The $28 Million Westside Library Project

I support libraries.

I support reading, education, and community space.

But I also believe that when the City commits $28 million to a single project, residents deserve to understand exactly what they're getting — and what trade-offs come with it.

The Westside Library Expansion Project, also referred to as the Archibald Library Resiliency Project, is estimated to cost approximately $28 million.

The City has stated that $6.5 million comes from a California State Library grant, and that the City is providing a $6.5 million match. The City has also indicated it is seeking an additional $5 million to support certain upgrades, including solar and battery storage.

That naturally leads to a few reasonable questions.

Where Is the City's $6.5 Million Coming From?

When the City provides a $6.5 million match, that money must come from somewhere.

Residents deserve clarity on:

• Which fund provided the City match?
• Was this drawn from reserves, capital improvement funds, impact fees, or another allocation?
• What projects were delayed, reduced, or deprioritized to make this possible (if any)?

Every dollar allocated to one project is a dollar that cannot be used elsewhere.

Transparency builds trust.

What Does the Additional $5 Million Mean?

The City has indicated it is seeking an additional $5 million to complete certain resiliency upgrades.

Residents may reasonably ask:

• Was the project approved before all funding was fully secured?
• If outside funding is not obtained, will the City cover the gap internally?
• If so, from which budget category — and what is the impact elsewhere?

Responsible budgeting means understanding the full cost before commitments are finalized.

What Is a "Library of Things"?

The new facility will include an expanded "Library of Things" area.

Across the country, this can include lending items such as tools, equipment, technology, and specialty gear.

The concept is expanded access.

But expansion also brings long-term responsibilities:

• Ongoing purchasing and replacement
• Staffing and tracking
• Maintenance and storage
• Administrative oversight

Residents may reasonably ask whether these additions represent the core mission of a public library — or whether they expand operating costs beyond what was originally intended.

The larger question isn't whether these programs are creative.

It's whether they align with our most urgent priorities as a city.

Cooling Center & Battery Storage

The City has stated that the new library will function as a designated cooling center and include battery storage to provide reliable power during emergencies.

A cooling center provides relief during extreme heat events.

Battery storage allows certain systems to operate during power outages.

These are legitimate goals.

But residents may ask:

• How frequently is the facility expected to serve in that capacity?
• What specific systems will remain operational during emergencies — and for how long?
• What is the total cost of the resiliency upgrades?
• Could similar emergency services be distributed more broadly across neighborhoods?

Emergency preparedness is important.

So is evaluating cost relative to benefit.

What Happens to the Current Archibald Library Site?

If services are relocated, residents deserve clarity about the future of the existing Archibald Library property.

• Will it remain a public asset?
• Will it be repurposed?
• Will residents have input before any decision is made?

Clear communication now prevents speculation later.

The Bigger Question

If the City is spending $28 million, what exactly are we buying — and what are we not funding instead?

That is not criticism.

That is responsible governance.

At a time when Rancho Cucamonga faces:

• Traffic congestion
• Infrastructure strain
• Rapid development
• Public safety concerns

Residents deserve leadership that evaluates every major expenditure through a simple lens:

Is this the best use of taxpayer dollars right now?

My Position

I am not opposed to libraries.

I am opposed to spending without clear priorities and full transparency.

If elected, I will:

• Ask for full lifecycle cost analysis before major approvals
• Ensure funding sources are clearly disclosed and easy to understand
• Evaluate operating costs, not just construction costs
• Prioritize infrastructure, public safety, and long-term sustainability
• Explain my votes openly and honestly

Good government is not about cutting everything.

It's about common sense budgeting.

Because growth without infrastructure is not progress.

And spending without accountability is not leadership.

Send Me Your Questions

If you have questions about this project or other City spending priorities, I want to hear from you.

Contact David

Read Wasteful Spending & Common Sense Budgeting
Read Overdevelopment & Infrastructure