The Billings City Council adopted the FY2027–FY2031 Capital Improvement Plan on Dec. 8, 2025, after an extended debate over how the draft plan ties to projected utility rate increases and which transportation and trail projects should be prioritized.

City staff presented the plan as a five-year inventory of 128 projects totaling roughly $502 million, with about $103 million earmarked for the first year. “This year’s CIP is 128 projects totaling $502 million,” the presenter said as he walked council through the draft and the forecasted funding assumptions.

Councilmembers pressed staff on how the CIP’s capital assumptions affect future rate recommendations for water, wastewater, stormwater, solid waste and street maintenance. Councilmember Kennedy argued staff should be prepared to revise the public‑works list to match lower rate scenarios and moved to direct staff to scale back those projects; the council debated whether such direction should happen in the CIP process or during next year’s rate-setting discussions. The procedural motion to change the draft as proposed did not carry.

Council then considered several amendments. One amendment moved construction dollars for a set of transportation and trail projects — including the 25th Street Bridge, Alkali Creek Trail connection, Downtown–Heights trail connection, the corridor from King Avenue West to the TransTech center, and the Yellowjacket Trail — into out years while leaving feasibility and planning work in place for FY2027. Supporters said the change would prioritize Safe Routes to School projects and avoid assuming grant or urban funding that is not yet secured; opponents said the CIP already contains several annual funding sources for pedestrian and Safe Routes work. The amendment passed 7–4.

Another amendment, proposed by Councilmember Owen, moved the estimate for expansion of an evidence‑storage lot to FY2028 and reduced the placeholder cost from $1.3 million to $500,000 to give staff and the council’s Budget Committee time to refine scope and funding. That amendment passed unanimously.

Council also amended introductory CIP language about the future‑projects list to clarify that items on that list “are not the highest priorities,” replacing language that implied staff should ignore those items entirely. The change passed unanimously.

After amendments, the council took a final voice vote on the amended CIP; the motion carried with one councilmember recorded in opposition. The adopted CIP remains a planning document: staff emphasized it shows a set of projects and funding assumptions, while rate-setting and final budget decisions will come next fiscal year.

What happens next: staff will return with revised options tied to the council’s direction during the budget and rate‑setting processes. The council also directed staff to refine cost estimates for the evidence‑lot project and report back with firmer budget figures and funding-sourcing options.

Quotes

“This year’s CIP is 128 projects totaling $502 million,” the staff presenter said during the briefing. Councilmember Kennedy urged staff to prepare scaled‑back scenarios, saying, “If you want to have the rate adjustment be half of this, I would suggest you be clear about which projects you take off the list.” Councilmember Owen, supporting a delayed and reduced estimate for the evidence lot, said the city needs the capacity but “$1.3 million out of the police budget is not something I can support now,” and moved the item to FY2028 with a lower cost estimate.

Vote tally and actions

- Adopted FY2027–FY2031 CIP as amended (final voice vote): approved; clerk recorded one councilmember in opposition.
- Amendment: Move specified trail/transportation construction projects to out years: passed 7–4 (voting in favor recorded as Councilmembers Niece, Owen, Rogers, Kennedy, Aspenleiter, Tidswell and Boyette).
- Amendment: Move evidence-lot funding to FY2028 and reduce estimate to $500,000: passed unanimously.

Why it matters

The CIP sets the city’s five‑year capital priorities and is the basis for later budget and rate decisions. The amendments reduce near‑term capital assumptions tied to projected rate increases and move several trail projects into future years unless grant or other funding becomes available.