Transparency Isn’t a Slogan. It’s Proof.

This post is informed by what residents are saying online and in community forums.

People aren’t confused.

They’re paying attention.

The City continues to describe the proposed library tax process as “transparent.” But recent actions suggest something very different.

A central claim in the City’s messaging is that a 17¢ per square foot parcel tax would generate approximately $3.1 million per year. That figure is the foundation of the entire financial justification. It determines whether the tax is appropriate, excessive, or sustainable over time.

Naturally, residents have asked a reasonable question:

How was that number calculated?

Is this tax rate sufficient now that the cost is $37 million and interest rate rates are calculated at about 5%? or will the city immediately raise the taxes to accommodate the increase in construction costs?

When community members requested the underlying data, assumptions, and methodology used to reach this estimate, the response was not greater disclosure. Instead, the City referred people back to the same previously published impact report and withheld additional records under broad exemptions.

In other words, the conclusion was repeated.

The math was not shared.

You cannot build public confidence by asking people to accept a financial claim without showing how it was derived.

And you cannot be surprised when trust continues to erode.

For many residents, this is not an isolated incident. It fits a long-standing pattern: major financial decisions presented as settled facts, limited access to supporting information, and community questions treated as obstacles rather than contributions.

That is not transparency.

Transparency is not a press release.

It is not a talking point.

It is not a label applied to a process.

Transparency means publishing the assumptions.

Sharing the data.

Explaining the methodology.

Inviting scrutiny.

It means letting residents see not just what you want them to believe—but why it is justified.

Until that happens, skepticism is not cynicism.

It is rational.

Transparency isn’t what you say.

It’s what you’re willing to show.