City Commissioners voted 4-1 during their Nov. 19 meeting to terminate their 1993 management agreement with the Great Falls Public Library board that include seven mills of funding annually.

Commissioner Shannon Wilson voted against the action because it came first on their meeting agenda, before their discussion on a new agreement.

The commission vote provides notice that the city is terminating the 1993 agreement when it expires in April.

There was roughly two hours of public comment and commission discussion during the meeting regarding the 1993 agreement, the 2023 city charter amendment that provided more funding support for the library and the need for public safety funding.

Commissioners voted 4-1 to approve a new five year agreement that maintains the seven mills for the current budget year, which are already budgeted, and for the next four years reduces that city support to 3.5 mills.

Commissioner Rick Tryon voted in dissent.

The library board will consider the new agreement during their Nov. 26 meeting.

The library is funded through a mix of city, county and state dollars, as well as support from the Great Falls Public Library Foundation, but that funding is specific to programs and collections and cannot be used for operations, staffing or capital improvements.

City, library board considering management agreement compromise

Under an agreement between the county commission and library board, the county has funded the library $177,000 annually, an amount that hasn’t increased since 2011. That funding was maintained in the current county budget, according to County Commissioner Joe Briggs.

Voters approved a two mill levy for the GFPL in 2000 and in the 1993 management agreement, the city gives an additional seven mills, plus additional funding support on top of that.

In June 2023, voters approved a city charter amendment that allows the city to levy up to 17 mills for the library, increasing the voted mills from two to 15.

The city doesn’t have to take that whole amount and the levy amounts are determined annually during the budget process.

During the levy presentations in 2023, before the Montana Department of Revenue issued reappraisals, which are done every two years and will be done again in 2025, city officials estimated that the 15 mills would generate about $1.55 million, increasing the library’s operating budget to about $2.7 million annually.

In the current fiscal year, which began July 1, the seven mills through the agreement are projected to generate $842,8000 for the library, or 27 percent of the library’s budget, according to the library.

During public discussions throughout 2022 at the library board and city commission meetings, officials discussed the library’s funding structure and when commissioners decided to send the question to the ballot, they selected the option proposed by the library board that maintained the seven mills in the management agreement but cut the $350,000 annual subsidy from the general fund.

After voters approved the library funding in June 2023, during a year fraught with election concerns and issues, library officials began implementing the programs and services they’d said the increased funds would provide.  They also hired more staff, as detailed in their levy proposal and multiple presentations throughout the community.

Library board rejects city proposal to cut mills, approves counter proposal

This summer, the library increased operational hours with funding through the levy to be open seven days per week, the first time since 2014, when the library, and other city departments, were cut significantly to adjust for the bankruptcy settlement from the city’s failed Electric City Power venture.

Last winter, Commissioner Rick Tryon said during a city commission meeting that he wanted to consider taking back those seven mills in the management agreement, which was set to renew in April 2024.

Initially, other commissioners didn’t support the move.

Tryon asks to review library management; library board to discuss at Feb. 27 meeting

But by their Feb. 20 meeting, commissioners agreed by consensus to discuss the management agreement with the library board.

Representatives of the city and the library board met in April, June, July and August, resulting in an offer for a five year agreement that would have eliminated the seven mills after two budget years and named the library director as an administrative liaison, removing the position as a city department head.

Susie McIntyre, GFPL director, was name librarian of the year by the Montana Library Association in April.

The city called it their “final” offer, but the library board voted 3-1 to reject the offer during a Sept. 5 special meeting and the city told the library team they’d reopen negotiations.

The negotiating teams met again in October and November and have come to compromise agreement.

Library continuing improvements, management agreement discussion

Under the agreement the commission will consider during their Nov. 19 meeting, the city would provide the full seven mills in the current budget year, which was already budgeted, then for the next four fiscal years, would provide 3.5 mills.

The proposed agreement would also allow the library board to appoint the library director and set the director’s salary, which is not the current practice. The director would report to the board and be responsible for the management of the library and execution of library policies as set by the board.

In recent years, it’s been a complication of the existing arrangement as the library director reports to the library board and the city manager as a department head.

City officials continuing discussion on public safety poll, levy

Under the proposed agreement, the library director would be the administrative liaison to the city manager’s office.

The proposed agreement also maintains city services such as human resources, payroll, finance, accounting and other services under the same internal service charge structure that applies to other city departments and currently exists for the library. The library, like other city departments, pays internal service charges for those services.

Library employees will also remain as city employees under the proposed agreement.

The proposed agreement would expire June 30, 2029 and could be extended for successive one-year renewal terms only upon mutual written agreement of the parties prior to the expiration of the original term or any renewal term. Either party may request a review of the agreement prior to the end of the original term or any renewal term, according to the city.

During the Nov. 19 commission meeting, Aaron Weissman, a local business owner who served on the city’s public safety advisory committee over the summer, said that “this is the wrong decision. Pitting the library against public safety is a false choice.”

While public safety has significant needs, “none of this is okay,” he said.

The city could close the library entirely and fence off all city parks and still not generate enough revenue for those public safety needs.

In an attempt to meet those needs, the city asked voters for a public safety levy and “unsurprisingly, the citizens said no.”

But the voters approved the charter amendment that provided more funding for the library, he said.

“The money you take from the library today won’t be enough to make a dent” in public safety needs, Weissman said.

He said the city should start charging developers more for their impact on already strained public safety resources.

Erin Merchant said that she and her husband own several small businesses and properties in Great Falls.

She said they supported both the library and public safety levies, which had an impact on their finances, but they believed to be worthwhile for the community.

The decision to take back the mills from the 1993 agreement was legal, but unethical.

“I understand the need to problem-solve and think creatively to make ends meet. But this decision is neither creative nor constructive. It’s punitive. A targeted response because a levy vote didn’t go the way some of you may have hoped. That’s not leadership. That’s vindictiveness,” Merchant said. I am incredibly disappointed, not just as a resident, but as someone who trusted you to make decisions that reflect the best interests of our community. This choice demonstrates a profound lack of accountability for how your actions today will ripple into the future. I know you understand the difference between right and wrong. And this, plain and simple, is wrong. The precedent you are setting by pulling these mills is dangerous. It diminishes the trust voters have in you. It jeopardizes the success of future levies. You know better. And frankly, I expect better.”

Brianne Laurin, Great Falls Public Library Foundation director, told commissioners of her “deep disappointment and sincere sadness” with their vote to reduce funding for the library over the next four years.

“Library supporters are not a special interest group. They are your neighbors, families, students, seniors, veterans, and business owners who made their voices heard at the ballot box in June 2023,” Laurin said.

The commission decision to reduce library funding would also add challenges in fundraising for the foundation, she said.

“Donors give to enhance and grow library services, not to backfill basic operational funding. When government support diminishes, it becomes increasingly difficult to inspire philanthropic giving. Donors question why they should contribute when their tax dollars, specifically allocated for library services through their votes, are being redirected elsewhere,” Laurin said. “The foundation exists to supplement and enhance library services, not to replace core funding. This reduction in city support will inevitably impact our ability to raise funds for innovative programs, special events, and capital improvements that our community deserves.”

Shirley Schermele, a retired local school teacher, said she was disappointed in the commissioner’s decision to reduce library funding.

“As a teacher, I know the value of knowledge and access. The library isn’t just a building filled with books; it’s a cornerstone of our community. It’s a place where children discover the joy of reading, where students find the resources they need to succeed, and where adults, young and old, can learn, grow, and connect. To threaten the library’s funding after voters just approved a levy is not only disheartening but, frankly, a betrayal of public trust,” Schermele said.

As she was speaking to commissioners, Jeni Dodd and several people sitting with her in the back of the chambers who opposed the library levy and the 1993 agreement, snickered, as they did while others spoke in favor of the library during the meeting.

Charlie Parker, son of District Court Judge John Parker, first thanked Mayor Cory Reeves for assisting in saving his father when he became lost near their home in a blizzard several years ago.

He said that he understood the need to support public safety, but urged commissioners to “hold the library in your heart.”

His mother, Carrie Parker, who runs Helping Hands, a community food pantry downtown, said “‘this is a false choice. We should not have to choose between our library and public safety.”

She said that as a teacher and through working with the homeless, she knows books are good for kids and has seen what happens to kids who aren’t exposed to books.

“Kids who read more are smarter,” she said with better comprehension, verbal skills and general knowledge. “This does not bode well for test scores. We can’t afford to cut children’s programming.”

Dodd said that the library should not receive any funding from the city’s general fund.

She said that voters didn’t know about the seven mills included in the 1993 agreement when they voted on the levy in June 2023.

Several others also said that commissioners should terminate the 1993 agreement and cut city funding for the library.

Commissioner Rick Tryon thanked those who were part of the negotiations and said they were discussing the 1993 agreement, “We’re not dealing with past levy issues, failed or successful levy votes. There is some relevance to it. That agreement is well past time to be looked at and reviewed and updated.”

He said some aspects of the 1993 agreement were “fuzzy.”

When the seven mills were included in the 1993 agreement, it “didn’t get anywhere near the scrutiny or the public vetting that we’re doing now.”

Tryon said the agreement wasn’t voted on anyone but those commissioners, probably in a mix of other items during that 1993 meeting.

Commissioners consider and vote on hundreds of contracts, resolutions and ordinances annually. They can range from smaller amounts that are approved on the contracts list on the consent and not typically discussed during the meeting, to millions of dollars on public infrastructure projects. They considered and voted on millions of dollars of infrastructure projects and grants funded with federal COVID relief funds. Resolutions set fees for parking, park and recreation, building development and permitting, among other city services. They approve agreements for ambulance services private management of the golf courses.  Commissioners annually consider and vote on utility rates. Only the five commissioners vote on all of those items during their meetings on the first and third Tuesday of each month.

Commissioner Susan Wolff, who participated in the negotiations with the library, said that she wanted an agreement that brought the city and library current with modern day and that the agreement could be reviewed before the five year term was up.

Dodd returned to the rostrum to speak again, calling for McIntyre’s resignation as library director saying she was a liar. She said the ballot should have spelled out the other funding sources for the library.

McIntyre rose to speak saying she hadn’t planned to speak but needed to respond to being called a liar.

She said “the library was funded by the city before the levy,” as a city department.

State law dictates ballot language and McIntyre said the public safety ballot questions did not specify existing funding sources.

McIntyre said the 15 mills added in the 2023 election will generate an estimated $1.8 million for the next fiscal year, which will begin July 1, 2025.

The city’s proposal to take bach 3.5 mills of the 1993 agreement equates to about $420,000 and the $350,000 general fund subsidy the library no longer receives, totals $777,000, which she said approached half the value of the mills approved in the levy vote.

“I am not perfect, I have made mistakes, but I have never deliberately lied to anyone,” McIntyre said.

Tryon said he didn’t appreciate the acrimony and political rhetoric surrounding the library funding discussion.

He accused library supporters of mounting a letter writing campaign to commissions that Mayor Cory Reeves said resulted in them receiving thousands of emails.

Tryon said that for raising the idea of discussing the 1993 agreement, he was called a variety of names, including “racist,” “slimy politician,” “fascist,” “I was told that I was dishonest.”

He said that someone made stickers depicting the commission as stealing money from the library that were distributed throughout the community.

“The seven mills in that agreement does not belong to the library,” Tryon said, and that in considering the city’s public safety needs, “I can’t in good conscience support library expansion” over public safety.

Tryon pulled library payroll sheets for September 2023, which was before the library had levy funds in hand, and September 2024, which was after they had levy funds.

In September 2023, the library had 17 employees and $829,069 in payroll.

In September 2024, Tryon said the library had 34 employees and $1,426,231.

He read McIntyre’s salary and said that she got about a $5,000 raise over the last year.

Over the summer, city finance staff told The Electric that “all nonunion employees are paid on a merit system between 0 to 5 percent. The city manager sets the merit range each year. Then based on the merit system the employee is given the percent range increase through an evaluation process. The department heads follow this process.”

Tryon said he would not vote to approve the proposed agreement because he believed the city had greater needs for general fund resources.

Mayor Cory Reeves that he was glad the discussion was coming to an end.

“This has not been fun dealing with this project,” he said, but joked that’s why they made the big bucks and said commissioners are paid $36 per month.

Under city code, the salary of each commissioner is $312 monthly. The salary of the mayor is $468 monthly.

In 2023, filing fees to run for office were $37.44 for commissioners and $56.16 for the mayor.

Reeves said that initially he wanted to remove all seven mills for the library in favor of other city needs, but that he wanted to find a compromise.

Commissioner Joe McKenney, who participated in the library negotiations and sat on the city’s public safety advisory committee other the summer, said “I don’t want to talk about the library anymore, so I’m hopeful we can put this behind us this evening.”

He said one reason they proposed a five-year agreement so they didn’t have to look at it every year and that it gave the library some peace of mind in stable funding.

“I support the library,” he said, but they need to balance the city’s needs.

“We’re the decision makers,” McKenney said, and the commission appoints the library board.

He said the five commissioners had varied opinions on the seven mills and “we had a lot of trouble trying to come to agreement.”

Commissioner Shannon Wilson said that it was clear in the library levy discussions and media coverage that the seven mills were part of the funding package. 

She said she understood that public safety departments needed help, but that voters wouldn’t trust them for taking those seven mills after the library levy passed.

Wilson said she regularly visits the library and sees a number of people using various services, such as farmers on Sunday reading the regional newspapers.

“We need to have money fo the library or we’ll lose the library as we know it,” she said.

Wolff said that after a career in education she didn’t want to cut funding for the library, but said that compromise was the only way to ensure some funding remained for the library.

She said that she knew they could lose all seven mills so she thought an updated agreement maintaining some mills and reflecting current realities was preferred. 

Wolff said that she had confidence in the library director, board and staff to make the best use of the dollars that remained.

She said she’ll be recommending that the commission apply the funds cut from the library toward Municipal Court and the city legal office, then in the future they can pursue a levy for only police and fire.

Here’s our previous coverage on the matter:

City, library board considering management agreement compromise

City, library reopen negotiations over management agreement, funding

Timeline: library, public safety levies

Library board rejects city proposal to cut mills, approves counter proposal

City proposes cutting library mills; library board set special meeting Sept. 5

City reappoints Johnson to library board

Library bandshell demolished, park beautification planned

Great Falls Public Library to open seven days a week in June, for first time since 2014

Library approves contract for remodel design

City officials continuing discussion on public safety poll, levy

City’s public safety committee sends recommendations to commission

GFFR discusses needs, challenges with public safety committee

City, public safety committee continues discussion of gauging public opinions

City creates new public safety advisory group; still discussing whether to poll on public safety levy

City reviewing public safety needs, resources after levy failure

City to review budget; Tryon drops push to move library funds to public safety

Library continuing levy implementation; Tryon asks to consider pulling some funding for public safety

City officials discuss public safety after levy, bond failure

Municipal elections results: Reeves, Tryon, Wilson win commission seats; public safety levy and bond fail

Library levy goes to city ballot June 6

City Commission votes to send library levy to June ballot

City moving forward with plans to send library levy to May ballot

Key things to know for the June 6 library election

Library presents master plan, levy proposal to city commission

Library board to discuss levy options

Great Falls library board pursuing levy

County budget development continues, looking at public safety, library funding

Officials looking at options for library funding structure

Library looking at funding structure options, possibility of levy