Beth Moreau

Q1. What is the biggest problem Portsmouth is facing, and how would you solve it?

Affordability. This impacts many areas of our city. Home prices are a barrier to first-time buyers. Rental costs preclude many who work here from living here. Commercial rents can drive lower margin businesses out. Residents experience tax increases as property values increase out of proportion to their income. All of this stems from the desirability of living in Portsmouth. It is a vibrant, safe, well-managed, financially stable community that has arts, entertainment and dining within walking or biking distance for most. As detailed in my answers to other questions, as Councilor I have worked to maintain that desirability while trying to mitigate the negative consequences, particularly related to workforce housing. If reelected, I plan to shepherd key initiatives I started to completion while also applying my extensive knowledge and background in community planning to ensure that the Master Plan reflects how residents want to see Portsmouth change in the coming decades.

Q2. Portsmouth’s budget has reached nearly $150 million and its payroll has 260-plus people earning $100 000-plus. As a city councilor, what steps would you take, if any, to address the tax burden on residents?

Like many homeowners, my household experienced a significant property tax increase following the recent property reevaluation, so I understand other’s pain with their increase. The goal of reevaluation is to fairly distribute the tax burden based on property market value. I will continue to ensure that long-term residents who now find themselves “property wealthy but cash poor” can have their taxes adjusted to fairly reduce their burden. The revaluation also exacerbated the trend of residential properties paying a larger share of the overall tax burden due to depressed commercial property values, particularly for office buildings.

I supported creation of the Gateway Neighborhood Overlay District to spur redevelopment of underperforming commercial properties into much needed housing, increasing their taxable value. I also support maximizing revenue from other sources, particularly downtown parking. Unfortunately, recent significant cuts in federal funding have reduced or eliminated many alternate revenue sources. Portsmouth citizens need to continue to press the State government to allow local taxes on lodging, similar to other tourist states. A big part of Portsmouth’s appeal is our beautiful public parks and recreation, great schools, reliable police and fire departments, and modern public infrastructure. I will continue to ensure that city budgets deliver those services efficiently and effectively, keeping annual budget increases at or below inflation.

Q3. With affordability being such a challenge in Portsmouth, what would you do to make it more accessible to people with a wide range of incomes?

Affordability in Portsmouth is almost entirely driven by housing cost. I have worked to increase the availability of workforce housing. Even creating more market rate rentals appears to be having a positive effect. In its “2024 Residential Rental Cost Survey Report”, New Hampshire Housing identified Portsmouth as having the largest decrease in median rental cost for a two-bedroom apartment between 2023 and 2024 among large cities in New Hampshire. Still, affordability means having many different types of housing for different people at different points in their lives.

This is why I support the effort to create co-living housing in select locations. Co-living has been very successful in other areas of the country. It is not the same as a dormitory; Portsmouth is not a college town with throngs of students who are away from home for the first time. Co-living is not the Brewster Rooms. I lived a block away from that poorly managed boarding house for 12 years prior to its closure, so I understand its unique ownership issues. Co-living simply offers another housing alternative in both price point and lifestyle. Nationwide, many successful co-living facilities are self-managed. At least at first, those here will have on-site management. I had hoped that micro-apartments would be another alternative to decrease housing costs, but in one case units that were built in Portsmouth originally for rental are instead being sold as a pair and the new owners are connecting them.

Q4. The Portsmouth Housing Authority has projected rents for the apartments the agency is building on city-owned land at the former Sherburne School will range from $1,580 for a one-bedroom unit to nearly $2,200 for three bedrooms. Are those rates low enough for working people? If not, what can be done to lower them?

The cited rental costs are maximum values allowed by HUD based on local area median income levels. I support PHA in its effort to keep rental costs below these maximum levels, using an income-based sliding scale to ensure residents contribute their fair share. For example, one-bedroom units at the Ruth Lewin Griffin Place workforce housing development cost $1,083 per month for individuals making less than 50% of the area median income. This is nearly $500 per month below the maximum. I expect that rents at the Sherburne School site will be similar. This, combined with the city and local businesses paying their employees a fair living wage, will ensure that individuals like our local police officers, firefighters and teachers can once again reasonably afford to live in our city.

Q5. Should the city commit to using more city-owned land to build truly affordable housing or has Portsmouth done enough?

As part of my tenure on Land Use Committee and, later, Housing Committee, I examined city-owned parcels of land for potential use for workforce housing. There are almost no parcels outside of the Sherburne School site that are suitable for such development. Part of my reason for supporting city’s legal settlement with The Kane Company was the requirement for them to provide the city a gift of land on which the city could create affordable housing. Additionally, I helped to create the Gateway Neighborhood Overlay District that may result in additional, suitable land being similarly donated. I also identified that Service Credit Union owned a large parcel behind its headquarters on Lafayette Road that might be suitable for redevelopment. As a result of my conversations with their leadership, plans are progressing for over 200 units of workforce and veteran housing on that lot. It is this type of private/public cooperative development that will continue to have Portsmouth in the forefront of addressing the Seacoast area’s affordable housing crisis.

Q6. Should the city reconsider the scope of a potential police station and City Hall renovation and upgrade project with a projected $42 million cost?

I believe that improvements can be made to meet most of the Police Department’s identified needs at less than the projected $42 million cost. I support the ongoing work of the Municipal Building Blue Ribbon Committee to achieve this goal. This committee, which includes developers, long-time residents, representation from the Police Department and Police Commission, as well as my fellow City Councilors Kate Cook and John Tabor, is identifying ways to reduce costs and improve the overall functionality of the entirety of the City Hall complex.

Q7. Should Portsmouth do something to encourage development at the McIntyre building site, where the owner says city zoning has made redevelopment difficult?

I do not believe that any such zoning changes are necessary at this time. The current owner of the McIntyre Building purchased the property for roughly $9 million through an open, fair bidding process, taking on whatever risk comes with their plans for making a financial gain off its redevelopment. Like any developer, the owner of the McIntyre Building can use the established process for requesting variances to the property’s zoning where justified. The General Services Administration had offered the city to purchase the property for between $20 to $25 million, which I voted to reject as I saw it as a bad financial deal.

Q8. The City Council has put forward ideas to address traffic flow and walkability in high-profile locations like State Street and Congress Street. What is your opinion on these efforts?

The city has been working on the Market Square Master Plan since late 2023. Early feedback indicates a desire to make Market Square and the surrounding core of downtown a more pedestrian-friendly experience. A significant obstacle to achieving this is the present traffic pattern that sends all U. S. Route 1 southbound traffic through Market Square to the end of Congress St. This traffic flow was created in the car-oriented 1950s to provide more exposure for downtown businesses. Another issue is that DPW is planning to perform a major utilities project in the next few years that will be extremely disruptive to Congress Street traffic.

It makes sense that we at least perform a detailed study of the feasibility and cost of alternatives for routing major traffic around Market Square, including returning State St. to being two-way. The intent is not to ban vehicles from Market Square but to emphasize pedestrian access, and limit the downtown core to ADA Accessible and short duration parking, as well as loading zones. This will also reduce vehicles circling through Market Square looking for parking. DPW has conducted trial periods of various traffic calming and realignment concepts in other parts of the city. The Congress St. utilities project may provide a similar opportunity to make temporary changes to traffic flow around Market Square and Congress St. to help understand the impact and desirability of such changes.

Q9. Should the city begin looking for a site where it can build its third municipal parking garage? If so, what part of the city makes the most sense? If not, how can the city meet its increasing parking demand?

The “Strategic Parking Plan” submitted in January 2025 identified that the city will need to create 500 parking spaces by 2035 to support downtown and nearby areas. To remedy this shortfall in time requires that serious planning begin in 2026. The report also states that in FY25 the city expects to collect $6.4 million in parking revenue, 63% of which will be spent on non-parking related service and salary support. This includes a $2.5 million contribution to the General Fund, which is identified as reducing the tax burden on a median single-family home by $336 per year. While some of the parking revenue comes from residents who purchase monthly passes because they have no parking or insufficient parking, most short-term parking revenue comes from non-residents.

Failure to meet the anticipated parking demand would not only reflect a loss in potential non-property tax revenue for the city but would also put pressure on residential neighborhoods near downtown as non-resident vehicles would be incentivized to park in them. The potential sites for a new garage would need to be studied carefully. Improving transit options between business zones needs to be emphasized, in part to help reduce the need for parking, particularly for downtown and west end residents, as well as to expand options for locating an additional garage.

Q10. What else would you like voters to know about you?

I am the City Council representative on the Master Plan Advisory Group, which is providing oversight, direction and inspiration for the Master Plan process that will be taking place over the next 15 to 18 months into early 2027. A Master Plan is created once every ten years or so and it is the document that guides decisions about zoning and development for the following decade. This effort is crucially important to the future of our city. With knowledge I have gained over 12 years serving on the Planning Board and my active role on the Rockingham Planning Commission, I am able to provide unique insights and suggestions on development of the plan, and to encourage thoughtful input from residents to ensure that the plan truly reflects what we collectively view as the best possible future for Portsmouth from a development perspective.