MANCHESTER, NH. May 11, 2026–More than a week after injuries made by Girard at Large regarding the data used to produce a state mandated budget report, Manchester School Superintendent Jennifer Chmiel responded with an email that did little to answer the questions asked.

Chmiel: Details withheld

After discovering the district had posted information required by the Students First Act on its Web site, Girard at Large asked the following simple question in an email sent to Chmiel on May 2:

Hi, Jenn.
The link below is to the district’s effort to comply with the Student’s First Act.  It would be helpful to know, exactly, where the district pulled the numbers from, how it adjusted them for inflation and the exact dates it used for the specific start and end dates.  Needless to say, none of these numbers align with any publicly available source of information.  Thanks.
Earlier today, Girard at Large sent this email as a follow up to the one sent on May 2:
Hi, Jenn
When this information is finally produced, this article, which you’re invited to comment on, will be updated, assuming it needs to be.

The second link is to an extensive article and analysis written about the district’s data.

Her reply came more than 7 hours later, saying:

We reviewed your inquiry and have the following info to share.
The top two graphs, Cost per Pupil and Teacher Average Salary, were pulled from the NHDOE website.  They were adjusted for inflation to November 2025 using the Bureau of Labor (BLS) calculator as noted on each graph.  The bottom graph, Sum of Administrator Salaries, was pulled from the District financial/payroll software based on actual paid salaries as required by HB1265.  This graph was also adjusted for inflation to November 2025 using the BLS calculator as noted on the graph.  The final chart of Top Administrator Salaries for Fiscal Year 2026 is based on the contracted salaries for each position
Since this information adds nothing to the understanding of the information already made public, Girard at Large replied, writing:
Jen,
Your response does not provide any of the detail sought.  You don’t identify which state data you used, despite there being multiple state figures for per pupil costs.  You say you used district data for the administrative salaries instead of the data on the state’s Web site, which comes from district data and is available for the current school/fiscal year.  Moreover, we can’t see if what you used is any different from what’s on the state’s site because you didn’t present any nominal data, only data factored for inflation on an undisclosed date.  You say you adjusted for inflation, but you don’t say what date you adjusted to.  You also don’t disclose the date in November you used to adjust for inflation.  Was it the 1st?  30th?  Some other day?
Why November 2025? That’s in the current school year, which you don’t provide any data for, though the law arguably requires you to do because this budget year is previous to the budget for the coming fiscal year.
These questions are pretty straight forward.  Why are you withholding the answers to them?
If we get any answers, we’ll update this article. At this point, it would seem that the district is content to use numbers that can’t be independently verified and aren’t compared to the nominal (actual) spending levels in each of the prior ten years, as required by the law, including the current year.