Another billing city council business session.

I will call the meeting to order.

And if you would all join me in rising to say the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge a lead.

Probably.

Please remain standing.

Councilmember Nicholson.

Dear God, as we gather here today as City Council, we are grateful for the opportunity to serve our community.

We ask for wisdom in our discussions and decisions.

Let us work together in unity to put the needs of the people of Billings before our own.

May our words and actions reflect the compassion, integrity, and justice that Jesus demonstrated when he walked among us.

Amen.

Amen.

Please be seated.

Will you call the roll, please?

Councilmember Shah.

Nicholson.

Present.

Pittman.

Here.

Kennedy.

Here.

Aspen Liter.

Lindley.

Here.

Boyette.

O'Donnell.

Mayor Nelson.

Present.

Thank you.

All right.

We'll move on to the minutes for January 2020 26, 2026.

Do we have any changes, comments, or a motion?

Councilmember Shaw.

Thank you.

I move to approve the minutes from January 26, 2026.

Do we have a second?

Councilmember Lindley.

Thank you.

Any discussion regarding those?

Thank you.

Then let's move to a vote.

All those in favor of approving the minutes.

Please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed say no.

Passes unanimously.

Let's see.

We move on to council courtesies.

Do we have any?

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I just wanted to note and thank the Billings PD for their work with and in coordination with Operation Vigilance Uptor 6.

The BPD, Department of Justice, DCI agents swept up some of the worst amongst our community in human trafficking and child exploitation.

These are the kinds of joint task forces and work that's going on in our community on a regular basis and putting the worst of this community where they belong in jail.

These actions are what we should be doing to keep our community safe.

And our law enforcement officers in coordination with our attorney general are doing a an excellent job in trying to take down human traffickers and the people that are taking advantage of the most vulnerable amongst our community.

So I just wanted to note that and thank the work that BPD has done and uh look forward to communicate continued cooperation with law enforcement agencies.

All right, thank you.

Any other courtesies.

Thank you.

Uh there are no proclamations tonight.

So that leads us to council reports.

Um, and I know that we've had meetings of the budget legislative and operations committees, so council member Kennedy.

Do you want to go first?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Um, the legislative uh committee will meet on February 18th from four to five, and we will have uh presenting the lobbyist from Helena will be on Zoom.

And then we will uh I will be getting out the agenda at the end of the week.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Aspen.

Uh just a reminder budget and finance is this Wednesday at nine o'clock in the conference room next door.

So agenda went out.

If anybody has any questions, uh we're about ready to start getting into budget season, so uh buckle up.

Any other I have a report.

Yeah, the operations council committee met on the 5th of February.

Um we talked a little bit about City Hall and the building issues that are coming up, but mostly it's a good building, and we're all happy with it.

Um then we uh we elected officers and I was named chair of the committee.

Councilmember Nice will be vice chair, Mike Boyet will be secretary.

Um and then finally, we just talked a little bit about the uh two 200 rules that previous operations committee was working on.

We'll be getting the most recent version of those rules, or at least the most recent uh recent corrections and strikeouts, and then we'll be meeting on those again.

Um reminder though that the committee meetings are now changed to be the first Monday of the month at 11 a.m.

following the pre-council meeting, and they'll be right here next door.

Okay.

Any other boards?

Yes, sir.

Yeah, thank you.

Um so um I will be uh presenting an initiative on forming a council committee, another committee to review all the boards and committees that serve the city buildings and council.

Uh it seems like uh we have uh over 27 uh uh committees, some of which are not receiving enough interest to have uh people apply.

The council committee will review the uh need for that committee.

If the committee was set up on a limited time, committees that are required by law and consolidation of committees and boards.

We would hold up appointments until this committee reviews and recommends it to keep it or eliminating the limited amount of staff time for these committees.

We could save staff time for needed projects.

This committee will meet weekly until all committees are reviewed, and this is a push, an effort to push local government efficiency.

So I spent uh uh a great deal of time uh this week reading on the different uh committees, and uh they seem to be uh uh in need of uh specification of of these different uh different committees.

And as a new person involved in these, uh I'm not sure exactly what they're what their purpose is, if they're strictly advisory uh to this this council or if they're uh if they are uh making decisions for the council.

But anyway, I need to know.

Um well thank you, Councilmember O'Donnell.

Um for the heads up, uh we will look forward to your initiative in the uh the end of the program tonight.

Um appreciate that.

Any other council reports?

All right, we're gonna move on to um I understand there's a motion to remove an item.

So is that you, Councilmember Boyet?

Yes, sir.

I was gonna wait till after the administrator reports, but I'll do it now.

Oh, yes.

Um I would like I've moved that we remove item uh regular item number two, council appointment to Yellowstone County Behavioral Health Coalition to a future date.

I just think there's uh I don't know what it is, and I want to understand what it is before I vote on it.

Okay, is there a second for that?

It's been uh it's been moved and seconded by uh uh council member Kennedy.

Councilmember Boyette move that we remove item number two for a period of time to um get a little more clarity on that.

Um is there any uh discussion regarding the motion?

Councilmember Shaw.

Um thank you.

I I don't have any problem with this, but I I believe our city administrator had a little information to give us on this item before we vote.

Thank you.

Would you like me to so specific to this?

That it was actually my first item was to request that it be removed from the agenda.

So I wasn't gonna get into the discussion per se, but it does require by your rules three quarters or eight of the eleven of you to remove an item.

I'm sorry, nine of the eleven, thanks.

Nine of the eleven to remove it from the agenda.

Um and yes, when we bring bring it back, I can bring you the um the uh charter for the coalition and what his purpose and function is.

Thank you.

Councilmember Nice.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Just to uh clarify, Chris, when you say you bring it back, that'll come to a work session so we can have discussion on it to understand what it's all about.

Um respectfully, I would say let's not narrow it to just a work session because it may be something that you can get the information to you in the in a packet material that you may be comfortable just deciding it through consent or possibly through the mayor.

There's some misunderstanding of uh the formality of selecting your voice there.

This is not something that we have in resolution or some formal group.

It's a coalition like a half a dozen others that Riverstone Health has, where whether it's the suicide, uh suicide prevention coalition, um, continuum of care, growing in billings, safe routes to schools or healthy by design, several of these have a seat available if the council would like to have a voice there, and that's what they're asking for here in this conversation, frankly.

So I'd like to discuss outside of this just how formal you want to make the appointment to that board.

Understand.

Thank you.

All right.

Any other discussion regarding the motion?

And we'll move to a vote.

Um all those in favor of removing item number two, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, say no.

Okay, the motion carries unanimously.

And seeing how I have now six times in a row jump the agenda one way or another, I'll go back to uh Administrator Kakulski.

Anything else to report?

Mayor and council, I do have a handful of other things.

So uh appreciate your patience.

Uh just want to give you a uh brief update on where we are with our public uh our public works director recoup recruitment process.

So I really need you guys to be communicating through me and everybody in kind of in that superintendent slot and deputy slotter all stepping up.

So a big thank you to Brett and Sherry and Derek and Mac and Lewis and Jennifer who are all helping me out as we work through this period where uh Debbie's last day was Friday in her retirement.

I do have a meeting, uh Kevin and I do at one tomorrow with the recruiter, and he's gonna go over the stack of applicants that they have.

So I'll have a better feel after we go through that process if we're gonna have uh interviews sooner or later.

But uh just ask that you work with me, and we'll do our best to make sure that communication continues to flow, but it'll also give me some real insight from you guys as to what you're seeing as well.

So please work through with through me with that, and I'll be working with the team.

Um Northwestern Energy, I think some of you saw, or maybe you were all included in an email from them relative to the comp some public comments on street lights on the south side.

They've been uh in, gotten some of those repaired, but also gave some information about uh what's going to take a little bit more time.

So I just wanted to point that out that they've been responsive, at least in the near term reminder for everybody that uh Monday, February 16th is observation of presence day.

So the work session next week is on Tuesday, because that holiday.

The same thing with orientation.

Orientation will be Tuesday morning, not Monday morning, and Tuesday morning will be uh out at the billings operations center where we're gonna hands-on, you know, see what goes on there from public works parks and also police.

So um, and then the last thing I have is no ex parte communication came in this afternoon.

And that wraps it up since we've already amended the uh agenda for this evening.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, sir.

All right, that moves us on to public comment on non-public hearing agenda items one and two only.

Um if you'd like to have a comment on anything on items one and two.

I know we've removed two, but just in case someone came here to speak on that, we're gonna allow you the opportunity to do so.

If you have anything to say, please come forward.

And uh remember you have three minutes to speak on items one and two only.

Please state your name and where you live.

Amanda, I'm in the heights.

I think everybody knows where I live.

Um, I just had a couple questions.

I know you guys aren't taking questions, but you were talking about the budget.

So I was wondering, is there like any way that like people can look at the budget and like be like, well, I have questions about it and get a hold of you?

I'm sorry, Ms.

Houslord.

So that was not item one or two.

Um, if you'd like to speak to that, there'll be an opportunity at the end of the meeting tonight to speak on to that stuff.

But if you have something on one and one or two, we'd sure like to hear it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other public comment regarding items one or two?

Seeing none, we'll close the uh comment period on this.

And that takes us to the consent agenda.

Uh, do we have any separations?

Councilmember Pittman.

Um Mayor Council, I'd like to uh remove uh one A one.

One A one.

Okay, one A1.

Any others?

All right.

That leaves uh items B through H.

Councilmember Nice.

Mayor, I make a motion to approve the items.

The consent agenda is submitted with the exception of the item removed 1A1.

Second.

We have a second with Mr.

Pittman.

Uh any discussion regarding the consent agenda or the motion.

Councilmember Boyette.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just always say that anyone who donates to the city, we need to recognize in this case, Rim Rock Federal Credit Union donated $2,500 to our anti-graffiti fund, which is really good.

And code enforcement really does a good job on that.

That's an excellent program.

And um look forward to having them do more.

So I want to thank uh Rimrock Federal Credit Union.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

Uh let's move to a vote.

All in favor of approving items B through H on the consent agenda, please indicate by saying yes.

I'm sorry, aye.

Aye.

Those opposed say no.

All right.

That passes unanimously.

That brings us back to one A1.

Mayor Nelson recommends that council confirm the following appointments.

Mr.

Pittman, would you like to speak to your separation?

Yeah.

Mayor Council, I would like to postpone this to the next business meeting of February 23rd.

Second.

The motion is to postpone this to the next business meeting, which will be February 23rd.

That's been made by Mr.

Pittman and seconded by Councilmember Nice.

Is there any discussion regarding this?

Councilmember Lindley.

Yeah, maybe just a question trying to understand the reason why.

Some of these I could be wrong, but like animal control board, it would seem like we want to make sure that we fill those seats.

So just wanted to understand the movement.

Mr.

Pittman, would I speak to that?

Sure.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

Um so there's a couple of things.

I'd like to see all of the applications, and then in light of uh what council member O'Donnell was mentioning, uh get some more information on what his proposal is before we actually take any action.

Okay.

Any other discussions or questions regarding the motion?

Councilmember Shaw.

I was waiting for you.

I guess I just have a question about this to follow up.

So we've already done this with the police advisory commission.

I'm getting concerned we're not gonna staff our boards.

I I mean, I actually think this is a great idea to review the commission.

I'm on board with that.

I just don't want these boards to be only half full for the six months or however long it takes council to go through this process and make these decisions.

That is my concern.

So if it's just delaying it two weeks and we're gonna approve something in two weeks, fine.

If it's delaying it two weeks to then delay it for another six months, I'm concerned about that.

Um I think council member O'Donnell who can speak.

Thank you.

Uh great great point.

Uh I recall as I was reading through all these different boards that most of them have uh several people on there.

So it doesn't look like the the work of that committee would be really uh uh stifled by not uh approving these people uh tonight, which there are one, two, three, five out of eleven.

So six of them are no applications for these boards, which indicates the either the lack of understanding of the boards or expertise on them or knowledge that the uh the the boards need people.

So I think uh a review would be good.

Besides that, the motion is only to postpone these for one week.

Two weeks, I'm sorry.

Yeah, council member kiss.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

I guess the other thing I would like to say is I you were for the new council members.

We typically always got the the um application so we could review them.

So part of our job is to consent uh to what the mayor has is picking.

So without that information, we really are not able to consent unless you know who who we're we're dealing with.

The other um uh uh question I have uh really for the movement and and is uh my my assumption is maybe this is why I'm bringing this up is that these board positions remain open for additional applicants so that we may in two weeks see additional applicants or additional names so that we're having so we're not closing the application process.

I'm assuming.

So I'd like to make sure we clarify that that's still open for another two weeks in case other applicants, especially since there's so many no applicants here, that we can bring those in.

Is that are we able to do that to make sure we leave these all these applicants' positions open?

Chris, maybe that's a question for you or our attorney, one of the two.

I I don't think it's a problem as far as accepting, continuing to accept by code.

We need to make sure there's a minimum of a 30-day window that the public is notified that there are vacancies, then we kind of can do an open until filled, I think from that point.

Your intent, being clear about your intent tonight is helpful.

Um I do think for some, like Board of Adjustments, we may really need to make sure we're back here in two weeks because it I think it's I'm not certain, but I think it's statutorily required, and there are applicants who work their way through that process, and we don't want something like that hung up.

So Councilmember Aspen Liner.

Mr.

Mayor, I I would only just echo um what City Administrator Kukulski said.

The the one that we really need to pay attention to is the Board of Adjustments and the Board of Appeals, because those are statutory.

And when we can't make quorum, that sets private industry in a bad spot because applications are delayed and that costs money.

So need to be careful with the the Board of Adjustments and the Board of Appeals, because those those do have impacts on you know the development community.

So I'll I'll go with the two weeks, but those two next next business session, we really need to set that so that they have full core.

Thank you.

Okay, the motion is I'm sorry, councilmember.

Sorry, one more comment.

I uh I think the idea, thanks, Councilmember Nice about the application comment.

Seeing the applications makes sense, I think.

Um I don't know if though what um the initiative that uh council member O'Donnell's is suggesting would have any impact in two weeks, to be clear.

Like I don't think that that what he's suggesting is meeting week after week to review committees and boards.

I don't think it's reasonable to think that's going to be done in two weeks.

So anyway, I'm okay delaying two weeks.

I'll vote to delay two weeks, but I don't really want to kick the can.

I want to make sure that especially for people that applied um and want to volunteer that we're not just leaving them hanging.

So thank you.

Councilmember O'Donnell.

Uh a question for uh Mr.

Kokulski.

Uh uh the points that were raised about the council members being able to review applicants for these different committees.

Is that not a process that that exists right now?

I've certainly never gotten anything.

I can't say what's happened consistently over the decades.

I know of more recent, there have been interest by the council to see, and I think they would come to you guys in an email or a packet, not necessarily the council pack, as your process is the mayor selects and ultimately the council decides if they want to sign off, agree to who the mayor by charter puts forward.

But I I do think there was a there's been an extended period of time most recently where the other applicants have been known that you've gotten to see who else applied for those boards.

Where you're seeing here no applicants.

So obviously, take board of adjustments.

I'm I'm making the assumption that we're one applicant, because there's two openings.

One says no applicant, one says former council member joy, that's your applicant.

We can moving forward uh show you uh easily through a spreadsheet or otherwise how many other people applied.

I think that's what's happened in the recent past.

Yeah.

Count Councilmember O'Donnell, the uh uh Article 5 of the charter says that um boards, commissions, or committees shall be appointed by the mayor with consent of the council.

Sure.

So this has been uh procedure as I understood it.

Uh if I may, uh it from what I have heard, it sounds like a good idea to have informed consent rather than just uh regulatory consent.

Thank you.

Yes, sir, Mr.

K.

Sorry, mayor.

The other piece for counsel is is uh kind of stating the obvious, but the packet for two weeks from now goes out next month, next Tuesday because Monday's a holiday, or typically, frankly, when Monday's a holiday, the clerk's office will work to get it out on Friday.

So the actual packet material for the decision two weeks from tonight is four days from now.

That's when that material will go out.

That that may not change anything you're thinking about, but um, like I said, as far as board of adjustments, that's the one that concerns me the most relative to timelines.

I don't know if there are applicants, and I don't know if there's a scheduled meeting coming up between now and later.

So councilmember Kennedy.

Chris, we have 28 boards.

Out of those 28 boards, could you go through those and just email us of how many of those are statutory that we have to have?

And how many of them are just on an advisory um area?

And um, do we need them all?

Do we not?

28 different boards seems a lot.

Especially when it all comes back and the final decision is made right here.

So we should look at that and we should look at the staff time, because I know it's been brought up over and over again about the amount of staff time to different things and doing my initiatives.

So I would just say that we just need to know which ones are statutory that we need.

Mayor and Council, that's not a problem to get to that information.

And would flag for you is aviation and transit, just in that, what's going on in that world relative to ultimately them making a recommendation to this body.

That's one we don't want to wait four months to figure out either.

But yes, answer your question.

We will let you know which ones are statutory, which ones are in your code or otherwise.

Councilmember City Administrator Kokulski.

Um the uh board be dissolved by uh the city council, would we be required to allow the terms to run out before it's dissolution, or could we do it immediately?

You know, this is certainly a general statement.

There may be something in your code that's more restrictive.

I would think if it is exclusively a council created body, you probably have a lot more flexibility relative to when it starts and ends, unless there's something in the code that says otherwise.

I've I've not run into that here or in prior lives.

Um statutorily, it's gonna have a statutory, you know responsibility to it.

So um so let's see, I'm gonna use my second allowed comment per item to say we could.

Um I I think these two things can be separated.

Uh O'Donnell's Council member O'Donnell's uh initiative and the appointments.

We can appoint tonight.

It might be better since we don't know exactly what kind of harm we may be causing by not appointing tonight.

And then if we need to dissolve boards, then we could do that.

So that's a possibility.

Mr.

Pittman.

Uh just call for the question, please.

All right.

So there's been a call for a vote.

Excuse me.

What what are we exactly voting on?

Oh, we do.

Oh.

There's been a call to a vote.

So uh all those in favor of voting at this point in time.

Well we're we're voting on voting.

Voting on voting.

Yes, we are.

Yeah.

All those in favor of voting at this point in time, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Called order was passed unanimously.

That moves us to a vote on the motion, which was to postpone to February 23rd.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed?

No.

Aye.

Okay.

So that passes.

Mayor, could I get clarification on who is the nay?

Um Mayor Nelson and Councilmember Nicholson.

Okay, thank you.

I can't believe we are so far.

We are now going to the public comment on non-agenda items.

Speaker sign in is required.

You're allowed to comment on anything that is within the control of the city council.

Um and is not on the regular agenda or on the consent agenda.

Uh, you'll have three minutes to speak.

Please come forward and uh state your name and where you live, and we'd love to hear from you.

Hello.

Good evening.

My name is Sonia Davis, and I live downtown.

Um, and I wanted to bring up two things to the council today um of which I've discussed before, but I just want to I guess go get into a little a little deeper.

The first thing is I want to start by quoting an often used saying that all politics is local.

That's why this council is important.

That's why the decisions that you make are important.

That's why people come and spend their their Monday evening to address you.

Apartheid is classified by the UN as a crime against humanity, and it is a system of institutionalized segregation and discrimination in the Israeli occupied Palestinian territories.

A few weeks ago, when the director of parks and rec was here, he discussed geofencing and that the program that they use is called Placer AI.

This is an Israeli-owned company.

And while I am not here to debate the benefits or detriments of using such a technology, I will tell you that technology exists that is not owned by the Israeli state.

And I think it is the responsibility of city council to direct the Parks and Rec department to find an alternative software to provide that service.

The second thing I want to bring up is that two weeks ago there was a protest downtown that was an anti-ICE protest.

I was not in attendance, but I saw some of the media coverage.

In one of the articles I read, there was a snapshot of at least four counter-protesters.

Three of them that I could tell were dressed in full tactical gear, hats saying ICE and border patrol.

They had visible weapons, holstered weapons on them.

And I think this is a speaks to a larger issue of how ICE agents in general are often wearing their also these people had their face covered.

I just don't think that this is an appropriate way for law enforcement to behave at any level.

This issue was brought up to county commission and Mark Morse was indignant in his defense of it.

But I just want to say you all are smart people.

Surely you can see the issue with law enforcement covering their faces, not giving their names, not giving their badge numbers.

All I'm asking is for our local local government to be proactive in defining policy policy, thereby providing guidance to law enforcement officers, whether from the city, federal, or state level.

Thank you.

As many of you have seen, there is absolute chaos and terror reigning on Minneapolis.

It's not that far from us, right?

And ICE has a presence in Billings and in Montana.

I want to speak on some of that.

So on September 17th, 2025, at 5:30 in the morning, ICE raided the home of an 89-year-old woman here in Billings, claiming that they were searching for something that belonged to her grandson.

What business does ICE have in the home of an 89-year-old woman, a member of our community, right?

We need action from city council to actually prevent ice from coming into our community and terrorizing members of our community.

In Whitefish, Montana, a local police officer stopped somebody because of a broken tail light and then called customs and border protection because quote, the man only speaks Spanish.

And we need the Billing City Council to take a stand against ICE, an actual stand, not just words, not just lip service.

Please.

I would really like to hear an elaboration on that because Helena just passed a resolution a couple weeks ago that actually limited local police's uh interactions with ICE, right?

They directed them not to sign a 287G agreement, which is what part of what we're demanding.

We're also demanding that the uh Billings PD request that ICE remove face coverings and identify themselves.

Um we're also demanding that the city of Billings not disclose a person's place of birth, immigration status, or national origin, um, except when required by law or upon a valid court order, right?

We see that ICE doesn't really care about those things, uh, right?

Valid core orders or by law.

They break the law every single day by tearing families apart.

Um and also uh I think that the we're demanding that the Billings City Council uh deny contracts for land use to ICE if possible, and any current agreements between the City of Billings and federal law enforcement agencies like ICE, Customs and Border Protection, uh, the Department of Homeland Security should be investigated for land use violations.

Thank you.

Good evening, Council members.

My name's Jennifer Strong.

I'm ward three.

I had the pleasure of being here with you last week when you had a presentation about what our city council can and cannot do.

And that was really insightful.

And so I wanted to thank you for bringing that presentation and allowing us as the community to be part of that so that we could understand better what your responsibilities are and are not to our community.

So thank you for that.

Um it brought a lot of clarity.

And um I find it really interesting that um we have people who really enjoy using our constitutional rights when they aren't really interested in following the law themselves.

It's really helpful to have a constitution that you can abuse when other people are trying to follow the law and you don't feel the need to follow the law yourself.

I don't direct that at you, just a general comment.

So I appreciate your service.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other public comment.

Hello, council members.

My name is Ann Clancy.

I'm an organizational change consultant who has worked for about 35 years in this community and across Montana with many organizations, including the Billings Police Department.

So I'm speaking to the resolution instructing the Billings Police Department not to enter into an agreement with ICE.

I took the liberty of looking at the city of Billings, uh the police department and the sheriff's department, and also um the city council, your mission and vision statements, which all talk about partnership with the community, working with all people, human rights, community commitment for the city council, also a diverse, welcoming community.

So these are all partnership principles, which has been a part of my work all these years, working with many different organizations.

So they know it's about collaboration, working together.

So if you let ICE come in and work with them, they are a domination-oriented organization.

So you are going to forfeit the um this more partnership perspective that has been in the city of Billings for many years now in favor of these organizations, homeland security, customs and border ice, which are domination, no partnership, no collaboration, no mutual respect, no diversity, no inclusion, no equity.

So I would urge you not to enter into any agreement with these organizations.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other uh public comment.

Hello, my name is Andreas.

I'm here with the Billings Alliance for Immigrants' Rights.

Um I would just like to reiterate our demands that excuse me.

Uh could you tell us what part of town you live in, where you live?

Uh I live off Reburg, so yeah.

Um we encourage that you guys pass a some sort of resolution instructing Billings PD to not cooperate with ICE, uh specifically not to enter into a 287G agreement with ICE.

Um we've seen clearly that the Billings community does not want to have cooperation with ICE or ICE in our community at all.

Um we've seen this through many demonstrations, many protests, and we've seen this nationally as uh general support for ICE has been dwindling and protests nationwide have been cropping up.

We know ICE doesn't make our community safer.

They make our communities more unsafe.

Um ICE has been deporting people regardless of immigration status and have been deporting mostly based off of race.

We don't want this in our community.

ICE has been murdering protesters and legal observers.

We don't want that in our community.

We want you to take action, much like they did in Helena to prevent ICE from coming into our community and making it more unsafe.

Thank you.

Sure.

Come on up and uh give us your name and the part of town you live in.

Hi, um, my name is Cheryl Messina, and I live um over in Anafeld.

Um I think that we can all agree that ICE, law enforcement, immigration, that all of it is become just incredibly emotional, and it can become an incredibly inflammatory discussion.

People can use very derogatory terms.

Um, this really is not about a party stance.

This really is about who do we want to be as a people, who do we want to be as a community.

Um, and there have been safeguards in place.

I mean, we have amendments, we have all sorts of things in place that say illegal searches not okay, that we can't just be profiling people, we can't decide um to just take this sort of blanket approach to things.

Um I think we could also agree that we have long since moved past a point of finding dangerous people.

Um nobody is saying that criminals should be walking free, but I it's become sort of this blanket persecution.

It's no longer really having true valid reason at times for these stops, these seizures, these searches, all of that sort of thing.

So it it really is important.

It's important to me.

I think it's important to many of our community members.

People aren't comfortable often coming forward.

But uh, we need to be able to trust our local law enforcement.

Our local law enforcement can do some really wonderful things.

Um, what what I would hate to see, what I know many people would hate to see, is that we suddenly just become this arm or this branch of a federal agency, and that they just sort of have free rule and reign within our community.

Um, certainly there are things like we need to get um you need permission to at times we may need to collaborate with them, but as a wholesale blanket, um, entering into just a wholesale blanket agreement.

Um, I would ask you to strongly consider that.

Um, and that is not in really the best interest when we talk about being a community that wants people to thrive, to move here, to belong to us.

Um, there are many people who have many contributions, and um, it's really become just sort of this persecution without true basis and form.

So um I hope you consider this and appreciate you listening.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any further public comment?

Anyone else?

Councilmember Shaw has made a great suggestion.

So if there's more than just one of you, could you please come up front, have a seat in the front row so you'll be a little closer and hi?

State your name and where you live and take your three minutes.

Good evening.

My name is Isabella Franklin, and I'm one of the many residents currently living in Yellowstone County.

I want to take the the time to thank Mayor Nelson and our council members for joining this meeting and allowing the people of Billings the chance to have their voice heard.

I understand that your council may be facing an onslaught of public pressure to disclose whether or not they're in agreement with Section 287G of immigrant of the immigrant and immigration and nationality act, excuse me, as permitted federally by the state of Montana to allow law enforcement agencies to work with ICE in their efforts to relocate undocumented immigrants from within our country.

It is imperative that Billings stays a city, people can feel safe in without constant fear of approaching conflict on the horizon.

ICE's mission says it's focused on only detaining the worst of the worst criminals, such as terrorists, rapists, gang members, and drug lords.

But according to data compiled in 2026, taken from an established DHS immigration records.

More than 70% of individuals detained by ICE in 2025 has zero history of criminal convictions, no DUIs, no violent charges, nothing.

Most of the immigrant families in support of ICE fear, the people we see being forced into custodies are non-offending peaceful residents, as you, I, and everyone in this room are.

ICE agents are not subjected to the same regulations that are billings police officers are.

ICE agents are allowed to use racial profiling as a basis for questioning, and they cannot be held accountable for their actions because they remain faceless and nameless on the job.

Anyone that cannot be held responsible for their misconduct should not be associated with law enforcement agencies.

The safety and well-being of our community relies heavily on your transparency regarding issues of public concern.

It also relies heavily on your empathy towards minorities facing dehumanization and violence in a time where they are at most vulnerable.

A green card should not dictate whether or not it's appropriate to cause psychological or bodily harm towards an individual who's different from us.

We allow one group to be treated as subhuman.

We conform to a society that won't protect our rights when the time arises.

Choose empathy.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Further public comment.

State your name and where you live.

My name is Jeff Kettless, and I live on the uh in Ward 5.

Good evening, Council members and honorable mayor.

The reason why I'm before you tonight is to let you know that Magic City has lost a little bit of magic.

As you may or may not know, uh a great man recently passed away, Dick Zier.

Dick Zier was instrumental in our community.

He was a banker.

He was a real estate.

And more importantly, he was heavily involved in our community development.

Under Dick's leadership, many programs funded by the city through tax increment financing were was accomplished.

Dick was an icon in the city.

So I I come before you tonight to tell you that we should all remember Dick and hold him dear to our hearts.

I find it interesting that we're going to scrutinize public boards.

When Dick Dick's work speaks for himself.

If we look at if we look at the differences between our existing tax increment financing districts, it's an embarrassment.

What's going on with our downtown district?

Nothing.

What's going on with the other one?

Nothing.

Dick's district.

Dick stood for our for our families.

He stood for our children, and he made stuff happen.

Because of Dick, we're getting an IC arena.

The other boards I don't know about.

I do know this.

They got a lot of money, a real lot of money.

Way more money than Dick got.

But Dick produced for our children.

So tonight I would like to remember Dick.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any other public comment.

Seeing none, I'm going to close that part of our meeting and we'll move to council initiatives.

I understand we have a few.

So councilman Deputy Mayor Boyette, you're first the gentleman talked about the TIFF, so my initiate uh initiative is about TIFF.

So my initiate uh initiative is about TIFF.

Um I propose that we uh study these three TIFFs.

Make a recommendation prior to June 30th when our MS MOUs expire with him to look at the possibility of having uh one person run them instead of three.

Uh right now we're currently spending six hundred and sixty-five thousand dollars.

I think we could do a lot better by having maybe one.

And if you look at the ones that I sent out, there's some other discussion about where they could be at um here in the building saving there because we could save money, that money should be used to go back to the people in that TIFF for uh revitalization.

And if you didn't get a copy, I have a copy.

I sent emailed it to you, but I'll give it to you.

This require a motion.

You wanna make a motion?

I make a motion that you accept my um initiative.

Okay.

Do we have a second?

Mr.

O'Donnell seconds.

Councilmember Shaw.

Uh thank you.

Um just so two questions.

One is staff time question.

How much staff time needs to go into the I mean, same question for everybody.

So if you want to So I looked, so Andy said he couldn't think between 30, 40 and 50 hours.

He doesn't know at this point.

A lot of it's gonna depend on our discussions, which I recommended that we have a work session to start this out.

We've talked about this for a long time that we need to re-evaluate these systems.

Um are they good or bad?

Why why does one get 326,000, one gets 100,000?

What's there's something amiss.

We need to figure this out and be consistent.

So okay.

Up to 50 hours.

Okay, perfect.

Um follow-up question is this isn't locking us into any particular outcome.

It's exploring the options, just to be clear.

Well, my first recommendation is to have one uh consultant or one lay us on per for the whole unit.

So I just want clarity on it.

Are we voting for that to move forward with that option, or are we voting to have a work session to explore the options?

Committee you'll vote on the option and the work session is part of it.

So we we would be voted the your initiative, just I'm clear, is we would be voting to move straight into the process of how to bring these three boards under one.

Correct.

Okay.

I'm I'm not on board with that.

I personally would be on board with having a work session to talk about it, hear from the boards, but I don't have enough information right now to say yes, this is the right path, is where I'm coming from.

Councilmember Nees.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um thank you, Mike, for bringing the initiative to us because this is something I think we need to have that discussion on.

And I think I think whether I think if the goal is to have it's gonna be some somewhat like the airport authority, the goal is to have an outcome of here of being under one consultant uh under the city.

We may reject that, just like we may reject the airport authorities recommendation one way or the other.

And so I think that's uh you know, that could be an outcome as you know what we looked at it.

This is what it would look like with one consultant, and you know what, we don't want to do that.

We're gonna stick with what we're doing.

And so I think that's I think having that goal is a good idea to see what it's gonna look like, how it would be structured within the city, so that we know whether or not it can or cannot work.

So I I will support this.

Thank you.

Councilmember Kennedy, then council member Aguirre.

I'm gonna support this.

Um, because I I think the amount of dollars that we're spending on administrative should be going back to each of these areas so we can help the people.

But the gentleman talked about this evening about how money was spent back for the citizens in that area.

I don't think people understand how much money we spend on administrative um costs for all of these areas.

I think we need to scrutinize it.

I think we need to scrutinize every dollar um that we have.

I think that's our fiscal responsibility.

So I will support it going.

Councilmember Geary.

Thank you.

I think uh voting to um eliminate two people's livelihoods is is a serious issue that needs complete understanding and discussion and an opportunity for the TIF directors to essentially defend their job.

If I mean I presume they would want to keep their jobs.

So I'm I'm not on board moving forward with this unless we have discussion first and then a vote.

Council member Nicholson.

I don't have enough information to vote in an intelligent way for this or against this, so I'm gonna vote against it.

Uh I've seen a lot of good ideas that come into being, and they don't um uh without a good understanding of what they might wreck.

So I'm gonna vote against it.

I'm all for a discussion about it, but I'm not ready to commit to such a change.

Councilmember Lindley.

I figured if we're talking, everybody should talk.

So yeah, I you know, look, I think the 600,000, 600 plus thousand that we're talking about in administration is a big number.

Um we do have a tight budget.

So I think it is prudent to take a look at this.

Um, you know, to the point that's been mentioned, um just to confirm, moving this forward tonight doesn't necessarily guarantee a consolidated TIFF.

Um it just opens the discussion.

And I think just from a fiscal standpoint, I think we do need to have it.

So I'm gonna support moving it forward, although I just want to indicate that doesn't necessarily mean I I immediately currently, as I sit here today, support the consolidation, but I'd like to take a look at it.

So I'd I'd like I just like to get myself clear on this here.

Councilmember Boyet, I heard you say that if we pass this, we would put out an RFP to engage one consultant to administer all three TIFFs.

After the discussion.

After discussion, that's part of if you look at this points.

We need to discuss each TIFF's request for different amounts of money.

Why are they different?

The scope of work.

Are they do they really need to be pull-time part-time?

I think there's a lot of questions.

This could be the ultimate answer, but after we discuss this, we could say no, it isn't.

Well, but I think we need we need to have a goal to start with.

Uh uh agreed.

And and I think I I see where you're coming from, but if we vote on this tonight in your form, we don't get that discussion.

We're just gonna put out an RFP.

No, that means we're gonna put it on the agenda so to talk.

That's all this.

Could you restate then your initiative exactly so that because I'm I'm lost here.

Well, the initiative is is to coordinate with a memorandum of understanding of the three TIFFs that are going to expire in June.

I propose a request for proposal to consolidate the administration.

With with that, we start my ideas.

You start with a work session.

To see if that is possible.

At the end of the work session, we decide that is possible that we'll continue.

If it's not, then we go to plan B.

But we have to do something.

We can't sit here with our hands and keep spending this kind of money.

No, I agree, uh, Councilman Boyet.

But um again, I want to make sure that we're very clear for the record exactly what we're voting on.

And again, it just starts with proposing uh request for proposal.

Would it is if I said it this way, would this be the same thing?

You would propose an analysis of what the three TIFFs are doing and what they're charging and why they're charging, and then what we're getting out of it prior to us deciding to issue an RFP for combined combination.

But again, this is only to put this on the agenda.

We're not voting on anything other than to put this initiative on the agenda at which time we will discuss it.

We're not voting on the on that part of it.

All right.

We're just bringing it to vote to the uh the council to talk about it.

So to clarify then, what you really want to do is you want to have a you want to discuss this possibility of issuing an RFP.

By by putting on in a future agenda, and that's what the initiative does.

Okay, that's is that clear clear as mud there, City Clerk.

Yes, you want that on a work session.

Okay.

Councilmember Shaw.

No, I I'm sorry, Mike.

I just I do need a little clarity here.

So we're we're voting to have a discussion at a work session, correct?

I'm because I'm on board with that.

I agree with everybody.

We should have this discussion.

It's important.

What I'm what I was troubled by was I was unclear if that discussion was going to be here's the RFP, how do we want to move that forward, or if the discussion is going to be should we do this?

Well, the first part is in the discussion, if you read those four items, that would bring a conclusion.

To me.

And that conclusion would be do we continue with this or don't we?

Or do we change it?

Okay.

That's that's what I want to clear it.

If that's the initiative, then I'm on board with it.

Okay.

Any other discussion or questions for council member Boyette?

So I'm guessing uh we have a motion, a second to place this on a consent.

Uh a work session.

A future.

I promise.

In a couple years I'll get this.

Future agenda.

A future uh to be on the future agenda.

Work session.

Work session agenda.

There we go.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

All those opposed, say no.

Councilmember Nicholson votes in the nay.

And we're going to move on in alphabetical order.

So that would be councilmember Lindley.

Thanks.

Okay, I sent out an email with an initiative that I have discussed before about the technology advisory commission.

So just a couple of uh quick highlights.

There's really five things that in my mind this commission would work to do.

Um, first of all, it's a it's a uh short term, meaning two years.

A lot of our boards and commissions last four years, and then potentially renewals.

Um, this would be a fixed time period commission.

The five key topics are cyber security, uh, review the the city's practices, make sure that we have a good way to measure where we're at.

Um secondly, take a look at and make sure that we're doing as much as we possibly can for resident facing um citizen facing technology, make it easy to interact with the city.

Third, discuss AI governance.

Um I think AI, candidly, from my perspective, being in technology is a great opportunity for the city, but it also brings some risk.

Um, we have a uh a responsibility to keep citizen data safe and protected, so we need to make sure that we do that.

Um technology governance and decision making.

This includes selecting software, software implementations, um, project management, all these things that do have a big impact on citizens.

And number five, looking at the possibility of local technology partnerships.

This likely would be things like partnering with the two local colleges, seeing if we can get um some partnerships going there.

So those are the five um items.

Uh excuse me.

90 days before the end of the two-year commission, we would expect a report from the commission.

Um and then as far as time commitment, roughly speaking, um, I would say probably five to ten hours a month is probably reasonable.

I think that's you know, conservative on the high side.

Um, you know, that could ebb and flow a little bit.

So my intention would be also to put this on a future work session for discussion, um, fine-tuning so that we could get it started.

Okay.

So you're gonna make a motion.

We need a motion first.

I'll make a motion that I'd like to put discussion about the technology advisory commission on a future work session.

Second by Mr.

O'Donnell.

Now discussion.

Mr.

Boyet, I saw you first.

So is this something that we're not doing?

Does our IT department are they inadequate?

Are they adequate at this point?

Is this is this gonna enhance them?

Is it gonna make them mad?

I mean, how does that how does this rely to our own people that are downstairs on the first floor?

That's a great question.

Um, I've spent quite a bit of time uh speaking with our our current technology team members.

We have an amazing technology group here within the city.

Um, not only the Central Technology Department, but also technology uh technology focused individuals within departments as well.

Um it takes a lot of technology to run the city, and I think the city is doing a very good job at it.

Having said that, um, in billings, we're blessed to have uh a large number of experts, really uh, you know, industry experts that their experience goes, you know, far beyond um what the city is able to um maintain and pay for candidly within the city's budget within the technology department.

Um when I first announced the possibility of this, um I've been contacted by no fewer than 10 local people who have immense uh experience in technology that would be really excited to share their experience.

So um, no, this is really just to make sure that we can um you know provide some extra guidance with with local expertise, build partnerships.

Thank you, Mary.

Yes, and Andrew, one of the things I really like about this is the fact that you're gonna look at the data and how the residents can it can help the residents and stuff like that.

And one of the things that we asked the um uh police uh advisory commission was to get work on that data, and that's never been done.

So is this something that this commission can take a look at as far as how it can get that data easier to our residents, easier for us to access in that kind of thing, and make sure that and and the police can actually utilize their system to its fullest extent.

Yeah, I think that's a really good point.

Um we hear it a lot in public comment.

I hear it from constituents that contact me that it's difficult to find information.

I mean, I know how to find it because I know where it exists on the city website most of the time.

Um but no, I think it's uh it's part of our job if we really want transparency to make this information as easy for the citizens to access as it is for all of us.

We're gonna make better decisions that way.

Great.

Thank you.

I appreciate you bringing this initiative, bringing you some of these solutions and the time frame, keeping it short, sweet, to they get the job done and move on.

So thank you.

Councilmember O'Donnell.

Thank you.

Uh as a uh former member of the uh Montana Information Security Advisory Committee Governor's appointment, uh, I'm familiar with this process.

I think it is important.

And uh to your first point about reviewing the cybersecurity nature of the city, uh it it's important that that I I would not like anybody uh telling the city what to do, but I think the people of billings need to know that cybersecurity-wise, that things are being done uh to protect them, protect their information.

I think that's a very healthy uh approach.

Thank you.

All right, any uh council member Nicholson.

Uh I like the way this uh process is going, that we bring the idea to a work session, the way we can discuss it, uh swap some ideas around and not have uh have a good idea where we might want to go, but not lock us into it.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

All right, so it's a motion to bring uh council member niece's TAC committee, the TAC.

Holy cow.

Who are you?

I yeah, yeah, I appreciate that.

I mean, that's a great initiative, but it is his I have Council Member Niece on the mind.

The motion was to bring council member Lindley's TAC committee to uh uh and give us some time on a work session.

Um we'll move to a vote.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye aye.

All those opposed say no.

The motion passes unanimously.

All right, Mr.

Councilperson O'Donnell.

Next.

So uh having uh read uh apparently I'm new to the procedure here that it was uh misplaced, but everybody has heard my my uh presentation on a uh committee.

Uh not that I'm in favor of uh uh plethora of committees, but I think we need a committee to investigate the committees to find out if they're relevant and if they're useful to the city.

That's my motion.

Would you like some time on uh uh the motion was to have to make a committee, but uh do we need to discuss this and bring it to the agenda?

Is that what the initiative so yes?

Is that what you want?

Uh so we can't create a committee tonight.

No, we need to talk about it.

Um then we make a committee to side due to the procedure.

So for uh future consideration.

So we have a uh a motion and a second.

The second is from council member Kennedy to place time on a work session.

We're gonna have a little bit of conversation.

So Kendra Shaw, would you like to say something?

Same question about staff time.

Um do you have an estimate for that?

Have you talked with staff at all about how much time they're thinking this would take for them?

Or is this more just council members reviewing?

I mean, I think obviously staff has to be involved.

I just we're just we're approving three initiatives, and I get concerned that we're derailing staff from the priorities that we've set, even though I think they're good ideas.

Hold on, council council.

We had talked earlier about this.

Uh one of the ideas was to have it to the operations committee and start with the uh the two most important ones right off the bat.

Uh Board of Adjustment and Appeal, have them immediately because they're the most important.

But why not just start with our group?

We're already committed, we're already there, and just we can work our way down for priority rather than go out to the staff.

We'll obviously may need staff, but let us um start it the process.

Okay, but I'm I'm sorry, Mary, is it right if I follow up for okay?

So that makes sense to me, but um, have a work session to define what that would look like is the initiative more or less right now.

Yes, okay.

Thank you.

Uh I wasn't really envisioning and very much staff time at all.

Okay.

Uh so not a burden on the it may turn out to be that way.

I just don't have any sometimes.

Thank you.

Yes, Councilmember Kennedy.

One of the areas that uh Tony and I talked about and um council member, um, what he brought up to bring it back to an existing committee.

The one thing is that that existing committee, and we could add um a council person or two on it.

But it would be reviewing those, looking at all of the criteria for the committee.

Um one of the things that comes up it was the airport authority.

If we're gonna go forward with an airport authority and we're appointing people for an airport transit board, an airport authority is going to have to have some criteria and everything with it.

So we might as well start looking at these committees.

I think 28 committees and um some of them maybe we need to consolidate.

Um but how many people are coming to all of these committees except for the staff that has to staff these?

And um council member Shaw keeps on wondering about um staff time.

We might as well look at these committees and see if they're worthwhile, if they're doing what they're doing.

I think the technology committee is a new committee that will be helpful to the staff, but there comes a time that some of these committees go away, and there comes a time that we beef up the committee, or um or are they doing what we really want to do?

And if we don't have a review of these, and I don't know when the last time the city ever reviewed these committees, um, we're not doing justice because they really need to be reviewed time after time.

So I uh like the idea that uh uh council member Boyette is uh willing to bring it back to that committee and start going through it because it will be a longer process, but we'll get some good information back from that committee.

Councilmember O'Donnell.

Thank you.

Uh one of the things that I think this might show is that uh by uh uh amending uh a commission or eliminating it or whatever, that it might uh relieve staff time.

So we might w wind up with a positive on that.

All right.

So we have a uh a motion and a second to bring forward to uh and we and we have some more discussion too, Councilmember Nice.

Yeah, uh thank you.

I know I thought you recognized me, but um I I'm I'm looking forward to this.

This is one of those things that has been on my long list of things to do because our boards and commissions that we appoint often, you know, they're there, but we don't really know what we're doing with them.

And they give us some of them give us some great advice, others, you know, we just get an annual report that just gets filed.

The other other thing we don't know is you know, what is it is needed on this on these these committees and boards.

Um, you know, uh so when you're appointing them and we're looking at the criteria of what should be on those boards, we've created several boards, and the new technology board is gonna have likely have more specialized people on those boards, and so we're gonna look for certain people that actually can help with that, what we need within the city.

And so um, and as was already mentioned, these boards exist in perpetuity.

All of these boards, we don't know where their bylaws are, what their charters are.

We need to review those and put put in time times uh ending times on these boards, some of them, some of them like I say are are statutory, but others that we need to make sure that we're saying, do we need this?

So with this, we don't have to come to 28 boards to review all at once.

We're gonna be reviewing these periodically over time as long as these boards have their time, these resolutions with expiration times and things like that.

So and and again, the other thing is as the council reviews each one of these every four or five years or whatever may be, we may be able to tweak the the purpose of that board is for what the council needs at the time.

So it stays relevant to what the city needs.

So I look forward to this um coming due.

I know it's gonna be a long process, uh, but I I hope we move forward on this.

So thank you.

Councilmember Aspenlighter.

I just remind us that we talked about making this the shortest meeting ever, and we completely fumbled the football before we even made it out of the locker room.

Thank you for that uplifting report.

All uh we I'm not gonna restate the motion for the fourth time, so we'll just go to a vote.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed say no.

And that passes unanimously.

And uh dare I ask if there are any other initiatives.

In that case, we are adjourned.