The Hudson Budget Committee convened on Oct. 1 to hear updates from Selectman Liaison David Morin regarding requests from the town’s first responders. These requests involve the use of exaction funds received from the Target Logistics Center project.
“We had some discussion about the Target funds,” said Morin. “The Fire Chief gave a presentation at our last meeting. He stated that they need a training ground, a fire truck, and several pieces of equipment – including Hurst tools, airbags, and similar items. He’s putting together a plan for us to present to the Selectmen to determine what we’ll be purchasing.”
Morin also noted that the Hudson Police Department has already begun using its share of the funds.
“The police came to us to use some of their Target money. They purchased drones, which they’ve already used in a couple of instances,” he said. “They also plan to use some of the funds for officer training programs and other equipment.”
He clarified that all recent requests from first responders are being funded through the Target exaction money and do not represent new items in the upcoming town budget.
Given the long-standing controversy surrounding the Target Logistics Center exaction funds, Budget Committee members raised several questions.
“What was the total amount of money we received from Target?” asked Committee member Randy Brownrigg. “And what kind of account did this money go into?”
Morin responded that approximately $1 million was available to first responders from the exaction fund. Committee member Kevin Walsh added that the money was placed into “a separate account.”
“The police have used some of it – they’ve purchased new guns and the latest technology,” said Morin. “The Fire Department, at this time, hasn’t purchased anything.”
Brownrigg expressed concern about the legal handling of the funds.
“I spend quite a bit of time at the Department of Revenue, and I spoke with someone there,” he said. “There’s a procedure for receiving money outside the calendar year of the budget, and we haven’t followed that process.”
He cited RSA 31:95-b, a state law that governs the management of unanticipated revenue by municipalities.
“There’s supposed to be a public hearing when receiving this kind of money, to inform the public that it’s available,” Brownrigg explained. “It’s something we need to look into and possibly correct.”
Morin responded that some procedures under RSA 31:95-b had been followed, though he was unsure about the specifics of the account.
“The issues you’re talking about were addressed, although I don’t know about the account,” he said. “We’ll find out for you.”
Walsh added that three separate accounts, all isolated from the town’s general budget, had been created to manage recent unanticipated revenue.
Committee member Shawn Jasper raised a broader concern about the legality of the exaction process.
“The Planning Board’s ability to request fees as part of a project’s approval is governed by law,” Jasper said. “Historically, that was meant to prevent any form of extortion.”
He reiterated his longstanding position that the town’s receipt of Target funds may not fully comply with state law, though acknowledged there may have been recent updates to the statute.
