HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-09-26 Public Comment - E. Talago - Public Comment on proposed 2027-2028 Budget General FundFrom:Emily Talago
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Public Comment on proposed 2027-2028 Budget General Fund
Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2026 11:59:30 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good evening Commissioners,
I've spent more time reading this budget than any reasonably well-adjusted person probablyshould.
One theme keeps jumping out at me: competition within the General Fund.
Montana's local government finance system is built around a fairly simple premise. The
General Fund supports core municipal functions, while many additional community prioritiesare funded through voter-approved levies when the public decides a particular program is
important enough to warrant its own dedicated funding source.
The challenge is that our revenue streams are limited. When new programs and initiatives are
added without dedicated funding, they don't exist in a vacuum. They compete with every otherGeneral Fund priority for the same finite pool of dollars.
At the same time, this budget reports vacancies across numerous departments and funds. Thereare only so many ways that equation can balance. Either service levels decline relative to the
resources allocated, or employees absorb the difference through increased workload and stressin order to maintain the level of service the community expects.
Before we continue expanding what the General Fund is expected to accomplish, I wouldencourage the Commission to make sure the basics are fully covered first.
Are our core services fully staffed?
Are we meeting accepted benchmarks for public safety?
Are departments responsible for maintaining the infrastructure and services residents rely onevery day adequately resourced?
Because if the answer to those questions is no, then every additional General Fundcommitment deserves scrutiny.
The Community Housing Fund is one example of a broader policy question.
In 2021, voters were asked whether they wanted to create a dedicated affordable housing mill
levy. The measure failed. It was a close vote, but voters ultimately declined to authorize adedicated tax for that purpose.
Reasonable people can support affordable housing efforts and still disagree about how theyshould be funded. The larger question is whether programs that extend beyond what most
residents would consider traditional municipal functions should compete directly with police,
fire, streets, parks, libraries, and other core services for General Fund dollars.
That is ultimately a policy choice.
If the Commission believes those programs should continue or expand, I would encourage youto consider asking voters for dedicated funding rather than relying on the General Fund to
absorb an ever-growing list of responsibilities.
Growth in the tax base should help us keep pace with growth in core services. If every new
dollar is already committed elsewhere, then growth doesn't actually help us scale thoseservices to meet community demand.
I'd like to also address a concern several commissioners raised last week regarding the lack ofpublic participation in the budget process.
Respectfully, I don't think the solution is simply asking people to show up more.
Most residents have no idea where your actual discretion exists in this budget. They don't
know what portions are fixed, what portions are legally restricted, what portions arecontractual obligations, or how much money, if any, is genuinely available for policy
decisions.
Before adopting this budget, I would encourage the Commission to spend some time helping
the public understand those questions.
How much money is actually up for debate?
Where does Commission discretion truly exist?
What choices are you being asked to make?
Host a couple of commissioner-led walking discussions. Grab coffee with residents. Put out apodcast. Then, hold a work session among yourselves focused on negotiating tradeoffs and
their impact. Invite people into the conversation before the decisions are finalized.
If that means pushing the June 23 deadline, then push the deadline.
This doesn't require a major public engagement campaign or additional burden on staff. Itsimply requires taking a little time to have a conversation with the people you're making these
decisions on behalf of.
Budgets are ultimately statements of priorities. The public can't meaningfully weigh in on
priorities if they don't understand what choices are actually being made.
Thanks for your consideration,
Emily Talago, Bozeman Resident
bcc: Bozeman City Commission