The clarity really came, Baker says, with changes in provincial legislation. This includes the recently approved Bill 108, which changes how municipalities can pay for capital projects like this.

“And there’s downloading in terms of what’s expected of paramedics, and changes to the health unit structures,” she says, pointing to things the city may have to pay more money for.

As for where staff are proposing to cut square footage in the new library, Baker says it would come in staffing areas and other areas that could “compete with other city facilities,” such as public meeting areas and a proposed 300-seat multi-purpose room.

Baker says the cutback on staffing space would be consistent with what was in the original business case for the library.

“Right now, the staff area in the current design is actually quite in excess of that,” she says.

“What we’re proposing is that there are some reductions in space that we believe can occur, that are not going to take away or kneecap us in the future.”

Steven Kraft, the library’s CEO, disagrees with that notion, saying the increased space for staff is due to the increased size of the new library. At 90,000 square feet, the new facility would be triple the size of the current main branch on Norfolk Street.

“The real reduction would come in public space and collections, and that we certainly can’t afford,” he says.

Kraft adds that he is looking to call a special meeting of the Guelph Public Library’s board as soon as Monday evening.

With the new library possibly shrinking to under the levels recommended by KPMG in its report to the library board in 2018, Kraft says the city is no longer looking to the future with this project.

“There’s just extreme disappointment in this, in terms of building a library for the future,” he says.

“It doesn’t look like it’s going to happen at this point.”

Baker says that while the city wants the library project to move forward, it also has to keep its finances in mind.

"We really want the library as part of the Baker District. This is really just about prioritizations and having these tough conversations about service level enhancements," she says.

"I don't view this as a negative thing, I view this as really being financially responsible as a city."