Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Warrant Articles topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Campton selectmen present budget, answer resident questions and vote on warrant articles
Summary
At a Feb. 3 public hearing the Campton Board of Selectmen presented the proposed 2026 budget, answered residents’ questions about legal fees and wage increases, and voted on warrant articles 8–20; several articles failed while most were approved.
The Town of Campton Board of Selectmen opened a public hearing on the proposed 2026 budget on Feb. 3, heard questions from residents about legal fees, wages and department budgets, and then voted on warrant articles 8 through 20.
Selectman Mort Donahue moved to open the hearing at 5:30 PM; Selectman Sherrill Howard seconded and the motion carried. Town Administrator Charlie Smith and the board presented the budget and described the proposed warrant articles.
During the hearing residents asked detailed questions. Ted Baumeister queried why legal fees had increased; the board said the rise reflected more lawsuits, additional occasions when the town attorney was contacted or asked to attend meetings, and more Right‑to‑Know requests. Resident Linda Dauer pressed the board on a 4.2% wage increase for most employees; Selectman Sharon Davis explained that the increase contains a 2.7% cost‑of‑living adjustment (COLA) plus a 1.5% step increase. Karen Rienzo asked the board to justify two raises under Financial Administration totaling about $30,000; TA Charlie Smith said the increases reflect added duties and responsibilities for staff.
Other public questions covered invasive species containment (answered by Selectman Howard), projected work on Orchard Street (Selectman Donahue said it will be a complete reconstruction), whether certain services are shared with other towns (the Recreation Department is not shared; the Prosecutor and Fire Department are shared), and timing for a previously requested report (TA Smith provided a timeframe).
After the hearing the board voted on warrant articles with these tallies: Article 8 — 0 aye, 4 nay (failed); Article 9 — 0 aye, 4 nay (failed); Article 10 — 0 aye, 4 nay (failed); Article 11 — 4 aye, 0 nay (approved); Article 12 — 3 aye, 1 nay (approved); Articles 13–20 — each 4 aye, 0 nay (approved). The minutes do not provide descriptions of each article; where the record did not specify, descriptions are listed as not specified.
The public hearing was closed at 7:05 PM and the meeting adjourned at 7:19 PM.
