Your area Not set — showing everywhere
Meeting report · Select Board Minutes-only
Creating this report cost real money. Help fund coverage →

Select Board — March 3, 2026

The meeting featured multiple split votes and direct public criticism of a board member's attendance and location.

Date Tuesday, March 3, 2026 Public comments 2 Decisions 7 Lively

Questions about this meeting? ⁠Just ask.

Ask MeetingWatch answers from this meeting’s report, transcript, and records — with linked sources.

Summary AI-generated to surface controversy & community impact without bias — always verify against the actual meeting before relying on it.

During the March 3 Select Board meeting, two significant issues highlighted the tension between administrative efficiency and strict adherence to town policy.

First, the Board voted 2-1 to select Vachon Clukay to conduct the 2025 Town Audit. This decision was controversial because the town only received two bids, while current town policy requires three quotes for such services. While the majority argued that waiting for more bidders would be 'reckless' and cause unnecessary delays, the dissent raised a critical question: Should the town bypass its own procedural rules to save time?

Second, the Board addressed a serious concern raised by a resident regarding an $8,000 Land Use Change Tax (LUCT) dispute and a resulting property lien. The resident alleges these financial burdens stem from errors in the town's land use maps. While the Select Board has agreed to investigate the matter and review the maps provided, the situation underscores the real-world financial consequences that administrative errors can have on Warner residents.

As we approach the March 10 Town Election, residents should stay informed on how the Board balances policy, procedure, and public accountability.

Mar 3, 2026 2 public comments 7 decisions Lively
Notable statements Drag to browse

“They should have three quotes pursuant to Town policy [regarding the audit].”

— Mike Smith · Debating the selection of the auditing firm when only two bids were received. 00:00

“It would be reckless to put it off any longer [regarding the audit decision].”

— Harry Seidel · Responding to requests to delay the audit vote to find more bidders. 00:00

“Expressed her disappointment that a Select Board member is choosing not to attend in person and he chooses to be at his California home for the winter.”

— Faith Minton · Public comment criticizing Mike Smith's remote attendance. 00:00
This meeting — choose a section

Public ⁠impact

Issues from this meeting with documented community impact.
What was discussed

Individual resident facing an $8,000 tax burden and credit damage; potential systemic issue regarding town land use maps.

Topics ⁠discussed

Each topic expands to quotes and full context.
Speakers: Harry Seidel, Alfred Hanson, Mike Smith, Ben Frost
What was discussed

Discussion regarding Select Board representation at the March 10, 2026, Town Election and the assignment of presenters for various warrant articles.

Speakers: Harry Seidel, Alfred Hanson, Ed Mical
What was discussed

Review of Department of Labor violations, lighting replacement quotes, and a draft tree policy.

Speakers: Clyde Carson, Neil Nevins, Harry Seidel, Alfred Hanson, Mike Smith
What was discussed

The Energy Committee requested support for Senate Bill SB538 to extend net metering eligibility for municipal energy projects.

Speakers: Harry Seidel, Alfred Hanson, Mike Smith, Elizabeth Labbe, Clyde Carson
What was discussed

Debate over selecting an auditing firm, specifically comparing proposals from Vachon Clukay and Veroff CPA.

Speakers: Harry Seidel, Ed Mical, Alfred Hanson
What was discussed

Discussion regarding radio equipment costs and the potential for a 100-foot tower to facilitate Verizon financing.

Speakers: Harry Seidel, Alfred Hanson, Elizabeth Labbe, Mike Smith
What was discussed

Discussion on whether the town should adopt RSA 31:105 to protect employees from personal liability.

Speakers: Harry Seidel, Alfred Hanson, Mike Smith
What was discussed

Review and discussion of a draft policy for the sale of town-owned land based on updated RSAs and legal guidelines.

Speakers: Nick Edraos, Harry Seidel, Mike Smith, Alfred Hanson
What was discussed

Nick Edraos addressed the board regarding a disputed $8,000 LUCT, a property lien, and the absence of current use maps.

Controversy & ⁠dissent

Where the board, the community, or the agenda diverged.

Potentially controversial issues

01

2025 Town Audit Selection

There was a disagreement over whether the town followed its own policy requiring three quotes, as only two bids were received. This affects financial oversight and procedural integrity.
Board position: The majority moved to proceed immediately to avoid delays, while one member insisted on strict adherence to the three-quote policy.
Internal dissent
Mike Smith voted NO, arguing that the town should have obtained three quotes per policy.
low concern
02

Land Use Change Tax (LUCT) Dispute

A resident is facing significant financial hardship ($8,000 tax plus interest and liens) due to alleged town administrative failures regarding land use maps.
Board position: The board agreed to investigate the matter but did not provide immediate relief or a definitive resolution during the meeting.
medium concern

Split votes

Support for Senate Bill SB538 (Net metering for municipal energy)
2-1
Approval of Vachon Clukay for 2025 Town Audit
2-1

Community vs. board tension

Public ⁠comment

What residents said — verbatim, with timestamps.
2
Total speakers
1
Addressed
1
Partial
0
Not addressed
Nick Edraos
Partial
Mr. Edraos shared his experience regarding a Land Use Change Tax (LUCT) of $8,000 that was issued after he cleared land and installed solar panels. He noted that the Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) ruled the tax inappropriate because the town lacked the necessary maps to compare the land's status. He expressed frustration over resulting interest charges, a tax lien, and negative impacts on his credit. Key concern
The removal of the LUCT bill, the release of the tax lien, the restoration of his credit score, and a request for the town to contact property owners before issuing such taxes.
Board response
The Select Board agreed to look into the matter for him. Chairman Seidel reviewed a map provided by Mr. Edraos and noted the requirement for owners to file maps, while Mr. Edraos agreed to forward a new current use map.
The board acknowledged the issue and agreed to investigate/look into it, but they did not immediately grant his specific requests to clear the lien or restore his credit during the meeting.
Faith Minton
Addressed
Ms. Minton thanked the board for their service and adherence to the code of conduct. However, she expressed disappointment regarding a board member's choice to attend meetings via Zoom from California rather than in person. Key concern
A board member's lack of in-person presence and preparedness, which she believes hinders the town.
Board response
Select Board member Mike Smith responded by stating he is not in California, denied her assumption, and urged her to get her facts straight.
The board member directly responded to the specific criticism regarding his location and attendance.

Decisions ⁠logged

Every recorded vote, with timestamps and dissents.
00:00
Support for Senate Bill 538FN (Extending metering eligibility terms for municipal energy projects)
Motion by Seidel, seconded by Hanson. Mike Smith voted NO.
Passed (2 YES, 1 NO)
00:00
Approval of draft Town Land Sale Policy
Motion by Seidel, seconded by Hanson. Mike Smith abstained.
Passed (2 YES, 1 ABSTAIN)
00:00
Acceptance of Transfer Station lighting and fan installation quote
Accepted KLM quote for $2,980. Motion by Seidel, seconded by Hanson.
Passed (3 YES)
00:00
Decline DOT offer to purchase Map 28 Lot 33 (.3 acre parcel)
Motion by Seidel, seconded by Hanson.
Passed (3 YES)
00:00
Approval of Vachon Clukay for 2025 Town Audit
Motion by Seidel, seconded by Hanson. Mike Smith voted NO.
Passed (2 YES, 1 NO)
00:00
Approval of Consent Agenda
Includes various payments to Avitar Associates, Cyr Lumber, River Edge Forestry, MacMulkin Chevrolet, and tax refunds.
Passed (2 YES, 1 ABSTAIN)
00:00
Approval of Manifest (Accounts Payable/Payroll)
Approval of multiple check ranges and payroll deposits.
Passed (2 YES, 1 ABSTAIN)

Share ⁠this report

Drafts ready to post — click a block to copy, or use Share to post it.

X / Twitter — by angle

Prioritizing speed over established town policy regarding financial oversight.
At the March 3 Select Board meeting, the Board voted 2-1 to appoint Vachon Clukay for the 2025 Town Audit, despite only receiving two bids. One member argued this bypasses town policy requiring three quotes. Procedural integrity matters... https://meetingwatch.org/nh/warner/select-board/2026-03-03/ #MeetingWatch
313/280 chars
Community concern regarding administrative errors and their financial impact on residents.
A Warner resident is facing an $8,000 Land Use Change Tax (LUCT) bill and a property lien due to alleged errors in town land use maps. The Select Board has agreed to investigate, but a resolution is still pending. #WarnerNH #LocalGov https://meetingwatch.org/nh/warner/select-board/2026-03-03/ #MeetingWatch
307/280 chars
Internal board divisions and split votes.
The Warner Select Board remains divided. On March 3, the Board split 2-1 on both supporting SB538 energy legislation and selecting the 2025 auditing firm. Internal divisions are visible on key fiscal and policy votes. #WarnerNH https://meetingwatch.org/nh/warner/select-board/2026-03-03/ #MeetingWatch
301/280 chars

X thread

1
A look at the March 3 Warner Select Board meeting reveals growing tensions and questions about following town policy. 🧵 #MeetingWatch #WarnerNH
143/280
2
First, the audit. The Board voted 2-1 to approve Vachon Clukay for the 2025 Town Audit. However, only two bids were received. One member noted that town policy requires three quotes, but the majority moved forward to avoid delays.
230/280
3
Second, a resident is facing a massive $8,000 tax bill and a lien due to discrepancies in town land use maps. The Board has promised to investigate, but this highlights how administrative errors can cause serious financial harm to neighbors.
241/280
4
Finally, the meeting was marked by public criticism regarding board member attendance and several split votes on key issues. As the town prepares for the March 10 election, these divisions and policy decisions deserve close scrutiny. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/warner/select-board/2026-03-03/
257/280

Facebook — long form

During the March 3 Select Board meeting, two significant issues highlighted the tension between administrative efficiency and strict adherence to town policy.

First, the Board voted 2-1 to select Vachon Clukay to conduct the 2025 Town Audit. This decision was controversial because the town only received two bids, while current town policy requires three quotes for such services. While the majority argued that waiting for more bidders would be 'reckless' and cause unnecessary delays, the dissent raised a critical question: Should the town bypass its own procedural rules to save time?

Second, the Board addressed a serious concern raised by a resident regarding an $8,000 Land Use Change Tax (LUCT) dispute and a resulting property lien. The resident alleges these financial burdens stem from errors in the town's land use maps. While the Select Board has agreed to investigate the matter and review the maps provided, the situation underscores the real-world financial consequences that administrative errors can have on Warner residents.

As we approach the March 10 Town Election, residents should stay informed on how the Board balances policy, procedure, and public accountability. https://meetingwatch.org/nh/warner/select-board/2026-03-03/ #MeetingWatch #WarnerNH

Action ⁠items

Who owes what, by when.
Forward the list of companies contacted for audit bids to the Select Board.
Assigned: Elizabeth Labbe · Due: Immediate (completed during meeting)
Send a letter to the Town Health Officer regarding the need for annual recertification.
Assigned: Alfred Hanson · Due: Not specified
Investigate the LUCT, tax lien, and credit impact issue for Nick Edraos.
Assigned: Select Board · Due: Not specified
Forward the new current use map to Harry Seidel.
Assigned: Nick Edraos · Due: Not specified

Member ⁠positions

13 issues · 7 explicit · 2 inferred
Present
Support for Senate Bill 538FN YES
Supported extending net metering eligibility.
Approval of draft Town Land Sale Policy YES
Supported the draft land sale policy.
Acceptance of Transfer Station lighting and fan installation quote YES
Accepted the KLM quote.
Decline DOT offer to purchase Map 28 Lot 33 YES
Voted to decline the DOT offer.
Approval of Vachon Clukay for 2025 Town Audit YES
Supported appointing Vachon Clukay.
Approval of Consent Agenda YES ~
Approved the consent agenda.
Approval of Manifest (Accounts Payable/Payroll) YES ~
Approved the manifest.
Absent
Michael Smith
Member
Present
Support for Senate Bill 538FN NO
Opposed the legislation.
Approval of draft Town Land Sale Policy ABSTAIN
Abstained from the vote.
Acceptance of Transfer Station lighting and fan installation quote YES ~
Supported the quote.
Decline DOT offer to purchase Map 28 Lot 33 YES ~
Supported declining the offer.
Approval of Vachon Clukay for 2025 Town Audit NO
Opposed due to lack of three quotes.
Approval of Consent Agenda ABSTAIN
Abstained from the vote.
Approval of Manifest (Accounts Payable/Payroll) ABSTAIN
Abstained from the vote.
Absent
Present
Support for Senate Bill 538FN NO
Opposed the legislation.
Approval of draft Town Land Sale Policy ABSTAIN
Abstained from the vote.
Acceptance of Transfer Station lighting and fan installation quote YES ~
Supported the quote.
Decline DOT offer to purchase Map 28 Lot 33 YES ~
Supported declining the offer.
Approval of Vachon Clukay for 2025 Town Audit NO
Opposed due to lack of three quotes.
Approval of Consent Agenda ABSTAIN
Abstained from the vote.
Approval of Manifest (Accounts Payable/Payroll) ABSTAIN
Abstained from the vote.
Absent

Positions marked ~ are inferred from context and may not reflect the member's explicitly stated position. UNCLEAR means the vote was split but the record did not name how this member voted — it is not a “yes.”

Support coverage

Creating this report cost ⁠real money.

MeetingWatch attended, transcribed, and analyzed this meeting on its own dime. If this work is valuable to you, chip in to keep covering Warner.

Report composed by grok-4.3, gemma-4-26b, grok-4.20-0309-reasoning · analyzed 2026-06-01.