[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6477528,"mediaKeyId","5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68","parentId",5711645,"title","At a glance: Commission approves code change to sewer billing and levies assessments for street maintenance and lighting","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",6841000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68&start=6841&end=6841","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68/thumbnail_6841000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6477528/Livingston-City/Park-County/Montana/At-a-glance-Commission-approves-code-change-to-sewer-billing-and-levies-assessments-for-street-maintenance-and-lighting","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6477528-ad00413cd8647706403f862fe8b468b6/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144441&Signature=mSyTgJCaheVBNyX940okag5TXiHHaoHNuivOOZpD0A0PKfVIcyweqjUxZ5uBd4NCy7lMvuc1HmYzDaI8iUbuewZZIljtvygnZew3jxKIB5wknsC0ckCaJrzXRqXOvqDqDkr9oI4O5Fw-oi2jFQDx13fNa9KPP~~HmmmxJOGCoUt7kei4fnl~jgLf1w4XE9PankJO41btqZtWJKAEb477RdsR1kaO75lFamVLGq1mwj0reCexN6CJsvcqgWkKoR4S7mmnkSmcADaRbIs-PaC-E06aK1vR3iNxEr3co5UNb8uzbwXVMUNygZZjzXA4obsg6mjjUkMtFmoo6GGRfNDRxA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Livingston, MT","date","2025-09-03T15:25:59Z","article","At tonight’s meeting the Livingston City Commission approved an ordinance and several resolutions affecting utility billing and local special assessments.

Ordinance 3063: The commission approved amendments to section 14‑92 of the Livingston Municipal Code to change the winter sewer‑billing measurement period. The city’s practice is to estimate winter (non‑irrigation) water use and use that baseline to bill sewer during irrigation months. Staff presented an analysis showing some households would benefit if the winter measurement window shifts from October–March to November–April; commissioners voted to adopt the ordinance and the chair was authorized to sign the ordinance.

Resolution 5173 (Street Maintenance District assessment): The commission approved a resolution levying 100% of the cost for street maintenance and improvement district No. 1 for FY2025–2026 in the amount of $1,390,903. Staff said the per‑parcel assessment will decline for most property owners because new construction added to the tax roll spreads the assessment cost.

Resolution 5174 (Special Improvement Lighting District funding): The commission approved a resolution to levy $61,993 for fiscal year 2025–2026 to fund electrical current and maintenance for Special Improvement Lighting District No. 20. Staff noted the total is unchanged from the previous fiscal year and individual assessments are expected to decrease slightly because of new construction additions to the tax rolls.

Resolution 5175 (Lighting replacement levy): The commission approved a separate resolution to levy $38,000 for FY2025–2026 to fund replacement of street lights and related equipment within the lighting district. Staff said the work funded by this resolution is consistent with last year’s program and was unchanged in scope.

Consent calendar: Commissioners approved consent calendar items, with commissioners pulling items a, d and e for discussion and abstention recorded where applicable (a commissioner abstained from item d citing a conflict of interest because their spouse is the library director). The record shows motions to approve remaining consent items and subsequent votes approving those pulled items after discussion.

How they voted: Commission roll calls were recorded for the ordinance and the three resolutions; the clerk recorded each roll‑call response in the record and the chair announced the motions carried.

Why this matters: The ordinance changes timing that determines many residential sewer bills; the resolutions set assessment levies and fund recurring maintenance programs that appear in property tax bills or special district invoices.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2025_09_02 City Commission Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","The commission approved an ordinance adjusting the winter sewer‑use billing window and three resolutions levying assessments for street maintenance, lighting funding and a light replacement program; consent calendar items were also approved.","taxTitle","Livingston City, Park County, Montana","taxId",52298,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6477533,"Commission asks staff to start public location analysis for grade‑separated rail crossing after decades of study",757,4719000,5476000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68&start=4719&end=5476","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68/thumbnail_4719000.jpg","/articles/6477533/Livingston-City/Park-County/Montana/Commission-asks-staff-to-start-public-location-analysis-for-gradeseparated-rail-crossing-after-decades-of-study","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6477533-936eb345d415b83ad7d96e12ad45410c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144441&Signature=LDpqfSCo6LW0GWs9Xu6XK~8taOyCePRk9lkKXR3xghiM1L5OB7H1uPrTpKswOIkOmoZnmVG4AwmGDycTwhLgMW4uh9JFia13AexXVV4thcUZ10QVDhKXDem48IABXCzBsfNvshJPmpXIzceUSn4PN5a89X0CetKUikoxPDEhc2W6f115SlILBErHTJoXme0~ovh-5a-M0KzfUhektWIOCtDIRpZcbAn8Dl3nR3l-VFA3XOy6jAZHdoB2fLhLZCOnuQRRCgN8JG1kwoLzysWNqr3yYbbdNYbGK-eST4eFdEN4c42Pn0Eqfb7IJHx4a-K8JME4wfPAfvnIcM9FEF~J3g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Livingston City Commission directed staff to start an analysis and public outreach on possible locations for a grade‑separated rail crossing after City Manager Mister Gager presented the project history, funding options and a proposed work plan. The commission emphasized that a publicly vetted location analysis is a prerequisite to any future bond or grant application.

Gager reviewed past efforts: a 2008 voter approval of local funds for a Front Street/Star Road underpass that never reached construction after the federal match was lost, and a 2021 referendum seeking $20 million for a western crossing that voters rejected. He said there is no current community consensus on a preferred location and recommended a roughly eight‑month location analysis to evaluate all viable options and their constructability, costs and tradeoffs.

Gager outlined federal and state grant programs that typically fund such projects, including the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Rail Crossing Elimination program, the CRISI (Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements) program and the BUILD/previously RAISE program; he said state funding is very competitive and often goes to larger, faster‑growing Montana communities. He estimated a full project design and construction cost in the range of $25 million and said a $25 million project would yield roughly $2.2 million in annual debt service, which the city’s finance director estimated would translate to about $73 per $100,000 of taxable value (roughly $365 annually for a $500,000 home) if voters approved general obligation bonding.

Commissioners and members of the public raised multiple questions: whether the city could reuse the 2008 Front Street/Star Road engineering, whether an overpass (rather than an underpass) or a diagonal alignment might be feasible, how eliminating an existing at‑grade crossing would affect grant eligibility and how a new crossing would alter development pressure on the North Side. Gager said the 2008 documents still exist and could be reviewed, but staff recommended a modern alternatives analysis to reflect present‑day traffic, stormwater and constructability concerns.

Multiple public commenters urged the commission to proceed quickly, noting the project has been discussed for decades; others emphasized that voters have previously rejected general obligation funding and asked staff to bring clear cost and financing choices to the public before asking for new taxes. Gager said BNSF Railway has historically supported municipal crossing projects where elimination of an at‑grade crossing improves safety, and that private contributions and land transfers (BNSF and Northwestern Energy were mentioned as previous partners) can be part of the package but typically are tied to closure of an at‑grade crossing.

The commission discussed funding alternatives including a voter‑approved bond, a dedicated street assessment, or seeking federal/state grants; commissioner comments stressed the need to build public consensus before pursuing a bond. Several commissioners also asked staff to include land‑use and development impacts in any analysis because a new crossing could change accessibility and thereby accelerate development on the North Side.

Why this matters: a grade‑separated crossing is among the city’s most complex and costly transportation projects and would reshape traffic, emergency access and future growth patterns. Identifying a locally preferred alternative and documenting it in a planning report would make the city more competitive for federal grants that typically require prior planning work.

Commissioners did not vote to start design or to bond the project; they asked staff to begin a location analysis and public engagement process so the community can identify a preferred location before further funding decisions are made.","Staff presented history and options for a grade‑separated railroad crossing; commissioners directed staff to start a formal location analysis and public engagement to identify a locally preferred alternative before pursuing funding.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6477538,"Livingston updates timeline and finances for community wellness center; donor relinquishes naming right",1316,1284000,2600000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68&start=1284&end=2600","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5711645-27c0c43afa25cf28d6caee2cb4dedf68/thumbnail_1284000.jpg","/articles/6477538/Livingston-City/Park-County/Montana/Livingston-updates-timeline-and-finances-for-community-wellness-center-donor-relinquishes-naming-right","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6477538-e859eb0446356a428d38b98a7d7c5c04/orig.mp4?Expires=1771144441&Signature=KkrNstHoQqbrZHdAld1e7EXxtYmlTUcAuM15~9vyt325uGTMOH26Bv8xrned2YzPzlKh51I4KlZ2H6OavQzNqMWau1gh8rzVx4gHWORRpa6sThNKiQXBrZPquO3O0J3CVR9wrk-YMtAaF5CmWzOGhW0mEkxXNEdAgGuKlCZuV2uQYtQbaYvtnE4jbLwlM~i24Wu5TEFUhNoiptRAnJj4CRJrpbNTFOtq-gt3DJjz3LKgUHHY5WUy6k~JHsrkgzbUBULxTEQCrAiz8HW9RzGEJ32EAXz0lmM0gvnRiBongIdVvxJYBrpisVzM8AooCsNefp47i7t-VVls72jSugOdYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City Manager Mister Gager gave the Livingston City Commission a comprehensive update on the community wellness center project, describing the site, construction status, funding and operating model and asking the commission to accept a public naming process after the lead donor relinquished naming rights.

The project site is Katy Bunnell Park at North N and Gallatin streets and, including additional parcels the city expects to acquire from BNSF Railway and Northwestern Energy, the park could expand from about 1.8 acres to nearly 5 acres. Gager said the contractor has placed most precast wall panels and work is focused on roofing, under-slab systems and finishing the pools and gym. He gave a construction schedule that targets substantial completion in January 2027 and occupancy in February 2027.

Gager described the building’s program: a six‑lane lap pool, a secondary therapy/recreation pool with beach entry and current, a waterslide, a gym sized for regulation high‑school basketball and space for multipurpose and therapy rooms. The second floor will include a fitness area and a three‑lane elevated walking track. He described changing and family rooms designed to give operators flexibility on staffing and to improve safety.

On capital funding, Gager said the construction, engineering and site budget totals $23,600,000 and that the foundation supporting the project had raised about $22.7 million \"as of this morning.\" He said the foundation also committed an operating endowment to support long‑term maintenance and access; staff presented the endowment amount in the agenda packet as $5,000,000 and said the foundation intends the fund to secure operations and underwriting for youth access and scholarships. Gager said the foundation’s funding is expected to be sufficient to complete the building with required amenities, while certain features (for example, an outdoor waterslide) remain optional alternates the foundation will continue to raise money to add.

Gager described operating arrangements: the city will offer free access for Livingston residents and paid access for nonresidents; the foundation will raise endowment funds and youth scholarships so organizations and school groups can attend. He contrasted Livingston’s property‑tax–based operating model with Great Falls, which relies heavily on pass sales; Great Falls has reported operational shortfalls, Gager said, which Livingston’s revenue mix is intended to avoid.

On environmental and site safety, Gager said a Phase 2 environmental study and air monitoring had been conducted for the site and that monitoring results \"indicated that VOC concentrations were below levels established\" in the project health‑and‑safety plan. He also said soil sampling of excavated material showed contaminant concentrations below laboratory detection limits or facility cleanup levels and that the project will include under‑slab soil‑gas (radon) mitigation measures as a prudential step.

Public commenters asked about the project’s tax impact, staffing and whether nonresident users would reduce access for locals. A resident who identified himself as Wendell said he was concerned about the tax burden and the possibility of the facility adding $100 or more to some households’ tax bills; others asked whether the city has accounted for regional wage competition and whether the water slide could operate in winter. Gager replied that staffing models and wages had been analyzed and that the facility was designed to attract more professional, year‑round employees rather than seasonal staff; he said the slide can be operated in winter under standard industry installations used in other cold climates.

Gager also announced that the project’s lead donor relinquished naming rights and requested the city lead a public process; the donor asked that the final name include the word \"wellness,\" that it convey regional benefits and that it not be named for a person. Gager said staff will open a public portal and survey for name suggestions and will work with the donor to screen submissions before presenting finalists to the commission.

Why this matters: the wellness center is one of the city’s largest ongoing capital projects. The update clarified construction timing, funding sufficiency and operating plans that will determine long‑term cost to taxpayers and resident access.

\"That fund is sufficient to complete the structure with all required amenities,\" Mister Gager said of the foundation’s capital gifts, and he added the donor’s naming guidance—\"the donor has asked that the word 'wellness' be included in the name.\"","City staff updated the commission on construction progress, budget, funding and operations for the Livingston Community Wellness Center, described an expected February 2027 occupancy and announced the lead donor asked the city to select the facility name (donor requested inclusion of the word \"wellness\").","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

At a glance: Commission approves code change to sewer billing and levies assessments for street maintenance and lighting

Commission asks staff to start public location analysis for grade‑separated rail crossing after decades of study

Livingston updates timeline and finances for community wellness center; donor relinquishes naming right