Hooksett Budget Committee Meeting – November 20, 2025
Hooksett Budget Committee Meeting – November 20, 2025
The Hooksett Budget Committee met on November 20, 2025, to review the proposed school budget, discuss insurance concerns with SchoolCare, and hear presentations on a $7.25 million facilities bond and other warrant articles. The meeting included clarification of previous minutes, updates from the school board, and public comment from Town Councilor Roger Duham. No final votes were taken on the budget or warrant articles; the committee accepted the proposed school budget for discussion.
Clarification of Previous Minutes
- Special Education Director Chris Sosborne clarified that of the three special education teachers originally funded through an IDEA grant, one was moved to the operating budget this year. Two teachers remain funded by the grant. The school board declined a proposal to move a second teacher into the budget, citing concerns about future grant funding.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Town Councilor Roger Duham (Hooksett Town Council) expressed concern over the lack of prior planning for capital improvements, noting that maintenance trust funds were not set aside in previous years. He urged the committee to consider smaller, phased projects to avoid overwhelming taxpayers and increase the likelihood of voter approval.
Discussion Items
SchoolCare Insurance
- The school board reported that the insurance rate for next year came in at 7.7%, significantly better than the initial estimate of 16%. However, the board voted to add $11,660 to the SchoolCare line (now $368,760) because of a lack of confidence in SchoolCare's forecasting accuracy.
- School Business Administrator noted that the district is exploring alternative health plan administrators and has reached out to multiple providers. The state took over one similar consortium (New Hampshire Interlocal Trust) for insolvency in May 2025, underscoring risks.
- The SchoolCare reserve is being rebuilt to $25 million after a $30 million shortfall in 2025, but the reserve is separate from operational billing.
Proposed School Budget
- The budget includes three new positions: a sixth-grade teaching position (due to 32 additional sixth graders), a reading specialist at Cauley School (reinstated after two years without one), and a third-grade teacher at Memorial to reduce class size. The reading specialist position costs approximately $117,000 including benefits.
- The district has moved from Mac to Chromebooks for staff, saving money. A $150,000 technology trust fund warrant article (funded by taxation) is proposed to maintain a one-to-one device program.
- A $100,000 special education trust fund (from fund balance) and a $150,000 maintenance trust fund (from fund balance) were also presented. The maintenance trust fund currently has $117,000; previously no funds were set aside.
Facilities Bond – $7.25 Million
- The school board approved a bond for capital improvements at Memorial, Cauley, and Underhill schools, totaling $6,898,703 with a 5% contingency ($7.25 million). The bond is for 15 years with level principal funding.
- Work includes new roof, HVAC, boilers, controls, fire suppression, and plumbing at Memorial; HVAC, fire suppression, and plumbing at Cauley; and HVAC and plumbing at Underhill. The project is estimated to begin summer 2027.
- The district hired Harvey Construction and Turner Group (architects) as a third-party general contractor. A full facility study identified $20.7 million in total needs. The board plans to phase work over multiple projects every 2–3 years.
- The project is eligible for about $3,000 in impact fees. State building aid is unlikely; the district will apply but expects minimal funding.
- Facilities Committee Chair Gillian Guybout and Maintenance Director Dean Farmer presented. They emphasized transparency and community outreach (two public nights with under 75 attendees).
Technology Usage & Repair Costs
- Technology Director reported that annual Chromebook refresh costs average $75,000. Repair incidents have decreased significantly (70 repairs at Cauley this year vs. 200+ previously). Underhill devices do not go home; Memorial devices go home at teacher discretion; Cauley devices go home. Families are billed for damage, but no non-payment issues have occurred.
Key Outcomes
- The budget committee accepted the proposed school budget for discussion (motion by Marianne Susi, second by Mary Ann; passed with three abstentions).
- No final votes were taken on the budget, bond, or warrant articles. The committee will continue discussions on December 4, 2025.
- The school board will provide additional information: maintenance spending details (minus parts) to Mike Kovac, usage data for student devices to William Lynch, and the final warrant articles once drafted by attorneys.
- The committee declined to invite Harvey Construction to a future meeting, opting instead to watch the recorded presentation online.
Meeting Transcript
Wayne. Are we ready? Welcome back to the budget committee. It's been a while. Call the meeting to order. Okay. So in attendance, we have Ernie Bench Vega. Mike Kovac. No. William Lynch. Marianne Susi. Elizabeth Spitzer. And Senator John Champa for school board. We have Wayne Gwertel. Nice to see you, Wayne. Good to see you. Alyssa Ells. Here. And Abigail Shane. Missing today is uh Darren Greenberg and uh Germano Martins. Lindsay does look for you. Okay. Everybody want to take some time and look at the minutes, please. Do you have a book, Wayne? Do you want a book? I'm good. As I really want to start. Sorry, I asked you about that. Now they do. We scared everyone off on that part of course. I think we've still got authorization to expand. They didn't usually do that in the old days, but now all the articles say authorized to expand. Like the superintendent has the essays to expand once you put in the trust or I just have one question. I don't I don't know if it's that it says there were three teachers in the grant. I thought there was only one teacher in the grant. I think can we straighten that yeah straighten that out? Well, I don't want I don't not gonna approve or vote to approve if it's not correct, so I just didn't know. I think there were three. There were three. All three of them are in the grant. They were in the grant. They switched one over, and they were hoping to move a second one over this year. So is there that leaves one in the grant and then one got moved to the budget? Yeah, I was confused by that when I was taking those and I asked a couple of times, and you might want clarification because I'm not sure I got that right, but I didn't want to get away. Yeah, I just say I didn't want to approve the the minutes if it's not correct. That's why I was just kind of what you said, but I there is that missing one, and I didn't know how to put it in the minutes because I didn't wasn't sure what I had the same question as you but I didn't ask. We need to amend the minutes. So I know exactly what you're saying because I was confused. If it maybe just to explain it a little better, just so it because it from here it just looks like there were three teachers in the grant, but then one was put this is accurate. You can ask at the meeting, but we'll leave that that's what we're doing.
openpublica.com