Kensington School Board approves $4.5 million operating budget after public questions on audits and per‑pupil costs

Kensington School Board members approved a $4,500,298 operating budget for fiscal year 2026 following a public comment period in which residents pressed the board to consider an independent audit and questioned per‑pupil costs and demographic trends.

The public comment session included multiple residents pressing the board to seek “actual financial reports, audited reports, in the future rather than these, locally elected auditors,” and asking for clearer per‑pupil and SAU‑level cost breakdowns. Al, a resident, said, “I would like a couple of ideas of possibility maybe put it on your agenda. The ability to go for actual financial reports, audited reports, in the future rather than these, locally elected auditors.”

Why it matters: Speakers warned that fewer students will reduce state aid and shift more of the cost to local taxpayers; board members and staff answered questions about how state adequacy funding, special‑education aid and local assessments affect Kensington’s share of SAU 16 costs. The debate about independent audits also touched on transparency for grant applications and public understanding of district finances.

Board discussion and public responses Board members and staff described how state per‑pupil calculations differ from a simple division of the budget by enrollment. The board cited state reporting complexities and noted Kensington’s small size makes direct comparisons to larger districts imprecise. A resident, Michael Jaskow, said he observed Kensington’s cost per pupil “seems to be higher than the state average.” School staff replied that the state’s methodology includes and excludes different budget elements, and smaller districts often show higher per‑pupil figures because fixed building and administrative costs are spread across fewer students.

On enrollment and funding, a board member noted Kensington is “slightly better than 50% capacity” and that some nearby towns have declining enrollment; staff reminded the public that New Hampshire provides relatively low state per‑pupil funding compared with other states and that the ConVal litigation over adequacy remains on appeal.

Late motion on independent audit During the board’s regular meeting, a resident urged the board to budget roughly $10,000 to hire a public accounting firm for an independent audit rather than rely solely on a locally elected auditor. A board member moved to add $10,000 to the budget to pay for an independent accounting firm; the motion failed for lack of a second. The board did not change the previously posted proposed budget percentage (2.92% increase) and proceeded to approve the operating budget as presented.

Outcome and next steps The board voted in favor of the operating budget, $4,500,298, by voice vote. The board also discussed the annual certification process: each year the district must indicate whether it will use a locally elected auditor, retain an independent accounting firm, or seek a waiver; the board and staff noted the form and timing for that submission and that the locally elected auditor’s two‑year term is ending. Staff said the district will continue to provide residents with line‑item breakdowns and to present cooperative SAU cost information at the SAU public input session.

Ending Board members encouraged residents with follow‑up questions to contact the SAU and noted that more detailed cooperative cost‑per‑student figures will be provided at the SAU’s public input session or by email to attendees who requested the numbers.