HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-03-26 Public Comment - D. Campbell - Priorities MatterFrom:Deanna Campbell
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]Priorities Matter
Date:Saturday, October 3, 2026 10:01:49 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.
Dear Mayor and Commissioners,
As you consider the City's priorities for future spending, I urge you to begin with a very basicquestion: What must the City provide, as opposed to what might simply be nice to have?
Bozeman taxpayers are already carrying a substantial burden. Housing costs, property taxes,assessments, utilities, and the general cost of living continue to rise. This is not the time to
assume that every community want should become another taxpayer-supported project.
I believe the City's first responsibility is to provide and maintain essential services. Police and
fire protection, emergency medical response, streets, water and sewer infrastructure, and otherbasic City responsibilities should come before new amenities.
I am particularly concerned about the proposal for a second library. The numbers simply don'tseem to support it. In 2016, the library recorded 439,036 visits. By FY2025, visits had fallen
to 326,415—a decline of about 26%. Yet the Library General Fund budget was $3,728,195 inFY2025 and is budgeted at $5,595,200 for FY2027—an increase of about 50% in just twoyears. At the 2025 level of usage, the General Fund cost per visit goes from approximately$11.42 to $17.14.
I think these numbers deserve some serious consideration before taxpayers are asked tosupport a second library. Budgets should bear some relationship to headcount and usage.When usage has gone down substantially while spending has gone up substantially,taxpayers deserve to know why—and why we are considering expanding the service evenfurther.
The same questions should be asked about another aquatics facility or any other major new
project. Are the facilities we already have being used to capacity? Is there a real need thatcannot be met with what we already have? And can taxpayers afford not only to build another
facility, but to staff, heat, maintain, repair, and operate it year after year?
A new building doesn't stop costing money when the construction is finished. It adds anotherexpense to the City budget every year thereafter.
There will always be worthwhile things people would like the City to provide. But we cannot
afford to do everything. Sometimes we simply have to say, this might be nice to have, but itisn't essential and we cannot afford it right now.
I urge you to put the basics first: fund essential services, take care of what we already have,look carefully at actual usage before expanding, and consider the long-term cost totaxpayers before taking on something new.
When we talk about affordability in Bozeman, we should not talk only about housing. Taxes,
assessments, utility rates, and the cost of City government are also part of whether people—particularly seniors on fixed incomes, young families, and working people—can afford to
continue living here.
Please make affordability to the taxpayer an important part of these decisions.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Deanna Campbell
Bozeman resident and taxpayer for 37 years.