Waterville Valley, NH – The Capital Improvement Program (CIP) subcommittee of the Planning Board held the first of two public hearings on August 31, 2026, to discuss the town’s proposed capital investments and capital reserve funds for 2027 and beyond. The meeting served as an opportunity for the public to review draft proposals and provide feedback before final recommendations are made to the Select Board.
The subcommittee outlined the CIP process, which involves working with department heads over the preceding months to refine capital investment requests. The draft document is then presented to the Planning Board for a vote, and subsequently to the Select Board, which can make further edits based on the overall budgetary process. The Budget Advisory Committee also reviews the proposals, and the Town Manager bears ultimate responsibility for execution of the budget (link).
The presented document is a draft, and the “high, medium, low” prioritization system serves as a tool for the Select Board to guide its decisions — not a final determination of which items will become warrant articles (link).
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Discussions
Municipal Facilities
The total requested amount for municipal facilities — encompassing all high, medium, and low priority items — stands at $4.2 million. Two items alone account for more than $3 million of that total (link).
Public Works Generator: A quote has been requested for a secondary power generator at the Public Works garage. The facility currently has no standby generation power, meaning that during an outage the building goes dark and the fuel pump becomes inoperable. Board members acknowledged the safety implications while noting that vehicles could travel to Campton to refuel in an emergency and that public safety vehicles are typically kept fully fueled (link).
DPW Shower and Restroom: The proposed shower and restroom project at the Department of Public Works (DPW) was discussed as both a convenience and a genuine safety issue, particularly regarding staff exposure to toxic materials. It was noted that DPW staff currently share a single restroom. The Assistant Town Manager provided context, explaining that in many surrounding municipalities such routine facility improvements are funded through capital reserve accounts and handled without requiring a town meeting vote — a model Waterville Valley is working toward (link).
Maintenance Garage and Salt Shed Siding: The proposal includes full vinyl siding replacement for the entire maintenance garage and salt shed building.
Public Safety Center Stair Replacement: Questions were raised about the structural condition of the emergency exit stairs at the Public Safety Center. The stairs do not meet current building code requirements and, while pre-existing non-conforming structures need not be brought up to code, they were described by multiple attendees as steep and rickety. Replacement is being proposed on life-safety grounds (link).
Cost Justification and Estimates
A Planning Board member questioned how the dollar amounts in the CIP are derived, asking whether items have been formally bid or are based on estimates. The committee acknowledged the need for greater transparency, noting that formal quotes require significant effort from both town staff and vendors — and that some vendors will not provide quotes until funding has been appropriated. The committee committed to adding a “quote vs. estimate” indicator to the spreadsheet in future cycles. The Town Manager expressed confidence in department heads’ ability to provide reliable figures based on their professional experience and indicated that estimates would be sharpened before warrant articles are finalized (link).
Wastewater Management
- River Road and West Branch Road Sewer Line: Repair of the sewer line running along River Road and West Branch Road was identified as a high priority item. The project has already been delayed by at least a year, and the delay has compounded a related problem: repaving of both roads cannot proceed until the underlying sewer work is completed. A property in the area has experienced repeated sewer freeze-ups, and a temporary repair is being arranged while engineering work determines the permanent solution. Assurances were sought that the engineering would address the root cause — including questions about line capacity and volume — before construction proceeds (link).
Public Works Equipment
Existing Lease Payments: The committee clarified that annual reauthorization of existing lease payments — such as the $43,000 annual payment on a current plow/dump truck — is standard New Hampshire practice. Although a town could theoretically decline to appropriate the payment and return the equipment, this has not occurred in practice (link).
New Plow/Dump Truck Purchase: A separate $200,000 purchase of a new plow/dump truck was proposed — a second vehicle, not a replacement of the leased unit. The purchase approach reflects feedback from the prior town meeting in which residents expressed a preference for outright purchases over leases. The vehicle currently under lease is approximately five years old and is experiencing increasing electrical issues; the typical service life of a plow truck in Waterville Valley is four to five years.
Ventrac: An $80,000 request for a Ventrac utility vehicle was confirmed as a high-priority item; the priority designation had been inadvertently omitted from the draft (link).
Public Works Maintenance
- Sign Replacement: A $10,000 request covers sign poles, additional public safety signage, and replacement of damaged signs. Signs on Boulder Path Road and Snow’s Mountain Road that were damaged during construction are the responsibility of the construction contractor, who has been notified. A design and quote for a “freestyle” sign are complete, but the funding was not approved at the last town meeting; under New Hampshire’s “no means no” rule, no further action can be taken until funds are appropriated (link).
Parks and Recreation
- Passenger Van: The only parks and recreation line item is an existing lease payment for a passenger van.
Public Safety
- Lucas Device: A $30,000 request was made for a Lucas device — an automatic mechanical CPR device used on ambulances. The device effectively frees one crew member from performing manual compressions, allowing that person to attend to other critical tasks during transport. The town’s existing unit is an older model that is no longer being manufactured or serviced, and replacement parts are unavailable. The request was described as critical to patient outcomes (link).
Road Construction
Tripoli Road: Repaving of Tripoli Road requires written approval from the U.S. Forest Service. A verbal approval to repave has been received, but the town was told it cannot improve the subbase — making a full-depth “box out” reconstruction infeasible without further negotiation. The committee emphasized the importance of securing written authorization, particularly given ongoing personnel changes within the Forest Service (link).
Snow’s Mountain Road Change Order: An approximately $80,000 change order has arisen from Snow’s Mountain Road and Boulder Path Road work. Unknown underground infrastructure encountered during closed drainage system installation required re-engineering. Additionally, disturbing more than one acre of land triggered a permitting requirement from NH DES. To avoid running heavy equipment over a freshly completed road, the contractor (Piper Construction) was asked to defer the final pavement top coat on Boulder Path Road until Snow’s Mountain Road reconstruction is complete, at which point a continuous fresh surface will be applied from the top of Snow’s Mountain Road down through Boulder Path Road (link).
Lost Pass, Cascade Ridge, and Beanbender Road: Discussion centered on whether to separate these road projects. It was noted that stormwater flows from Cascade Ridge and Beanbender Road contribute to drainage problems at the Boulder Path Road area and a nearby parking lot. A suggestion was made to elevate Lost Pass to high priority as a standalone project while combining Cascade Ridge and Beanbender Road work with the Upper Boulder Path Road engineering effort. However, it was noted that Upper Boulder Path Road carries unresolved legal issues related to homeowner access approvals that must be addressed before any work can proceed (link).
Capital Reserve Funds (CRFs)
The subcommittee introduced a new spreadsheet for public review showing existing CRF balances, purposes, requested new contributions, and projected future balances. CRFs are managed through the New Hampshire State Bank and must be used for their designated purposes. The CIP subcommittee has begun meeting with the Trustees of the Trust Fund at least twice per year to coordinate oversight of these accounts.
Police Details Revolving Fund: A new $10,000 seed fund was proposed. Officers conducting paid details (such as at the Loudon racetrack) earn a detail rate paid by the hiring entity; the difference between that rate and the officers’ regular pay flows back into the revolving fund, which can also be used to cover overtime without drawing from the general fund. The town currently generates net revenue from police details (link).
Ambulance Billing Revolving Fund: A similar revolving structure was proposed for ambulance billing revenue. The town currently generates net revenue from ambulance billing as well.
Solid Waste Truck CRF Rename: A proposal was introduced to rename and repurpose an existing CRF carrying a balance of approximately $72,328. The fund was originally established to purchase a solid waste truck; since that purchase is no longer planned, the town intends to bring a warrant article to voters to change the fund’s name to “Municipal Solid Waste Operations” and redirect the balance toward transfer station operations. A town vote is required to change both the name and the purpose of a CRF (link).
Public Safety Equipment CRF: A member of the public questioned why the existing $90,000 Public Safety Equipment CRF balance could not be used to purchase the Lucas device now, removing it from the CIP. It was explained that the Director of Public Safety views that fund as intended for major apparatus such as vehicles — not smaller equipment — and that the fund is being built up to cover eventual replacement of aging apparatus over the next 15 to 20 years. The committee noted that the allocation could be revisited as part of the broader budget process (link).
Assessing CRF: A continuing $20,000 annual contribution to the Assessing Capital Reserve Account was recommended. The fund was established to cover future statistical or full revaluations of town property, which are required by RSA at least every five years. A full revaluation can cost approximately $75,000; by saving incrementally, the town avoids a large single-year budget impact. The town’s current equalization ratio is approximately 97–98%, well within the 90–110% range that triggers a mandatory statistical revaluation (link).
CRF Interest vs. Borrowing Costs: A resident raised the question of whether saving in CRFs is financially efficient when the interest earned may be lower than the town’s borrowing rate. The committee explained that CRF funds are held at the New Hampshire State Bank at competitive rates, and that the purpose of CRFs is not always to avoid borrowing but to spread costs over time and reduce single-year tax impacts. CRFs also provide flexibility for emergency expenditures during the year. Currently, the town is still in the early stages of building its reserves and has primarily drawn from CRFs only in emergency situations (link).
Wastewater Treatment Plant CRF: The Assistant Town Manager flagged a potential future CRF item related to the Wastewater Treatment Plant project. Rate modeling presented previously included a scenario in which the town contributes $10 million upfront upon project completion — which would have required saving approximately $2.5 million per year beginning in 2026. The committee noted that an early cash contribution could allow the town to purchase long-lead equipment at lower prices, with vendors storing the equipment until needed, potentially reducing overall project costs by millions of dollars. The specific CRF amount, if any, is still to be determined and may appear at the next public hearing (link).
The subcommittee will incorporate public feedback into a revised proposal for the second public hearing.