The Hooksett Budget Committee chairman said the Hooksett Police Department is spending money on items that were not approved by voters, and that they should be acting more transparently when it comes to big-ticket purchases.

Specifically, Chairman John Pieroni told the Hooksett Town Council on Wednesday, Dec. 3, that the Police Department is spending taxpayer dollars from its $3.2 million annual budget on projects that were not discussed during the previous year’s budget cycle.

“I think it is particularly disturbing when you have money being spent on items that never came before the Budget Committee,” Pieroni said.

A new sign for the town’s safety center, which cost $33,000, and an outdoor, fenced-in firing range for police officers, which cost more than $16,000, caused Pieroni acute concern. Furthermore, the Police Commission’s refusal to submit a financial summary of large expenditures to the town’s finance director is a sign of non-compliance, he said.

“We need to know how (the money) was spent in the past to see what needs to be spent in the future,” Pieroni said. “I think it was a reasonable request. (The Police Department is) part of the town budget ... so I would expect them to provide all the information that the finance director might need.”

Mark Meville, a member of the Budget Committee, also told the council he thought expenditures were shrouded in mystery and should, in turn, raise some eyebrows.

“That’s what we’re talking about: transparency and accountability,” Meville said. “The voters should have known about (these purchases). There was no transparency here.”

The comments were made during a portion of a regular Town Council meeting during which Pieroni was scheduled to deliver a brief overview on the workings of the Budget Committee.

Hooksett Police Chief Steve Agrafiotis was also present at the meeting and took an opportunity to counter the Budget Committee’s concerns.

Agrafiotis insisted purchases made by the Police Department were necessary and that the Town Council particularly directed the Police Department to move forward with buying the new sign.

“I see his point of it not being discussed earlier in the year,” he said. “But we wouldn’t have done the project if the council hadn’t approved it.”

Agrafiotis also said the Police Commission, which oversees the Police Department’s budget, is often required to spend money on items during the fiscal year that were not foreseen during the budget process.

Additionally, he said, the Police Department returned money to the town that was not spent during the previous fiscal year and that several town-wide purchases, including a new air conditioner for the renovated town offices, were purchased without discussing the expenses with the Budget Committee.

Town Councilor Pat Rueppel said she was puzzled why the Police Department was raked across the coals at the meeting.

“What happened was unfair,” said Rueppel, who made the motion last May to allow the Police Department to purchase the new safety center sign. “The Police Department turns any excess money back to us every year. It was unfair what happened to Steve (Agrafiotis) last night. One of the reasons the council moved on this sign in the first place was because nothing was getting done about it.”

Town Councilor David Ross responded to the Budget Committee’s comments by insisting the sign purchase was made above board.

“There were meetings and discussions about this,” Ross said. “It was not done in secret or darkness.”