Two warrant articles concerning the Reverend Morrison Meeting House have advanced to the Deliberative Session.
One article asks voters whether they will approve a bond of up to $3,381,000 “for the purpose of renovating the Town-owned Reverend Morrison Meeting House.”
In a memo, Town Manager Shaun Mulholland explained that “ReArch Construction provided cost estimates for the renovation of the building on Dec. 15, 2025, at the request of the Town Manager.”
“The estimated cost of the renovations, if work began in June of 2026, is $3,380,551,” he wrote. “The renovation would result in the building being compliant with building and energy codes. The work would also result in the building being ADA compliant on the first floor only, and a fire suppression system would be installed to meet life safety code requirements. The second floor would not be ADA accessible and would not be completely renovated.”
The second article is a citizen petition warrant article that asks: “To see if the Town will vote to establish a Reverend Morrison Meeting House/Lions Hall Capital Reserve Fund under the provisions of RSA 35:1 for the purpose of reopening and/or maintaining the building and surrounding facilities as a community public event/multi-use center.”
The article proposes $950,000 in funding, with half coming from taxes and half from the unassigned fund balance.
Former Town Councilor John Farrell, representing the Londonderry Historical Society, which submitted the petition article, said there were misunderstandings about the two proposals and emphasized that they are fundamentally different.
Farrell explained that the bond article is intended to open the building, while the petition article would create a capital reserve fund. He said the Historical Society’s goal is to save the building, noting that reopening it could be a multiyear process.
Farrell warned that if the bond doesn’t pass, the building may not survive. He noted that the bond requires a 60% majority to pass, while the citizen petition article only needs a simple majority.
Resident Ann Chiampa said her priority is to see the building reopened. She also suggested exploring grant opportunities, such as those offered by the NH Preservation Alliance, to help reduce costs.
A concern raised was whether the building’s original character could be preserved. Kevin Magee of ReArch Construction said they intend to keep it “as original as possible within the code.”
Town Council Vice Chair Shawn Faber noted that the future of the building has been discussed for years, including through a dedicated committee.
“We still didn’t have an answer,” he said.
Faber added that the Council felt compelled to act before the building deteriorates further and worked to keep the renovation cost as low as possible while still making it usable.
Councilor Dan Bouchard emphasized that the bond amount represents the maximum they can borrow and that the final cost could be lower if grants or donations are secured.
The Council voted 2-2-1 on whether to recommend the bond article, while the Budget Committee voted 0-5-2. On the citizen petition article, the Council voted 1-3-1, and the Budget Committee voted 0-7.