Libraries are wonderful community assets, but a $37.5 million price tag for a single library raises serious questions about priorities, fiscal responsibility, and just how much luxury taxpayers should be expected to fund in Livonia.

The Unrepairable Library That’s Only 37 Years Old

The current Livonia Civic Center Library was built in 1988—making it just 37 years old. To put that in perspective, many Livonia residents are living in homes older than their unrepairable library. Yet city officials claim the building has been so neglected that it’s beyond saving and requires complete replacement.

This raises an obvious question: If the city couldn’t properly maintain a building for 37 years, what confidence should we have in their ability to maintain a $37.5 million replacement?

The Math Doesn’t Add Up

Let’s break down what taxpayers are really being asked to fund, and compare it to what other communities have accomplished:

Livonia’s Proposed Library:

• $37.5 million for one library (size not yet specified)
• If this library lasts as long as the current one (37 years), that’s over $1 million per year just for the building
• That doesn’t include operating costs, staffing, utilities, or ongoing maintenance
• Total cost per year: likely $1.5-2 million annually for this single facility

Redford Township’s Actual Library (for comparison):

• Built in 2004 for $8.5 million
• Size: 65,000 square feet of beautiful, state-of-the-art space
• Adjusted for inflation to 2025 dollars: approximately $13.8 million
• That means Livonia is proposing to spend nearly triple what Redford spent (even accounting for inflation) for their library

Put another way: Redford Township built a 65,000 square foot, state-of-the-art library for what would be $13.8 million in today’s money. Livonia wants to spend $37.5 million. That’s a difference of $23.7 million—enough to build nearly three Redford-sized libraries.

What $37.5 Million Could Buy Instead

For perspective, here’s what else $37.5 million could accomplish:

• Build nearly three libraries the size and quality of Redford Township’s excellent 65,000 sq ft facility
• Restore the Nobel Branch Library (as citizens requested) AND build 2-3 smaller neighborhood libraries throughout our 36-square-mile city
• Major renovations to ALL current library branches with millions left over for technology upgrades
• A comprehensive parks and recreation improvement program serving residents citywide
• Road improvements on dozens of neighborhood streets throughout Livonia
• Technology upgrades for schools throughout the district, benefiting thousands of students

Instead, the city wants to spend it all on a single, centralized facility that most residents will need to drive to access—and that will cost nearly three times what neighboring communities spent for comparable facilities.

The Luxury Library Problem

A closer look at the proposed library reveals features that go well beyond basic library services:

• Expansive meeting spaces that duplicate existing civic facilities
• High-end architectural elements that prioritize aesthetics over function
• Technology infrastructure that will be outdated before the building loan is paid off
• Square footage that seems designed more for prestige than practical use

Citizens Asked for Something Different

Remember that citizens specifically requested restoration of the Nobel Branch Library—a practical, neighborhood-focused solution that would have served residents at a fraction of the cost. Instead of listening to this reasonable request, the city is pursuing a vanity project that centralizes services and maximizes expense.

This pattern should sound familiar: the city consistently chooses the most expensive option while ignoring practical alternatives suggested by residents.

The Accountability Question

Here’s perhaps the most troubling aspect: if the city claims they couldn’t maintain a 37-year-old building, why should taxpayers trust them with a $37.5 million replacement?

• What guarantees exist that this building will be properly maintained?
• What happens when this library needs major repairs in 20-30 years?
• Will taxpayers be asked to fund another replacement because proper maintenance is too expensive?
• Why should we reward poor maintenance practices with a massive new expenditure?

A Better Way Forward

PLAN B (People of Livonia Advocating for Neighborhood Balance) believes there are smarter alternatives:

1. Separate library funding from the bloated bond proposal
2. Consider renovation of the existing facility with proper maintenance planning
3. Explore distributed library services with smaller branches throughout the city
4. Benchmark costs against comparable communities to ensure reasonable pricing
5. Require maintenance guarantees and long-term care plans for any new facility

The Bottom Line

A $37.5 million library—over $1 million per year just for the building—represents exactly the kind of fiscal irresponsibility that has led to our current situation. The city claims they can’t maintain a 37-year-old building, then asks taxpayers to fund a replacement that costs nearly three times what other communities spend for comparable facilities.

When Redford Township built a beautiful, 65,000 square foot, state-of-the-art library for what amounts to $13.8 million in today’s dollars, it raises serious questions about why Livonia needs $37.5 million for theirs.

Before voting for this millage, ask yourself: Do you want to reward poor maintenance practices with a blank check for luxury construction? Or would you prefer practical, affordable library services that serve residents throughout our community?

Libraries should serve the community, not the egos of city planners. Livonia deserves better than a $37.5 million monument to fiscal irresponsibility.

This is the sixth in a series examining Livonia’s proposed downtown millage. Visit FakeDowntown.com for previous articles examining what constitutes a real downtown, how the city is packaging municipal building projects under a misleading label, the hidden costs of the proposed bond, the risks of the if you build it they will come approach to development, and how public safety funding is being held hostage.