Follow the money. Read the records. Ask better questions.
Where Is the Money Going?
Livingston's budget is hundreds of pages long. Most people will never read it. This page is here to change that. We'll follow public money from the budget to the audit and explain what the records show. No accounting degree required. No politics. Just the facts.
General Fund: The City's Main Operating Account
The General Fund pays for the day-to-day operation of city government. Recent budgets have projected year-end General Fund balances ranging from 33.2% in FY2024 to approximately 26-27% in more recent budgets. While Montana law does not require municipalities to maintain a specific reserve percentage, many local governments follow reserve policies near two months of operating expenditures (about 16-17%) as recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association. Livingston's projected reserves remain substantially higher than that benchmark despite recent reductions.
The budgets do not explain why the reserve target has been reduced over time, whether the City Commission adopted a formal reserve policy, or what financial analysis guided those decisions. Nor do they explain why Livingston continues to maintain reserves well above commonly recommended levels.
The Bottom Line
- ✔ The General Fund balance has remained relatively consistent.
- ✔ The City intentionally maintains reserves.
- ✔ A formal public reserve policy has not yet been identified in the records reviewed for this site.
Accountability Questions
-
Has the City Commission formally adopted a General Fund reserve policy?
-
Who determines the target reserve level, the Commission, the Finance Director, or the City Manager?
-
Why did the General Fund reserve target decline from approximately 33% to 26%, and what analysis supported that change?
-
How much of the General Fund balance is legally restricted, committed, assigned, or otherwise unavailable for new spending?
-
How much of the remaining balance is truly available for future priorities?
-
If the City believes healthy reserves are critical to financial stability, how are reserve targets determined across all City funds?
-
Are General Fund reserve levels reviewed annually as part of a formal financial policy or adjusted during the budget process?
Infrastructure, Reserves, and Utility Rates
During the July 7, 2026 Commission meeting, city staff explained that the Water Fund, Sewer Fund, Ambulance Fund, and other enterprise funds are well below the reserve level recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). Staff estimated that bringing the Water Fund alone up to the recommended reserve level in a single year would require approximately an 80% increase in water rates, making that approach unrealistic.
City staff also explained why those reserve levels matter. According to the Finance Director, healthy enterprise fund reserves improve the City's ability to borrow money, reduce borrowing costs, strengthen bond ratings, and improve eligibility for grant funding.
At the same time, Livingston's General Fund has consistently maintained ending balances of approximately 26% to 33% over the past several budget cycles, substantially higher than the reserve level commonly recommended for general operating funds. While the City's budgets describe these balances as consistent with "historical practice," they do not explain why the reserve target has changed over time, whether the Commission has adopted a formal reserve policy, or how those target levels are determined.
This creates an important policy discussion.
If reserve levels are essential to financial stability, borrowing costs, and long-term planning, why are the utility funds allowed to remain significantly below their recommended targets while the General Fund continues to maintain comparatively large reserves?
This raises questions about how reserve policies are established, whether they are applied consistently across City funds, and what financial priorities guided those decisions.
The Bottom Line
- ✔ Millions of dollars remain in the Water Fund.
- ✔ Staff says reserve levels are still below industry recommendations.
- ✔ Closing that gap immediately would require much higher rates.
Accountability Questions
-
Why are the Water, Sewer, Ambulance, and other enterprise funds significantly below their recommended reserve levels?
-
If healthy reserves improve borrowing costs and financial stability, why were utility reserve targets allowed to fall behind?
-
Could gradual rate adjustments in prior years have prevented today's large funding gap?
-
What long-term financial strategy exists to restore enterprise fund reserves while minimizing impacts on ratepayers?
-
How will deferred infrastructure investment affect future utility rates and capital replacement costs?
-
Are current utility rates sufficient to maintain infrastructure while rebuilding reserves, or will larger increases be necessary in future years?
-
How should the City balance maintaining General Fund reserves against investing in the long-term sustainability of its utility infrastructure?
Ambulance Fund: It's More Than Just Ambulances.
The Bottom Line
The Ambulance Fund supports much more than ambulances. It helps fund the personnel, equipment, and programs that make both emergency medical services and much of Livingston's fire response possible. A significant reduction in Ambulance Fund revenue, whether because an EMS levy expires without renewal or because the City decides to exit the EMS business and contract with a private provider, would have far-reaching consequences. If ambulance transport is provided by a private entity, the associated transport revenue would no longer flow into the City's Ambulance Fund. That revenue would instead go to the private provider, leaving the City without that funding source. The result would be a substantial reduction in the resources available to support EMS operations and many of the firefighters, equipment, and capabilities that currently serve both the City of Livingston and surrounding Park County.
Most people hear "Ambulance Fund" and assume it only pays for ambulances. It doesn't.
According to the budget and City Commission records, the fund supports:
Fire/EMS staffing
Ambulance replacement
Medical supplies
EMS training
Community Paramedic Program
BRIDGE Program (Mobile Crisis Response Team)
Other emergency medical services
Commission discussions also explained that if the future ambulance levy is not renewed, the City would need to decide whether these services could continue through other funding sources or whether service levels would change.
Research in Progress
Stormwater: A New Utility Is Taking Shape
Stormwater has been discussed in Livingston for several years. The FY2027 proposed budget includes a separate Stormwater enterprise fund.
This section will follow:
→
Stormwater revenue
→
Stormwater expenses
→
Planned projects
→
Future utility development
Questions We're Following
How are reserve targets determined?
How do budgets compare with annual audits?
Can Transportation Impact Fees be fully reconciled?
How are one-time capital projects funded?
How do utility reserves compare with recommended levels?
Methodology
Every statement on this page comes directly from official public records. Budgets. Annual audits. Commission meeting transcripts.
When records raise questions, this page asks those questions. When records provide answers, this page documents those answers. If additional public records become available, this page will be updated.