Elm Grove CDBG grant

Asked the council to vote no, arguing the town is lending its name to a private company's project and that displaced families with children in Hooksett schools shouldn't be sent to Manchester.

Read the grant-funded renovation list (siding, windows, patio, solar, dog park) and said a landlord improving his own building should pay for it himself.

Called the arrangement 'a company seeking the town's signature,' flagged the unfinished anti-displacement plan template, the $30,000 administration cost, and asked the council to vote no or table.

Said the July 27 deadline belongs to the developer, not the town, and asked the council to table the matter.

Asked what happens to market-rate tenants who earn too much to qualify once the whole building converts, saying they deserve written answers.

A contractor who warned that federal money brings Davis-Bacon wages, environmental reviews, and long-lived federal obligations — asked the council to vote no.

Cited Elm Grove's prior Newport, NH arrangement, warned of setting a precedent for every landlord, and said the company is already too wealthy.

Questioned why the company needs Hooksett's name and asked about tax bill impacts, ownership requirements, and who profits.

Said a community grant should benefit the community, not push market-rate tenants out, and suggested alternatives like 16 Main Street or transportation expansion.

A former state rep from Northfield raised a state constitutional concern about towns lending credit to for-profit corporations and mentioned grand jury investigation powers.