Loudon school-board candidates spar over $2 million SAU shortfall, state funding and vouchers

At a candidate forum in Loudon, multiple school-board candidates and residents pressed for accountability after the Merrimack Valley School District disclosed a roughly $2,000,000 shortfall and defended the need to keep student services intact.

Candidates said improving student proficiency and fiscal transparency are top priorities. “We have got to make a curriculum ... that teaches every child how to read and how to do math,” said Alexandra (School board candidate, Salisbury), noting published proficiency figures she said were “somewhere around 49%.” Tom Laliberte, a candidate and former elementary principal, said the district must balance student needs with taxpayers’ ability to pay and promised “to operate with openness and honesty” if elected.

Why it matters: Candidates and residents warned that cuts to positions and programs could harm student services and community safety. Several speakers traced part of the strain to state-level funding decisions and rising special-education costs that districts are required to cover.

Discussion highlights

- Accountability and the $2 million shortfall: Multiple speakers faulted district management and urged clearer, earlier disclosure. Alexandra said district leadership “hid from all of us this deficit.” Other candidates, including Lorna Carlisle and David Nesbitt, said special-education costs and mandates make budgeting difficult and that the shortfall may not reflect intentional concealment.

- Funded-but-vacant positions: A candidate identified “six positions in this budget that are funded with full salaries and benefits” but said the district does not plan to fill them now; she called that practice problematic for transparency in budgeting.

- State funding, vouchers and adequacy: Candidates and residents repeatedly urged action to press state legislators for more school funding. Speakers said New Hampshire’s low per-student state aid shifts a large share of education costs to local taxpayers and that expanding voucher programs reduces funds available to public schools. One candidate said the district is legally required to provide transportation for students who attend charter schools but does not receive the associated per-pupil voucher funding.

- Enrollment and program consolidation: Several candidates suggested examining under-enrolled schools and programs (cited examples included Webster and Salisbury schools, Washington Street School programs and Pennacook Elementary staffing) as potential cost-savings measures, while acknowledging such moves would require detailed study.

- SAU and contract accountability: Residents asked who negotiates union contracts; candidates said negotiations involve board representatives and SAU staff. Calls for clearer contract accountability surfaced after the deficit disclosure, including suggestions to review how raises and benefits are approved and whether contract language enables stronger fiscal oversight.

Community reaction and next steps

Residents pressed candidates for concrete steps they would take if elected: improved, plain-language budget presentations; earlier public planning sessions in spring; and more rigorous review of procurement and contract processes. Several candidates said they would listen, ask detailed questions, and push for clearer public materials and faster access to budget information on the district website.

Ending

The forum closed with repeated appeals to contact state representatives about education funding and with candidates urging voters to attend the district budget hearing and to vote in the upcoming town election.