Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cip topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board forwards six‑year capital improvement plan to town council after review
Summary
Hooksett planning board reviewed a draft six‑year capital improvement plan that includes TIF‑funded Exit 10 projects, police and DPW equipment, and school infrastructure; the board voted to accept the presentation and send the draft to the town council for further consideration, with one abstention.
The Hooksett Planning Board voted June 16 to accept a draft six‑year capital improvement plan and forward the document to the Town Council for its review and consideration.
The plan, presented by Christine Tewksbury, the town finance director filling in for Town Administrator Andre Grant, lays out municipal and wastewater projects and funding sources for fiscal years 2026–2031 and is intended to guide the council during the annual budget process. "After this presentation to the planning board, the town administrator will present the CIP to the town council," Tewksbury said during the presentation.
Board members said the long list of proposed projects — which include large, Tax Increment Financing (TIF)‑funded work at Exit 10, a Martins Ferry Road intersection project, police radio and tower replacements, public works equipment and a Memorial School infrastructure bond request — requires clearer public messaging before it goes to voters. Tewksbury told the board state law (RSA 674:5–674:8) requires the CIP and that it is a planning tool for the council and voters, not an automatic appropriation.
The draft lists roughly $68 million in municipal project costs over six years (excluding the school number shown elsewhere in the packet). Tewksbury and board members said much of the near‑term cost is driven by captured TIF value and by one large state‑funded road project on Hackett Hill and Route 3A. Tewksbury said that some projects already have funds set aside in capital reserve accounts; others would require voter approval of warrant articles. "Some of the things we do have the money for, but some of the things we don't," she said, adding that last year many warrant articles failed and the committee shifted or delayed projects in response.
Members pressed for clearer, larger print materials and asked staff to run alternative rate impacts that separate the school portion from municipal items. Board discussion emphasized prioritizing the most urgent projects and reducing the number of warrant articles to avoid voter fatigue. Several members described the plan as a "wish list" of department requests that the council and voters will ultimately pare down.
After discussion, the board voted to accept the CIP presentation and forward it to the Town Council for its review and possible placement on the warrant; the motion passed with one abstention. The board did not adopt funding decisions or move individual warrant articles; those choices remain with the council and voters.
The planning board asked staff to provide updated materials with clearer graphics and a revised breakdown of the school portion for the next board meeting so members could prepare questions for the council. The town finance director said she would supply more readable versions and additional tax‑impact scenarios.
The CIP presentation packet and the town administrator's presentation will be available to councilors prior to the council's budget work sessions; no final appropriations were made at the planning board meeting.
