By BOB MARTIN
Eagle Times Staff
CLAREMONT, N.H. — Claremont Mayor Dale Girard called for a budget reduction of 5% for Fiscal Year 2026 in a scathing letter accusing City Manager Yoshi Manale of keeping the city council “in the dark” about vital information and leading the city to overspend.
“After looking at everything, its [SIC] clear department budgets are being bloated and overspent without scrutiny,” Girard read from a prepared statement at the Wednesday city council meeting. “In my world, if something becomes more urgent, the “nice-to-have” gets pushed down the list. That principle seems to be missing here.”
He added, “With constant news about a potential recession and growing concerns about fiscal responsibility, I believe we should require the manager to provide a 2026 budget proposal 5% below the 2025 department budgets. I know some councilors feel that’s not deep enough — and that’s a conversation we can have during budget hearings. But it’s a starting point for real accountability.”
Manale said that 5% is more like nine to 10% because costs go up. There is obligated spending through employees, increases in health care benefits, needs in the fire department and more. If this cut is the direction of the council, however, he said he would work at it knowing it will be difficult and “something I don’t believe we need to do.”
“What you’re really asking is a minus eight to minus 10%, which when you look at our budget is a $1.8 million cut to our budget,” Manale said. “That doesn’t mean just fluff. Our budget has always been lean — and that is something that’s been a credit to this council. That means taking away infrastructure. That means taking away personnel. That means real, real, real cuts.”
Manale added that there are areas where he can make cuts, such as in the recreation department, and he will do his best to do so.
“I haven’t even had a chance to present a budget to you, to then be able to talk about going a minus five,” Manale said.
He added, “We have a lot of growth here. A lot of things are actually happening. I have developers coming every day and talking about how much they want to invest here. By the way, this is despite everything happening in the world. They’re saying, ‘We believe in Claremont.”
A letter full of concerns
Girard said the letter was in response to issues he hoped could be corrected internally but was told that he needed to address it at a public meeting.
“Consider this a state-of-the-city address — nothing more,” Girard said. “I believe the citizens and my fellow councilors deserve to hear this.”
He recalled a previous Manager’s Report, when it was announced that the city had a new lease at the airport. Girard is a member of the Airport Advisory Board and said he knew that the airport manager had been in conversation with several people. However, he was surprised to see the wording included that the city had a “new lease.”
“I asked for clarification that evening, and the manager stated, as recorded in the minutes, that he had not yet signed an agreement,” Girard said. “The next day, I sent an email requesting a copy of the lease. What I received was a fully executed agreement signed by the City Manager two weeks prior to that meeting. That’s not just a lapse in communication — that’s a problem with transparency and process. Long-term leases are supposed to come before the council.”
In the same meeting, the city council discussed carrying costs on the 17 Water Street building. He was frustrated that there was critical information missing from the memo, and earlier that day he was also told that information Councilor Nick Koloski requested had been removed at Manale’s direction. Girard said the updated memo had not come from the city’s finance director, saying, “That wasn’t an oversight — that was intentional omission, and it kept the council in the dark.”
Girard said he has spoken with residents about concerns within the community. One was the Sullivan Street sidewalk project, which he said, “We all know this didn’t go well.” He learned that the city had no engineered plans, did not follow NHDOT guidelines, and paid most of it up front without a performance or payment bond.
“These are major red flags,” Girard said. “While I’ve heard explanations — including that the bond date prevented it — that doesn’t hold up, especially since we found workarounds on other portions of the same grant. Following my conversation with the manager, he stated that all future projects will include performance and payment bonds. However, I want to be clear: the conversation happened a few weeks ago, and just this past week, we put out a project of similar value with no bonds. This leaves the city vulnerable, again. This has been corrected as of this afternoon.”
Girard then shifted to bidding, saying there are growing concerns as bid tabulations are not being posted consistently, and the city no longer awards bids to the lowest qualified bidder. Girard said it seems like bids are being chosen on reference.
“While that may occasionally make sense, you must provide a thorough justification — with reference materials — when we spend above the lowest bid. These are taxpayer dollars,” Girard said.
Girard noted that in one department, two recent bids cost taxpayers $21,000 more than necessary, which he said could cover a heating oil delivery.
“If we treated public funds like our own, these decisions would look very different,” Girard said.
A specific bid that irked him was for two sign boards. The lower priced model could not be seen as well at an angle, he was told, and he said, “These are road construction signs, not television screens. He asked how this would be funded, and he was told it would be from a certain line item. Upon further research, Girard found two-thirds of the line item had already been spent, which would not even cover one sign.
Girard has requested a year-to-date ledger for that account, and as of Wednesday was still waiting for information. He inquired about how the signs were being paid for without available funds and the answer he received was, “Council doesn’t control line items.”
“While that’s true, it revealed something troubling — we’re overspending line items by tens of thousands without blinking,” Girard said. “That suggests our budgets are padded more than they should be. A couple of months back, in reviewing three years of spending in another department, I found a dramatic increase. The manager agreed changes were needed and outlined what he would do. But six weeks went by — and nothing changed.”
Girard then said that there is a merit-based pay plan with maximums set by the council, and a few years back the council addressed a compression issue.
“I’m now hearing about stipends being used to get around those maximums and also cover special duties,” Girard said. “That bypasses the council policy. We may need legal guidance on this, and I’d like to know: how much these workarounds have cost us this year alone?”
Girard said that the sidewalk project is still about $45,000 short in funding despite budgeting $126,000, using nearly $33,000 and adding $130,000 in ARPA funds. He also said that during spring capital budget talks Assistant Mayor Deb Matteau requested $200,000 for paving. He asked how these funds would be used, and the question went unanswered.
Manale’s response
Manale focused on how the city is thriving in many ways, noting that he just had dinner with a business owner of 20 years who has 60 employees and is continuing to grow. Many make more than $100,000 per year, he said. There are other new businesses coming in, with four coming to downtown this spring. Manale noted they are excited and energized by the momentum of the city.
“This is just the start,” he said. “There’s a lot happening here.”
In regard to sidewalks and paving, Manale said the city had a contract that came in under what was expected from the vendor. The additional funds leftover were added to do an additional sidewalk and all of Summer Street. This goes for paving also, and they are looking at in-house paving.
Manale is concerned about the 5% request and said this is something that needs to be done collectively and not just through conversations between Manale and Girard.
“The director of finance and I are trying to make every effort to try and have as balanced a budget as possible for you,” he said. “And I think it is unfair to be able to say where we are today without seeing what we’re going to present to you. I talked to all our directors. I had a conversation in anticipation of this speech today noting what could possibly be in front of us.”
While Manale agrees with Girard about the growing concerns of the economy, he said the city has been growing. There were 500 new permits last year and nearly 600 permits this year, and new businesses are coming into town. He also said there are 18 new housing units, which means new people are moving in. He said so much effort has been made in the city, and a reduction suggested would be devastating. Other than cutting infrastructure or personnel, or even whole departments, he doesn’t know how they can get there.
“If you cut a budget by minus five, a $1.8 million cut, all the progress you guys have been working so hard on, it stops,” Manale said. “Because it sends a message that the city’s going to contract, and we’re getting smaller.”
Councilor Nick Koloski said he “wholeheartedly” agrees with Girard’s comments and is in support of asking the manager to bring back a reduced budget. He said Manale said to him recently that there would be padding in the budget because the council needs to feel good about making cuts during the meeting.
“That upsets me,” Koloski said. “That seems to be a waste of our time, the public’s time and the department’s time. So, I would like to just get straight to the point.”
Manale had a chance to defend himself, and said he doesn’t recall saying this to Koloski.
He later looked at Koloski and said, “You’re right, maybe there is fluff. Maybe there are places that need to be cut. I am meeting with our directors right now to try to figure out the opposite of what you just suggested, of where I could find every savings possible. By the way, I’ve mentioned that to the mayor. I’ve told the mayor individually I would work on his behalf to try to cut this budget as much as I possibly can because I made that commitment to him when I first came here. So, I don’t appreciate saying I have put together a fluffy budget because I’ve never done that, and I continue to never do that.”
Councilor comments
Assistant Mayor Matteau is in favor of the 5% cut and said, like the mayor, the frustration is transparency. She said year after year, about seven to 10% of the budget does not get spent. This tells her the city is budgeting more consistently, and “maybe our budget is too high, or maybe we aren’t getting the work that we want done, and we need to find out why that’s not happening.”
“With the way the world is and people worried about their futures and money, we need to look at tightening our belts,” Matteau said. “Does it need to be a flat 5%? I don’t know. But we all know there are ways to save money.”
Councilor Wayne Hemingway agreed with Manale’s comments about the city moving forward, saying he has seen a lot of great things happen since coming onto the council. However, he also believes looking at being more transparent and the council needing to “tighten their belt a little bit.”
Zutter isn’t sure about 5% but agrees on the notion of tightening spending. He sees the city’s growth occurring but also knows there are expenditures. He wants to keep a positive attitude about the city moving forward, as well as toward the budget.
Councilor William Greenrose agreed that the council should look at a number, and that the approach should be to look at the budget and cut where he could.
“A lot of what we’re talking about comes down to communication, understanding the numbers and what they really mean in the impact,” Greenrose said. “I want to understand what those cuts would mean consequentially to the city.”
OPTIONAL PULL QUOTE: “While that’s true, it revealed something troubling — we’re overspending line items by tens of thousands without blinking,” Girard said.
