MANCHESTER, N.H. – During their Tuesday, May 20 meeting, the Manchester Board of Mayor and Aldermen (BMA) Committee on Accounts and Administration voted to recommend that a question be put to the voters this fall on whether the Manchester School District (MSD) should be a department of the city government. However, it remains to be seen what exactly that will mean.
Ward 8 Alderman Ed Sapienza was unsure why a discussion was needed on the topic, but Ward 4 Alderwoman Christine Fajardo sought more information given that it was unclear what the MSD being a department of the city government would actually entail.
It was also unclear whether the BMA would have final policy oversight over the MSD or if there would just be more budgetary oversight, such as a line-item budgetary veto put in place for future mayors.
Manchester Mayor Jay Ruais reiterated his view that all relevant state statutes need to be taken into account before moving forward, noting that a review of what relevant changes to the city charter would be needed, and that any change would take at least some changes to the charter.
Board Chairman Joseph Levasseur recommended that any changes would be as easy as simply reversing the referendum put before the voters in 1999 that created the current relationship between the MSD and the city, although the exact wording of that original referendum and the legal viability of “reversing” the referendum was unclear as of Tuesday night.
Levasseur said that the Manchester Board of School Committee (BOSC), the school district’s governing board, has no oversight from the mayor, who serves as that board’s chair. Ward 3 Alderman Pat Long challenged this claim, noting that the 14 members of the school board are elected by the public just like the 14 aldermen. Levasseur also incorrectly said that the school district never releases information on its expendable trust amount, which it does in the packet of every month’s school board Finance and Facility Committee meeting. This month that figure could be found on Page 49 of that packet, with the figure reported at $24,051,176.
Additionally, when Levasseur said that the the school district was “not working” and that the amount of money in the district’s budget was approximately $100 million in 1999 and approximately $250 million today, he received a sharp response from Ward 4 Alderwoman Christine Fajardo. Fajardo noted that the cost of everything has gone up since 1999 due to inflation so it’s unclear why the school budget wouldn’t increase as well. She also requested more details on Levasseur’s claims regarding the district’s abilities.
“When I hear that it’s not working, it’s very subjective regarding the definition of ‘working,’” said Fajardo. “At the end of the day, if voters are told that we’re going back to 1999, they need to be told why.”
Ward 12 Alderwoman Kelly Thomas and Ward 6 Alderman Crissy Kantor stated that they believe the school district requires more oversight, while Long stated that he had not heard for calls for additional oversight from his constituents. Ward 8 Alderman Ed Sapienza also expressed his frustration with comments made by the school board and the veracity of their focus. Specifically, he noted comments by BOSC Vice Chair Jim O’Connell made on Monday night that he believes two high schools would need to be closed, although there was an indication that wouldn’t be the case in recent months. Superintendent Dr. Jenn Chmiel said Monday night there would be no closure of high schools during the ’25-’26 school year and no closure until analysis can be undertaken as part of the district’s facilities plan.
The recommendation by the committee did not specify the details of the referendum. Instead it tasked the City Clerk’s office and the City Solicitor’s office to bring forward information related to a potential referendum, with the alderman voting on the recommendation on June 3. Without an affirmation of the recommendation on June 3, City Clerk Matt Normand has indicated there would not be enough time for a necessary review by the New Hampshire Attorney General’s office over the legality of the referendum’s wording before the September deadline for finalizing any referendum language on 2025 city election ballots.
