MANCHESTER, N.H. – During their May 19th meeting, the Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen voted once again to table any action regarding Fiscal Year 2027 budgets for the City of Manchester, the Manchester School District and a variety of other funds that impact local government.
Manchester Mayor Jay Ruais’ proposed budget for the Manchester School District was voted down at the board’s previous meeting and the matter of the school budget and the various other budgetary items were tabled for a future date.
Numerous residents came out for the public comment section of to urge the board not to accept a budget that would override the city’s tax cap, which for FY’ 27 would be a 3.0% increase above the previous fiscal year’s school district and city budgets. A recurring theme during these comments centered around fears over increasing taxes making the city unaffordable, especially for the city’s elderly population. Orange Street resident Richard Girard expressed frustration with the possibility of using an upcoming city property revaluation as part of the tax cap calculation as well as tax growth during the first two years of Ruais’ tenure, urging the five Republican Aldermen to vote against a tax cap override and urging Ruais to veto one if it received the ten necessary votes to proceed.
“This isn’t overriding the tax cap, it’s obliterating it and the taxpayers will remember it, or anything close to it, if it is passed,” he said. “Sharpen your pencils, get spending under control and stop the lies.”
However, numerous residents also came out during the public comment section of the meeting to express frustration with a lack of funding and focus toward accessibility for the city’s disabled population. The point on funding, where disabled residents noted unfilled potholes and sidewalks filled with snow, was touched upon later by Alderman At-Large June Trisciani, as she noted that constituents have told her the need for increasing funding to the Department of Public Works in addition to properly funding the city’s schools and police.
Trisciani’s comments came as part of broader comments she made expressing frustration that some members of the board opposed the budget proposed by the board’s Democratic majority but did not present their own alternative.
In the Democratic proposal, the finalized bottom-line amount for the city budget would be $210,808,344 and the total bottom-line for the school district budget would be $245,381,749. Earlier in the year, school district officials expected that position cuts would be necessary with any budget lower than $251,405,787.
These figures were predicated on an expected assessed property valuation of $18,958,909,303 to be released later this year. The current assessed property valuation according to the mayor’s proposed budget is $13,358,909,303. This larger figure was taken from language within the language guiding the tax cap in Section 6.15 of the city’s charter.
Even with these figures, the revenue limitations within the tax cap would still require an override vote. Trisciani also made a motion to use two thirds of the expected Fiscal Year 2026 surplus of $1,769,000 as reported by the city’s departments to be used toward tax relief in Fiscal Year 2027 rather than the normal one third. The extra amount would come from the city’s revenue stabilization reserve account, better known as the “rainy day fund”, and would also require 10 votes from the board under Section 35.032 of the city ordinances.
Ward 1 Alderman Bryce Kaw-uh echoed statements made by other supporters of these proposed budget figures, believing that they represented the fruit of almost two months of negotiation and discussion between the Aldermen between meetings.
“I’m not jumping for joy at any of this, it’s a compromise,” he said. “I hope others on the board can see it, too, as a good faith compromise.”
Ward 8 Alderman Ed Sapienza had a different view, feeling that revaluation expectations should not be used in the calculation.
“This is a duck. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it’s a duck, right?” he said while holding a rubber duck. “An override of the tax cap is an override of the tax cap.”
Ward 5 Alderman Jason Bonilla felt that the usage of an override to reach that figure was necessary to reach an agreement with the city’s police officers’ union discussed non-publicly during the meeting since revealing the agreed upon figure would potentially damage the city’s bargaining position.
“There is no backing the blue without breaking the ceiling,” he said.
Ward 7 Alderman Ross Terrio said that he would support the agreed upon amount for the police contract, but could not support a tax cap override.
Ward 11 Alderman Norm Vincent also expressed frustration with the belief that not supporting an override meant not supporting the police.
“Everyone on this board supports the police,” said Vincent. “So, to sit here and yell at each other and say all this weak-minded stuff in my opinion is rhetoric that doesn’t need to happen.”
While the board is officially non-partisan, the roll call vote on Trisciani’s motion only received support from the nine self-identified Democratic Aldermen: Trisciani, Kaw-uh, Bonilla, Dan Goonan (Ward 2), Dana Dexter (Ward 3), Christine Fajardo (Ward 4), Jim Burkush (Ward 9), Bill Barry (Ward 10), and Dan O’Neil (At-Large). The motion was opposed by the self-identified Republican Aldermen: Terrio, Vincent, Sapienza, Crissy Kantor (Ward 6), and Kelly Thomas (Ward 12).
Ruais noted that the board would have another meeting on June 2nd to continue a discussion on the budgets before the deadline of June 9th specified in Section 6.04(c) in the city charter. This led to the motion to table final decision on the budgets, which passed on a non-unanimous voice vote.
Following the meeting, Trisiciani released a statement on behalf of the Democratic Aldermen, stating the group would continue to seek balanced solutions that support the city’s residents, protects essential services, and meets the needs of the city and its schools.
“Tonight’s outcome is disappointment particularly given the significant work that went into developing a budget that balanced fiscal responsibility with the real needs of our community,” said the Democratic Aldermen. “Residents have made it clear that they value strong city services, safe neighborhoods, quality schools and continued investment in Manchester’s future. We remain committed to protecting and improving the quality of life for everyone who calls Manchester home.”