintenance in it. Uh our current CIP, so the capital improvement plan for next school year is $975,000, and a big chunk of that, I believe close to a half a million dollars, is for the high school roof. Um over the next 5 years, we're looking at about I think I I should have wrote this down, but I believe it was about $10 million uh dollars um in CIP costs. This is not nearly enough um to fund the projects we have, but it is helpful, and so we've asked for $200,000 to go into that fund. Okay. Further question or comment on Article 8. There being none, are you

086ready for the question? All in favor of Article 8 as introduced, please say I. I. Opposed, nay. And Article 8 is adopted. Article 9. Shall the Merrimack Valley School District vote to adopt an open enrollment school program designating the schools of Merrimack Valley School District as open enrollment schools pursuant to New Hampshire RSA 194-D for the purpose of enabling the district to admit non-resident students to Merrimack Valley School District, MVSD, with 100% of its eligible resident pupils permitted to attend and 0% of its resident pupils permitted to attend open enrollment schools located outside the district. And further, to limit the number of non-resident pupils who may attend Merrimack Valley School District schools under the provisions of RSA 194-D to no more than 1% of the total enrollment in the Merrimack Valley School District. A majority

087vote is required and the School Board recommends adoption of this article. Do I have a motion on Article 9? It's been moved by Tracy Brickey. Uh um Name? I think uh Joan uh Sandra Joan Sandra Jones? Julie Jones, Jesus. Who's Sandra Jones? Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Um it's been moved and seconded and I recognize Tracy Brickey to speak to Article 9. So, I'm just going to take a couple of seconds to tell you what this article means. It means that um Merrimack Valley students can still attend any schools outside of Merrimack Valley. It just means that the district would not have will not pay to have them go to any open enrollment schools elsewhere. Um also, the 1% means that we could accept up to 22 students um from other districts if they apply

088to attend MV. Um if we do not become an open enrollment school in the way that's presented here, um we cannot control the number of students that we would have to pay for to go to an open and the other enrollment open the other open enrollment school outside of the district. Um this protects the district from an undetermined amount of money that we might have to pay those other districts. So, that's what open enrollment is. And if you have any questions, please I'll I'll answer them or I'll try to anyway. Okay. Article 9 is open to discussion and debate. And I see three people people in line to speak. I'll recognize Mr. Russell. I am Adam Russell from Penacook again. Before I get started, Charlie, I'm sorry for interrupting you so many times. I'm going

089to interrupt myself this time to restrict Article 8 real quick and then I do have a comment about Article 9. I will recognize that motion to restrict reconsideration of the adoption of Article 8 in the previous vote. Is there a second to that motion? It's been numerously seconded. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of restricting reconsideration on the affirmative vote on Article 8, please say I. I. Opposed, nay. The eyes have it and the motion to restrict reconsideration on the affirmative vote on Article 8 is adopted. Continue. Uh so, I just wanted to clarify your point on um this being a protective measure for the district. As I understand the statute and the the the legal responsibility that we have, not only is it that Merrimack Valley would have to pay for

090a student to attend a different school, we also lose state and federal funding for that student, effectively making the cost of that student double what it would be to just educate them in district, correct? Or close to double. Close I I don't know that it would be actually double, but it would be yes, a lot. We would lose the state and federal funding for that student. And then just to repeat what you said, it doesn't prevent anyone who chooses to take their student out of Merrimack Valley from doing so. It just means they don't do it with our already very tight budget money, and it does not frankly add to wasteful tax taxation. Yes, you are correct. Thank you very much, Tracy. >> Sure. Okay, further question or comment? Yes, ma'am. Hi, yes. My name

091is Tracy Pattinger from Boscawen. And I just had a question about this. Why not have if we're accepting 1% of students, why not allow funds to travel with the students at the same percentage rate? You're saying if you open it up, you have to allow everyone. You can't just restrict it to a certain percentage. We would have to pay um to have We would have to pay from our dis- from our budget for a student to go to the open enrollment school that they chose. That's That amount of money is not in the budget. We have no way of knowing. Um we would have had to if we said 22 students, then we would have to take the 22 and multiply it by $20,000, which is what it what the average approximately what the average

092student cost is. um, and that would be another $450,000 that we would have had to add to the budget in order to have that sort of contingency fund. So, we we can't afford to do that. Mhm. As a comment, uh, just as the bigger picture of this, I think the purpose, as you probably all know, uh, is to create competition with education. So, whatever schools and educators are doing it the best, students will travel that way. And, you know, the budget is important and it'll shake out as it goes. I know it's it would be really difficult where you're sitting because you've got to manage all those dollars very carefully, but in the bigger picture, we want competition with our education. We want to see which schools can educate our children the best. And the

093parents will take those students to those schools, and this school will do better. Students that come from other schools, their school will make changes and do things better. Ultimately, hopefully our our country will have better educated children as a result of competition in education. I know this is you're saying the budget is it's tricky to even think about that, but in the bigger picture, we want competition. We want we want to see who's going to educate our kids the best and take our students to those places. We also had a discussion about the fact that there will be parents who want to take their children out not because they're going to get a better education, but because they might they might want to take their child to a better basketball team or a better lacrosse

094team. And that is not what education is all about. Oh, okay. Yeah. Well, that doesn't change the point of what I was saying, I don't think. Thank you. Yeah, um, I I >> the other board members want to amplify on that? I kind of want to speak to that. Um, students can leave now. They have every right to leave. So, there already is a competition. What this is designed to do is to stop the state from giving us another unfunded mandate that we have to pay for. So, we take in students from other districts um who have chosen to come here because they like our school. Students can still leave. But, the point right now is to protect the taxpayer from having to overextend more than what I think is fair. So, I just want

095to make that clear. It's It's not that it reduces competition by us saying, "No, we do not allow students to leave." All we're saying is We're not >> We're not going to pay for it. You may leave. It is your right. You have ample opportunity, but we're not going to pay and strain more of our budget and our tax base because the state will not fund for that. Sure. But, again, competition is only available to those who can afford it, you would agree, I assume. They would have to also pay out what we So, like if they chose to go to Concord, the parents would still have to come up with another like what, $8,000? So, it's still it's still going to be for folks who can afford it. Right. All right. Thank you kindly.

096Melissa, did you have a further comment? It's about >> There you go. Sorry. The other piece about the competition is schools can not take a student. So, you may choose a district because you think it offers what your child needs, but they can say, "We don't agree." So, yes, it creates competition, and it is It does already exist, but I do agree also that parents are still going to need to have some financial input um into that. This protects our taxpayers, and that's our focus um is to make sure that we are doing our due diligence and being good stewards of our tax dollars. And so, that's what this article is about. But, again, even with that competition out there, if you're taking your child to another school, they can say no. Thank you. Okay,

097further question or comment on Article 9. Yes, sir. David Hemanway, Webster, again. I will start by saying that I am a product of school choice. I think it is a great option. However, I think that the RSAs as they are written in New Hampshire make that not an operable way to work. Our school system is doing, I think, an appropriate thing in following the same recognized pattern that most other school districts are currently doing at this time for the same annual meetings. My question regards the 1% that we are saying that we will accept. Is 1% the appropriate way to state that since 1% could actually be all one grade and add an additional class and teacher and then need more resources. Or, should we be breaking that down and saying that we want to

098accept an X number per grade. And secondly, how exactly does the funding work for coming into the school to pay for that student? Thank you. So, the um in terms of accepting students, Melissa just said the the um receiving school can say no, we don't have enough room. The it it it has to do with capacity. So, we could say, no, we can't take 22 students in grade two in Salisbury cuz we don't have enough room for 22 students in grade two in Salisbury. So, we have that we have that option in the the way that the statute is written. What the statute said is um up to 80% is what the district the sending district, will pay. And so, if the sending district um charges uh $20,000, um then they would pay us up

099to 80%. Isn't that true? Yes. Sam? Up to 80% of uh that amount of money. Um of what ours of what I would what we charge, which is also $20,000. So, um if the parent was coming from, say, um uh I don't know, a district that only charged $16,000, um then the parent would have to come up with the difference of that money. But, we'd still get that amount of we'd still get the same amount of money per student coming in. Thank you for the clarification. >> Sure. Uh Carissa Coral Penacook. My question is also about the 1%. Does that affect the um programs that are already are tuition-based for out like the MVLC or >> No. life skills? Okay. Yes, sir. Gary West, Loudon, New Hampshire. Just some clarifications on your numbers. You're stating

100$20,000. Is that our cost per student for coming here or for here is 20,000 or is that just a number you're >> That was just a an example. That was just a for instance though. >> is 19. So, students >> The average is 19767. Okay, so 20,000. That that's why I said it. Yeah. Okay. So, students coming in here from another school would have to take and pay or the school would have to transfer those funds to us. Yes. >> correct? And if our students go to another school, we transfer that $20,000 or 80% of it, sorry. >> That's why that's why the that's why we said 0% can leave. So, we're not going to pay for That's why we have That's why we have the zero for the lea- leaving students in there. You

101can leave. Okay. But, we're not going to pay. Right. That's why we put the zero in there. >> Based on what you got here today. Right. Before this goes gets a voted in. Today, if a student wanted to go to another school, say they want to go from here to Concord. Would would this district have to or this school have to take and pay that money out to Concord? Well, here's the thing. Just recently there was a um court decision where Pittsfield student went to um Prospect Mountain, thank you. Um to Prospect Mountain. Pittsfield did not They don't have a um They don't have a a policy. Um Pittsfield did not want to pay Prospect Mountain for that student to leave Pittsfield to go to Prospect Mountain, and the court decision was that they had

102to. So, that's why we have come up with this um article and why we want to put it in because, yes, we would have to pay. Okay. So, so as of today, summarizing your answer here, it is yes, we have to pay for our students to go somewhere else. And the other schools have to pay for their students to come in here. Yes. And they had to pay us 80% of our incoming cost or their school cost. >> Ours. 80% of our >> Oh, wait. You know what? Randy's going to um also say something. If I can just clarify uh a little bit. That would only be to another open enrollment school. So, this um this article makes us an open enrollment school. So, Conc- the example that you used of Concord doesn't really fit

103in this particular case when uh when Tracy was talking about Pittsfield. So, it'd would to be to another open enrollment district, but there are more districts around as as Dave had said that are doing open enrollment. So, then it would open it up. The 80% is on some pending legislation, but that hasn't gone through yet. So, as of right now, it would be the full amount for for the school to an open enrollment school. So, we're not an open enrollment at this point, correct? Correct. So, do we have to allow other students to come in here? We do not. Okay. And we don't have to even a foreign open enrollment school. So, after if this article gets approved tonight, then the policy probably the policy committee will be looking at some sort of procedure to

104accept kids in and that would look at things like, you know, capacity and and potentially, you know, things about that that student. So, once we vote this in yes, then we can have other students come in cuz we're open enrollment. But, until this gets voted yes, students can't come in here. We could still accept them if they but typically the parent would pay unless they did something from another district. There's something called a manifest educational hardship and there are some other avenues, but this would just open up those avenues. Okay. So, if we're not an open enrollment school if our students if our students wanted to go somewhere else, would we still have to pay since we're not an open enrollment? If they wanted to go to an open enrollment school, yes. Even though we're

105not. Correct. That's why this article has 0% on there to protect the district from that. Thank you. Further question or comment? Sure. Uh Trace Bastrash from Loudon and you know, I just wanted to say you got to get back to the Constitution, guys. And if you really look at the New Hampshire Constitution and how public school was supposed to be funded, there was supposed to be parents' choice and you were the money was to follow the child. And there's things in the works, like you know at the State House, where this is going to be addressed. And when I came here tonight, I was actually very proud of Tom Liberty and what he did with the budget. And I actually say, guys, I think this is pretty fair. We were only going to do 800,000

106for some knits and nats that we found. As far as being educated, we did a tour of Washington Street. I met with the special ed. I met with Mr. York. I sat down. I asked questions. I understand it's $700 a day to go to Spalding. But what I found out tonight was everyone says they care about the children. But last year, after the vote, my 10-year-old had his para, who he was attached to, ripped from him. And he cried himself to sleep for 2 weeks. And now Christina Moore, who came up and cut the democratic process at the knees at the beginning of the night, she is his case manager. Therese, can you >> My child was retaliated against, and all of you need to understand that. We will change that. >> to article nine?

107>> not have an LGBTQ trans flag without an American flag in our classroom with our property taxes. And we will have choice. We will have choice. And our children will be taken care of because this is not okay. Further question or comment on article nine. Further question or comment on article nine. And it's so not true. Okay. There being none, Quiet. Quiet, please. Stop. Yeah. Come on. Article nine has been moved and seconded. There being no further discussion or debate on Article 9. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of Article 9 as introduced, please say I. Opposed, nay. Article 9 is adopted. Article 10. Oh, before we get to Article 10, I have the results of voting on the official ballot. >> [clears throat] >> There were 709 ballots cast for the

108Article 1 for the term of 1-year term for moderator of the Merrimack Valley School District. Charles Nibling with 550 votes. There were 142 under votes and there were 17 votes for 14 write-in candidates. And Charles Nibling is elected moderator for the ensuing year. Thank you. Uh for the 3-year term in Boscawen, 709 ballots cast. Ryan Gunn with 364 votes. Tom LaLiberty, 271 votes. There were 71 under votes. And there were two votes cast one over vote and two votes cast for other write-in candidates and Ryan Gunn is declared the elected for the 3-year term representing the town of Boscawen. For the 3-year term for the at-large district-wide position, 709 ballots cast. Jessica Wheeler Russell with 460 votes. Louise Andrus with 222 votes. There were 20 under votes and seven write-in votes cast for three candidates.

109And Jessica Wheeler Russell is declared elected for the three-year term representing the at-large position. For the three-year term representing the town of Loudon, 709 ballots cast, Amanda York with 573 votes. There were under votes and a smattering of of uh write-in votes for 1 2 3. Well, I I'll tell you how many. 1 2 3. 18 uh write-in votes cast for 17 individuals and Amanda York is declared the winner for the three-year term representing the town of Loudon. And for the three-year term representing the village of Penacook, 709 ballots cast, Spencer Dickerson with votes. There were 198 under votes. And 18 votes cast for looks like uh candidate write-in candidates and Spencer Dickerson is declared uh elected for the three-year term representing the town of Penacook uh the village of Penacook. There are your results

110for articles 1 and 2. Before we move on, I'd like to make a motion to restrict our >> Okay, a motion's been made to restrict reconsideration on the adoption of article nine. Are you ready for the I Oh, is there Is there a second to the motion? It's been seconded by Heather Wonchul. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of restricting reconsideration of the affirmative vote on Article 9, please say I. Opposed, nay. And that motion is adopted. Article 10. To see if the district will vote to authorize the SAU 46 school board to update the district charter to allow the merger of the elementary grades K through 5 of Salisbury and Webster into a single consolidated elementary school facility and to further authorize the school board to enter into necessary agreements and

111take all other actions necessary to effectuate this consideration uh this consolidation to commence with the 2027-2028 school year for the purpose of creating operational efficiencies, enhancing educational programming and the student learning experience, reducing administrative overhead and providing equitable resources for all students in both communities. This article was uh is on the warrant by petition requires a majority vote. Is there a motion for Article 10? Article 10 has been moved by Josh Crawford. Is there a second to the motion? It's been seconded by Lauren Martin. And I would ask the lead petitioner to speak to the motion. And then I'll recognize you, sir. I know. Uh recognize Lauren Martin. Good evening. Lauren Martin from Boscawen. Um I sat on the school board. This was a a question concern while I was on the board. Um I

112felt it wasn't brought forward to all of the voters, which is why I did the petitioned warrant article this year. Uh when I sat on the board, we heard from students in both Webster and Salisbury Elementary about how important it is for the students to get together at these two schools that um suffer from low enrollment in both. Um we're looking at increasing budgets every year. We're looking for ways to have good education, but to also um save tax dollars. So, there were several um studies done about the consolidation of these schools. And the consolidation of this, you know, there were several options. We brought this forward so it could be heard by all voters and determine if this is what would benefit the entire district. So. That's it in a nutshell. Okay. Thank you.

113Um before we continue with additional speakers, I'm going to recognize Jim O'Shaughnessy to speak to the um effect of the adoption of this article. Hey everybody. Um so, there's a couple issues with the article as drafted. Um I'm just going to kind of point a couple out. First of all, uh it's it's an advisory non-binding warrant article. It it is just authorizing the board um to take action. It's not mandating action. Uh so, in that regard, it's not problematic. Um however, it does refer to the school district charter. Um there is no charter that your district wasn't created or formed by a charter. It was formed by the adoption of articles of agreement. Um those articles of agreement specifically provide the um number of elementary schools and where they're located and what grades they cover

114and there is a specific process for amending articles of agreement. It would require um that process to be followed in order for it to take effect. So, if you vote on this, it's it basically doesn't have any effect whatsoever. Yes, sir. Curtis Rood from Loudon. I'm not a resident of Salisbury or Webster, but my my children are grown for a long time, but it seems to me that if I were a parent in those two smaller towns than Loudon or Penacook, that I would want to have my children in grade five or younger not have to go an extraordinary distance to school. And so, I'm concerned about the possibility that this article was offered, which appears not to be approved by the school board. Perhaps I just heard why that is, but it seems to

115me that um we should look at from the point of view of the bigger community and if there are people in towns other than Salisbury or Webster who don't want to have the school districts the schools merged, we should think about what the the kids are going to be going through there. So, that's my comment to think about if you were a resident of one of those two smaller smaller towns, what would you want to do? So, that's my comment. I have two questions. Has anyone polled Webster and Salisbury the residents? Do we have data of what people other than the few representatives that have spoken here that we know what they think? And the second second question is, has there been a study looking at doing this in the past? I've heard from another

116resident that there might have been one and that it was not suggested that that this be followed through. So, those are my two questions. Okay. Who uh Jessica, would you like to respond? Um yeah, I'm Tracy, please feel free to add anything I'm going to say. So, um for your first question, which was were the residents of Webster and Salisbury polled? And then the second question was was there a study ever done? There actually was a There was multiple studies that were have been done. I think three three in my time. In 2023 was the last one. And actually these um um at that point the residents of Sals- uh Salisbury and Webster came It It's not like an official, you know, documented number of this many residents said we want this so this many

117residents said we didn't, but we have an we had an overwhelming number of residents who said, "We do not want this. We would like to keep our schools. This is what we want." And that was only a couple of years ago and that's actually what brought on having those um two schools coming together was the representatives from Webster and Salisbury. Now uh Salisbury, excuse me, said it would be really really great if we could show the benefits of the small schools and so those students kind of came to talk about how they're able to um you know, integrate with each other, but also have, you know, their smaller their I mean, they didn't talk about smaller class sizes, but that was kind of the undertone and that kind of thing. Does Does that answer your

118question? Yes, it does. Thank you. Okay, further question or comment, David. Uh to repeat the broken record, David Hemenway of Webster. Uh yes, uh as has been pointed out already, there have been multiple studies and I want to say that I commend the person putting the article together for what I think is their intention, which is to save money. But as has been done in the studies and multiple rounds of discussion in both towns, it's not like you can just shove all of the students from either school into the other. Other things have to happen including construction and similar. And by way and nature of them being small schools, there are already lots of costs shared between them including positions. Uh and so the perceived benefits of consolidation are not actually there. And so that

119would be my point to it. Thank you. Further question or comment on article 10. Whatever it is. Julie Nault Webster, I came with numbers. I like numbers. Um the functional capacity of both Webster and Salisbury is 138 students. In 2021, when that study was done, there were 144 students combined for the two schools. In 2026, there's 146. So plus two students this year over 2021. Um as David just mentioned, neither school um is can take on all these students. We would need some pretty hefty construction. Um I did notice in the '21 study that one alternative was to ship both towns to the other three schools. While I might discount Loudon just because of the distance, we would also need another study for capacity on on those schools as well. So I mean can it

120save us money? Maybe. I want numbers. Give me numbers. I You know what? Tell me what we can save. Tell me what we got to spend to get there. I can get on board, but with just this article, it's just it's moot. As the attorney said. Thank you. Further question or comment on article 10. Yes, sir. I'm Joshua Jasper from Salisbury. Uh just advocating for the parents. We have three kids who one is in the middle school but went through Salisbury, two in Salisbury. I work closely with Webster on the soccer program and know a lot of the kids. We love our schools. They're great the way they are. Um, all for cost savings but nothing in here gives me confidence that it would save cost or either school would be successful in merging at

121the point that it is. So, that's all. Thank you. Hi, Jennifer Chase from Penacook. Just curious if we've done any studies on what it would cost to renovate either of these buildings as we've heard that neither one is capacity for both schools to be merged. Because it was 5 years ago, the but I think at the time, Fred, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we were looking at around $3 million. Um, so now five? I don't know. Would that save us How How long would it take for that to net? I don't know what the return on investment was. It It would It would depend on how many classes are needed. So, some of them, when you combine them, there's 30-something kids, so that's still two teachers. So, it's not like

122we can combine the schools and have one teacher at each grade level and we're saving, you know, five or six, you know, uh, teaching positions. It just doesn't work that way. So, it would really depend, you know, if we save, you know, let's say two teachers, you know, if the way that the course is class sizes work for saving two, obviously, and, you know, there's some other shared staff. So, you know, a nurse, custodian, you know, some of the the cost to run the school, um, but then that would have to be, you know, spread out. It would definitely be in the 5 6 7 years for return on investment. And especially when you factor in how much we spend on these studies already, like the multiple studies to come to the conclusion that there

123aren't any savings. Thank you. All right. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Tom. difference Sorry. It's on. It's on. Okay. I'm going to take a little different spin on this. You got straight now you got 62 kids at Salisbury School. 62 kids for one elementary school. And you have 84 at Webster. And you add those together, as Julie said, it's 146 students that we have in two schools. The capacity is 145. We're just over that capacity. And when you take a look at Washington Street School and what could we possibly do in there, we got about 30 kids at Washington student school. So, we're we're funding three schools that have about 170 students in there. To me, that doesn't make sense. And I think that the school board needs to take a good look at what

124they can do. We've heard it today, the cost the cost the cost of of our education. But, we need to really start to think about what we can do with these three schools. We're looking at Washington Street School to spend $5 to renovate over the next 7 to 10 years, which is really going to be more like 8, 9, or 10 million dollars. It just doesn't seem practical. It doesn't seem feasible. We really need to take a good look at what we can do. Um and I will tell you this, there are educational benefits for students to be in classes larger than seven kids for six years and for teachers to be able to collaborate together instead of instead of having one grade level teacher at the school, but to have two. And I don't

125know if it still happens, but at the time you had your specialist traveling between schools and you had your principal traveling between schools. And and I don't think that's healthy, either. I think this district really needs to needs to take a good look at this. If it's good, it's good. If if it's not, we should be vetting it or we should be looking at it and vetting it to make sure it's good, but it needs to it needs a closer look than it's getting. Uh Catherine, I believe you have a comment. Yes, so just currently in terms of class sizes at Webster and Salisbury, there is only one grade level that could be combined and be under the district recommended maximum capacities. Further question or comment on article 10. Uh with with a great amount

126of respect to everyone that has voiced their opinions tonight, given that this is a non-binding advisory and it's getting late, I'm going to go ahead and move the question. Okay, I will recognize a motion to move the question. Is there a second to the motion? Second it. It's been duly seconded. Uh before we vote on that motion, I will rec- recognize Heather Wonchul who is in line to speak. Um Heather Wonchul, Hopkinton. One aspect that you may want to throw into this, I drive in Webster now. My elementary school students are on the bus for almost an hour. If I have to go all the way to Salisbury, that's going to add 15 to 20 minutes. A lot of them can't handle the hour that they're on the bus now. I can't imagine an hour

127and a half. Thank you. Okay. Uh the pending motion is the motion to move the question. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of ending debate on article 10, please say I. Opposed, nay. That motion is adopted. And we now move to the adoption of article 10 as introduced. Are you ready for the question? All in favor of the adoption of article 10, please say I. All opposed to the adoption of article 10, say nay. The nays have it and article 10 is defeated. We move to article 11. Article 11, to raise and appropriate $0 for the expenses of maintenance, renovations, repairs, and improvements to the property known as the Washington Street School located at 26 Washington Street Penacook Do you have a point of order? Nope, not yet. Before I finish reading

128this? >> Nope. Go ahead. >> Wait, I I don't have a point of order. >> Okay. Um Okay. Uh to to to Where was I? Located at 26 Washington Street, Penacook, New Hampshire, 03303. No Merrimack Valley School District moneys appropriated in the 2026-2027 budget, nor any moneys appropriated in the 2026 School District Warrant Articles, nor any or nor any or any moneys in trust funds, nor moneys by transfer of trust fun- of funds, nor any moneys received by any means such as gifts or grants will not be expended for for used for used maintenance, renovations, repairs, or improvements to the property known as the Washington Street School located at 26 Washington Street, Penacook, New Hampshire, 03303. This uh article appears on the warrant by petition. A majority vote is required. Is there a uh motion

129on article 11? Is there a motion on article 11? It's been moved by Louise Andrews. Is there a second to the motion? It's been seconded by Josh Crawford and I'll recognize Louise Andres as the lead petitioner to speak to Article 11. Thank you. The first thing I want to say, the Merrimack Valley Learning Center, as you know, is located in the Washington Street School. I have absolutely nothing against the Merrimack Valley Learning Center. It's a good program. My thing on this is the Washington Street School building. I have done my homework. I've investigated. I have everything to back what I'm going to say. And I hope some of you are going to listen. If you don't, you don't. The Washington Street School, many years ago, was condemned and that is why the new Pentecost School

130was built. In the early 2000s, a study was done on the Washington Street School, paid for by the taxpayers. And way back then, there were many things that were wrong with the school and it kind of got laid back. The Merrimack Valley Learning Center moved into the school and things kind of went along and we put money as we had into it to try to improve it. In 2023, there was a study done on the school and at the time, I asked for a I never got one. That study cost $22,600. The It was itemized a little more than what the facility committee and the school board wanted, so they didn't have the study. Things kind of got lost and they went along till 2025 when Ban Banwell did a study on the school. And

131last year the facility committee and the school board brought it back, the Washington Street School. And what they did as far as I'm concerned in reading the minutes, they mainly wanted the Merrimack Valley Learning Center in the Washington Street School, and they did not study or talk about what it was going to cost the taxpayers to repair the school. Now, I had a meeting last fall, November or so, with Fred Reagan, and I learned a lot of things about the Washington Street School. And one of the things I came away with was a picture of the Merrimack Valley High School. And that picture said Merrimack Valley Learning Center alternative. And there was a circle around the old shop, so I started asking questions. I asked the school board, I sent an email to each one

132of them, asking them if they had that information in front of them when they made the decision to go ahead and do more work on spend more money on the school. [snorts] Not one school board ever answered me. So, that told me they did not have that information when they made the decision to go ahead. Now, when they made the decision, there was nine people that voted for going ahead. One abstained because he didn't have enough information, and one voted no. About a week ago, I took a tour of the school. How many people in here have taken a tour of Washington Street School? I know there's a lot of people that haven't. All I want you to do is think how much money do you want to put into that school? The CIP doesn't

133show everything in what it's really going to cost us. Did you know there's asbestos in that school? And we have never been given an estimate >> Yes, she has 10 minutes. of what it's going to cost when they run into it? When they make repairs? It's not even ADA compliant. The stairs don't come under code. Here we have 36 special education students in that building. And there's a lot of things wrong with that building, but we don't have the money to to bring it up. They want to put an elevator in it, which I understand. But, it can't be done this next year because we don't have the money. And the CIP is very confusing. In one section, it shows it in red, and they're going to put it in when they get money from

134students that come from out of the district. But, they've school board has already voted that they're not going to do it this next year. And yet on the front of the CIP, it's all in black like they're going to spend the $900,000. Before we go forward with the Washington Street School, it should be brought before the people of the school district. With everything brought forward, what needs to really be done to school, the total cost, and whether we have real alternatives for the Merrimack County for the Merrimack Valley Learning Center. Chris. Chris. >> And I'm going to be very honest with you. Today, I called special education in the Department of Education, and I hope to talk to them tomorrow because I am concerned if one child gets hurt in that school, what is our

135liability? Because we know it's not ADA compliant. We know we got to spend thousands of dollars on it. We know the stairs are not under come under code. Louise, >> of problems >> with the time that you have left. You have approximately 4 minutes left. Can you clear up Can you >> wrap it up. >> no, I just want you to clarify the purpose of the article. The purpose of the article is to not put any more money into that building because there's a lot of problems, and I think we have better alternatives than the Washington Street School, which was once condemned and has never been up to date. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Uh, a question or comment on Article 11, but before I recognize Mr. Russell, I'm going to ask Mr. O'Shaughnessy to

136speak once again to the impact of the adoption of this article. Um that's a it's actually a little bit hard um for me to tell you what the impact would be uh because there's a a bunch of issues with the article in its current form. Uh first of all, it contains a double negative. Um Well, first of all, it's attempting to raise an appropriate $0, which isn't really a thing, but um in doing so there's a double negative because towards the end of the warrant article, it also it says such um money will will not be expended. So as drafted, it's um kind of null and void on its face. Um it's confusing. So I'm I'm a bit um perplexed about what would happen if it were to pass as drafted. Uh and and because

137of that, I'm concerned that um someone could argue that it it triggers the no means no. I believe based on the petitioners' statements that that is sort of the intent is to prohibit the district from spending any money on the Washington Street School by triggering um RSA 32:10. I'm not convinced that it would do that for the reasons I've already explained. Um but I nonetheless I I I'm I don't think the meeting should adopt uh in its form it it I would recommend that it it be amended um if that was the uh will of the voters. Okay, thank you. I recognize Mr. Russell to speak to Article 11. Um so I just This is on, right? Okay. Uh Adam Russell from Penacook again. Um I just want to say we've spoken um at length

138in this meeting and last year's meeting and even the year before that about the increasing ever rising cost of special education and the learning center is a huge part of Merrimack Valley School District's strategy to limit those costs because the students that are there would otherwise need to be sent out of district and as we've discussed in several other warrant articles tonight, that carries an immense cost. Even in light of the necessary repairs, which Fred, I'd be happy to hear if you have any of the numbers estimates for the projects that are proposed for the Washington Street School, even if we're not moving on them right now, I'm sure that those numbers exist. Even if we're talking several million dollars spread out over the next however many years, the cost of sending all of those

139students out of district, I am 100% convinced would eclipse that renovation cost in short order. The ability to have our special education students educated in the learning center environment where it is located is hugely beneficial [snorts] to the district. And one other thing that I will point out that this article doesn't actually give us is any suggestion or guidance as to an alternative. And to my knowledge, I don't know that there is another building that I could point at on a map in the district, let alone in Penacook, uh that would meet the needs that we have. You know, I know that it's a the building's in rough shape. I know that there's a lot of cost >> But I think I can't support this article for all the reasons I've just said and also

140for as the counselor said, the double negative means that as I read it, we'd have to put our whole budget toward it, Which is not, I think, what the intent was, but that's how I would see it have to go. Thank you. Further question or comment on Article 11. Yes, sir. Dennis Jakubowski, Loudon, New Hampshire. Uh I think the loud the Washington Street School is a good thing for us because it keeps our students in our community. And [clears throat] even though they're in a different school, they're still playing soccer with their friends afterwards. And I also think all night tonight we're talking about money. And money is not being properly sent to us from the state. So, I would ask everybody to think about who you're sending to Concord and pick more responsible individuals

141to represent us in Concord. Further question or comment on Article 11. Hey, hang on, Charlie. I'd like to Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, did you want to respond? Thank you for your patience at the mic. I appreciate it cuz I want to address a couple things in the and that have been kind of stated overall. And I think it's important. I'm going to say it's very important that we are sending out correct information. So, I'm going to correct some of the record here right now because misinformation is what causes chaos and havoc and people to vote against their own best interests, I think. So, what I want to um first stress that the Facilities Committee in my time on the board has looked at this multiple times and it also has been even longer than that

142as far as I understand. Somebody shared with me it's been decades, I think. Which is, you know, quite some time. So, this is not a fast-moving process. We've been looking at this for a very, very long time. We have looked at alternatives. I have specifically asked about moving students to the high school and the Facilities Committee um had some answers from both the student um services side of what that would mean for the programs. And also what it would mean to the taxpayers. So, the solution that the facilities committee and then the board came up with is the most cost-effective way of ensuring that we can keep our kids close to home. And that we can um save money in the long run. The other piece to this is this number that's being thrown out.

143Now, we could guess 9 million, 8 million, which I keep hearing being tossed out as if it was a fact. It's not. We The fact is that in the study that we have, it was cost, which I have in front of me, 5 million 378,000. So, I want to be clear. We can speculate, but the study gave us solid numbers, and that's very important because just throwing out a 9 or 10 is is not It's not helpful to anybody. What I will say, the other function or the other um piece to this is that we are not only are educating our own students, this program is also taking in students from other districts who wish to send send to our school as if we were an out-of-district placement school for them. So, we're receiving revenues

144from this program. And in the long run, what the facilities committee and um the board eventually directed to the SAU was that we would wish to see these programs expanded. Not only, as I stated before, to keep our students home where they are able to be closer to their support systems, to their families, to participate in after-school activities in their community, and be with their people, which is a benefit to the students and critical in their own success. We're also going to be taking in revenues, and as we expand, the more revenues we will be taking in. And the idea is to use some of those revenues to offset the cost of the renovations. This was, you know, not some uh far-fetched kind of grasp at, well, maybe we'll do this. There is a plan

145to use those revenues to lower the impact on taxes for our um for our community because we are very aware of you know, the cost of construction and all that fun stuff that comes with this. But the board itself is charged with ensuring that we maintain our buildings. And so that we the board and the and the facilities committee acted within um what is our elected uh what's the word I'm thinking of? What we were elected to do. Um which was to make the best choice with the powers that we are granted as an elected body. So, I'm hopeful that folks are a little bit more clear about what the plan is and what the ideas are. And obviously, I'm happy to answer any questions specifically, or I will, you know, pass the ball to

146Randy um if you have other questions or Fred. But I just want to make that very clear. And also um that the students who have personally come to me as I was standing outside today to thank us for keeping the program where it is was huge. The students have um it's if you've ever actually been in the building um with the kids, it's fantastic. And I um appreciate it where it is. Um oh, sorry. I'll yeah, I'll end it there. Thank you. Thank you. Further question or comment on Article 11. Um I just want to thank the board member for their clarification. Um I think that's really important and I agree with both um, past commenters with their um, the past two commenters with their comments and I they were things that I wanted to

147say as well, so I'll just say um, ditto. Um, to uh, I just want to give a educators Oh, my name is Alyssa Layhar. I'm from Loudoun. Um, and I'm a parent, a Loudoun resident, and also a teacher at Loudoun Elementary. Um, and another comment that someone made today um, also pointed out um, the recognition that I just want to say that there is a huge need for funding for programs like the Learning Center, for programs that address um, students with disabilities, students who need counseling services, um, students who need support center. These are things that we are seeing um, as teachers on the ground a huge increase in the past five years, especially since COVID. Maybe not directly because of COVID, but our environment that we're teaching is is changing drastically. Um, and we

148are finding a huge increase for the needs of these supports for students and we are dying to give students in this district what they need. And the Learning Center is so fabulous for students with disabilities that can't be successful in a traditional setting and that is their best fit and we wish um, that more students from out of district could come to that program cuz it's such a great program. Um, I know that in the past years there have been waiting lists. I I don't know if anybody on the board can clarify that. There have been waiting lists for that program. Um, so if we were able to expand that building to um, to make it to code, we would be able to bring in that revenue. We would be able to serve students better.

149Um, so it might not be this vote, but So, it might not be this vote, but next year or the year after when that renovation vote does come up, please vote yes. Please vote yes for the students that need that program and need a safe space to learn. Thank you. Further question and please please try to provide new information and not not repeat anything. Yes. Can you hear me? There you go. We do not currently have a waiting list. We have vacancies actually. Just wanted to clarify. Thank you. Okay. Yes, sir. Hi, I'm David Armstrong from uh Penacook. Um I just wanted to uh speak just from my experience and my family's experience with the learning center and not just the program, but the location of the facility and having a separate facility because I

150know at the um facilities meeting, which I attended and the prior board meeting, there was some discussion about whether the facility uh could be um moved to the high school or um you know, eliminate the separate building and I think uh the board member made a reference to we have all these buildings with not enough students in them. So, I want to speak a little bit to that. But, um my son uh attended the learning center for all a part of 7 years. Um prior to that, he attended Penacook Elementary and they do have a an on-site uh I think they at the time they called it the learning and adjustment room. Um they may still call it that and that was within the the school building and that not only was unsuccessful for my

151son uh and and didn't meet his needs, so we ended up doing what I would probably expect was very expensive out of district placement um in about fourth grade. But, it was hugely disruptive to the rest of the school population. So, when an incident happens and you have to lock down half the school or you have to evacuate parts of the school, it's not only disruptive for the student, it's disruptive for the school community at large. And I believe having uh those students in the mainstream building and having them that close to the population of the the mainstream students and the number of students and the commotion and the sensory overload that that would create for some of those students is not going to work for at least a portion of them, and so it'll

152be disruptive and won't work for them, and it won't work for the rest of the student body, the what I would call either the neurotypical, non-IEP, whatever you want to call the rest of the student body, it would be disruptive for the rest of the student body as well. Um having that >> seconds, Mr. Adams. >> Thank you. Having that facility here is an asset for our district. And the article as proposed, whether or not it's, you know, properly drafted, is talking about letting that asset wither away. And what the school board has talked about is investing in that asset and potentially getting a return on that asset. So, not only for where the students but also for the taxpayer um having sat through those meetings, the facilities meeting in the prior board meeting, I

153believe our best option is to invest in our asset and not let it waste away. Thank you. Thank you. Further question or comment on Article 11. Yes, sir. Hi. My name is Bob Irving. Uh I'm a I've been in the the business for over 50 years. Uh mostly uh wood construction and not concrete and bricks. Um but I would urge everybody here to vote against this uh this article because it says we should not maintain the building. Anytime you don't maintain any building, it leads to increased depreciation and there's danger of whatever falling apart. Uh but we have to separate the building from the program. We have a good program, it's in a good location, it works. Is it worth keeping the building for that program? My understanding is something I read that there there's

154a possibility of bringing in people kids from other areas to utilize more of the building. The question is is the building worth it? And I I don't have an answer for that. I I'm not familiar with the inner workings of that building, but uh I'd like to see something maybe next year of the maintenance that's required to bring it up to a certain standard that we can rely on for 10 or 20 years. If we're going to keep it, it may be very much worth it. I don't know. And nobody else does because there's nothing in the there's nothing here that says what condition it's in. There's been you know, there's a lot of talk about it's falling apart, but I don't know what that means. Um so let's find out and come back next

155year and say let's put X dollars over so many years into this building and get it to a certain standard or tear it down and build a smaller building or sell it. I don't know. But I don't think we should I think this bill has to be voted down because we can't put any money. We can't just not put money in it. That means it falls down by itself. Makes no sense. Thank you. Further question or comment on Article 11. Did you have a question, sir, or or you're good? Okay. Final speaker on Article 11. And I can't call the question because I want to say something. My name's Heather Fairchild. I live in Webster. For the petitioners, I I speak I'm speaking against this article. The petitioners, I'm assuming, do not want to put

156money into this article uh into this school. However, if the petitioners want to bring this up again, they need to understand, just like this gentleman said, in order to decommission a building, you need to do things to it. You need to do renovations and or drain the system. You need to do repairs. So, if you are going to put this up again, make sure you have a budget for it. I think the studies are a good idea either for both decommissioning and or bringing it up to snuff. Thank you. Okay. Are there any other questions or comments on Article 11? Thank you, David. Uh There being none, are you ready for the question on Article 11? If you are in favor of adopting Article 11 as introduced, please say I. If you are opposed to

157the adoption of Article 11 as as introduced, please say nay. And the nays have it, and Article 11 is defeated. Article 12, to transact any other business that may legally come before this meeting. Uh we have several people who have comments or questions or thoughts to share? Essentially, I'll recognize just about anything but please understand that anything that happens under this article is strictly non-binding. Yes. So, I want to first congratulate and thank Tom for his wonderful work in coming out and making sure that everything was clear and coming out to all of the communities. He has set the standard and the example that I hope continues with this board. Uh and my second comment would be for things like the Washington Street School, I would love to see that put in the CIP and

158then have a vote brought to people with knowledge of exactly what needs to be in it, whether that that expenditure should be continued. Uh and I know that a lot of that data is there already. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yes. >> I am Adam Russell from Penacook again. I just have a very brief comment that I I want to reiterate from our our conversation way back a couple hours ago about the budget. Uh for everyone that has been continually concerned about taxes throughout this entire meeting, I have to stress and I cannot stress enough, you are in the wrong room to fight that. Hey Tracy, as a state representative, can you on behalf of Merrimack Valley School District, please step up and hold the Department of Education to tax and give us our

159funding back to the best of your ability? Thank you. Further uh further comments or questions under Article 12. No, Julie Nadeau Webster, I make a motion to adjourn the meeting. A motion has been made to adjourn. Is there a second to the motion? Second. All in favor of the motion to adjourn, please say aye. Aye. >> [cheering] >> Opposed, nay. Thank you. New board members, do not go away. New board members, do not go away. No. No, you keep that.