You are the URL.

These are not your slides.

You are the brand new grammar and spell check.

I appreciate that.

Oh, that's amazing.

Yeah.

So then I can go and just all the same.

Yeah.

So we know that.

I have a script.

So I'll just let you know.

Actually, actually, my dog right now is that one little lift.

Yeah.

Or eleven.

I'm sorry.

Oh, just eleven buttons.

Yep.

Yeah, I'm getting out of that.

Yeah.

So yeah, yeah.

It hasn't changed.

Well, there's a hitting maker on the app that's right.

Yeah, you know.

I don't know.

Yeah, I think.

Yeah, I'll do it in the start or mouth.

Easier to worry about.

Um, we didn't want to get her, but I think it's pretty crazy.

So she she was microbiome.

So both of us would have biology.

Right.

No, I I wouldn't hear that.

Sounds like that, though.

I don't know.

I'm not sure if you have a quarter point.

So are you familiar with all the way to the totally?

Yes.

Like yellow.

And then the neighboring work.

Yes.

Like, we can't start with all the mouths.

We could go and just put it on the PC.

Yes.

They didn't.

Yeah.

Um for the mod.

Oh, that's how we're sponsored.

Yeah, I mean she worked in Bozeman.

There was nothing there.

Um I graduated.

Yeah.

Oh, old research.

Like just service.

Oh, yeah.

Do you have an affordable?

Yeah, I don't know.

Okay.

So uh Austin asked.

Yeah, but the Tom House is looking into the park.

No, I went from from here to yells.

Yeah.

Okay.

Right.

Yeah.

Yeah, it's not a P2.

Here it's not part of the following problems.

Yeah.

But I didn't hear of an else in the lunch.

Was it a government?

Yes.

Yeah.

We're waiting for a form.

Okay.

Um yeah, I mean for a long time.

Yeah.

This was in awesome.

Okay.

Let's read down there.

Okay.

Allison is almost sailor, yeah.

Allison is on your share share comments.

So I don't know.

Oh, it doesn't pay on the call.

Um, so uh, uh, I should have trouble production center.

Like, oh no, six pieces of what starts programming.

Yeah.

So they can use it.

Shall we just turn the circuit for your pellet strip and then it's kind of case in anything?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Because Bell's turn species of special concern.

Well, if we look slow down and kind of slowly productive.

Like right now, yeah.

And they gotta have the right habitat so you can sure.

And then the group I worked with in this different meet.

Um just like in veterinary medicine.

Right.

And so I'm sorry.

No, it's okay.

Uh we don't have our mental weekend.

We were we are points.

Happy new year.

Okay.

I would say the live big groups are just like groups and more than something compared to all the roads and I have this.

Thank you for your patience.

Um good evening, and thanks for joining us.

Before we start the meeting, I'd like to remind folks of a couple of things to make it easier for you to follow along and make public comment.

You can watch us in real time in several different ways.

You can attend in person in the city commissioner.

Stream us live on your computer by going to the meetings video page at Bozeman.net and clicking the view live event link.

You can watch us you can watch the meeting on cable TV channel one ninety.

You can also join via video conference.

You'll find the link to join us by clicking on the calendar event for the meeting on Bozeman's main webpage to find the city commission agenda.

Click the link to register and follow the prompts to enter the meeting.

Lastly, you can call in to listen.

You'll find the phone number for the video conference and access code on the agenda.

Please note this is for listening only, and you will be unable to give verbal public comment using this method of participation.

If you're joining us through the video conferencer having connectivity issues, try exiting out of the meeting and coming back in.

If you continue to add issues, please remember you can also listen via the phone information streaming live on the website or on Cape on Channel 190.

If you'd like to offer public comment this evening, there are two ways you can do that.

You can make public comment in person here in the city commission room.

Or if you're joining us through the video conference, you can use the raise your hand feature when it's your turn to comment, staff will call on you by name.

Please remember to go back in and lower your hand when you have finished making your comment.

Any public comment received by noon today will have been distributed and read by the board.

We will hear in-person public comment first, followed by those joining via video conference to allow time for the remote attendees to cue up for comments.

With that, I will call this meeting to order.

Can we do a roll call?

James Webster.

Here, Chelsea Holly.

Here.

Ashley Wilson.

Here.

Alison Brecke.

Present.

Are there any disclosures?

Yes, I've got one.

Just some quick updates.

I think as you all know, I was involved in the Bonton Centennial Downzoning, and I think you all know that that had a successful conclusion in the UDC hearings in December.

So that was great.

Now also going forward, just as an FYI, I am heading up the Scann neighborhood and what that is, South Central Association of Neighbors.

It's a combination of the Bonton and the South Tracy South Black Historic District.

So about 400 homes, and we had our inaugural meeting because scan had been off of the inter-neighborhood council, otherwise known as INC for about four years.

But as of Saturday, the 10th of January, our annual meeting at Story Mansion, we put seven steering committee members in place and will now attend the next Inc.

meeting.

I personally been to the last six of them, so I feel like in pretty good shape to move forward.

And then most recently, as a result of the coming out of the second reading of the UDC.

And I'll hand this out.

There is I think it's gotten around that the um B390 foot height initiative is something that is out there.

Oh, okay, sure.

Yeah.

Actually, yeah, thank you.

So any rate, what this is, uh the B390 foot enactment is going to go into play on February 1st along with the rest of the UDC.

And long story short, what you have in front of you now is a nice write-up from the Bozeman Hotel Owners Association.

That can that this piece was written by David Losef, who owns the Baxter, and John Anston, who owns the Bozeman Hotel.

And they were writing pretty much with an aesthetic eye as to why the city should consider trying to, shall we say, roll back the 90 feet to 60 or 70, because that was in there.

And certainly the historic main street, I think the height restriction on that right now is 60.

So the B3 area is the area surrounding the main street historic district.

So it's what's on Mendanol and Babcock.

And again, just a nice piece to read through over the weekend.

Certainly don't expect anybody to read it now, but it really I think is a nice summary of some real good aesthetic points that are appropriate for those of us on this board to potentially weigh in there.

So this is really more of well, it's a disclosure of what I've been working on on the side, but also a great FYI, I think, for our board because it really speaks to some of the historic preservation initiatives that have been out there in the past.

Thank you.

Here, I want to I want to just welcome that we have our new commission liaison.

We were foreign about this very recently.

Fellow very excited to have Commission Sweeney on as our uh Commission as HVAP's commission liaison.

She did um overtook for Commissioner Magic, who has been part of our board for a while.

But um so Commissioner Magic will be missed, but we're excited to have Commissioner Sweeney on it on uh HPAC and B.

Here, thanks.

Were you notified this morning?

About five minutes before this meeting.

Yeah, finalized.

Okay.

Uh any changes to the agenda.

Uh approval of the minutes from October 15th, October 15th.

Can I get a motion?

I move that we approve the minutes of October 15th.

A second.

Can we get a vote?

Aye.

Second or Wilson.

Aye.

Uh Chairperson Holly.

Aye.

Member Brecky.

Yes.

Okay.

Public.

Sorry.

Public comments on non-agenda items falling within the purview and jurisdiction of the board.

This is the time to comment on any non-agenda matters falling within the scope of the historic preservation advisory board.

There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public comment relating to that item, but you may only speak once per topic.

Please note the board cannot take action on any item which does not appear on the agenda.

All persons addressing the board shall speak in a civil and courteous manner, and members of the audience shall be respectful of others.

Please state your name and state whether you are a resident of the city or a property owner within the city in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your comments to three minutes.

Is there any public comment?

Living across the street from B3, which was rezoned in 2022 by a former uh city commission.

So I am one of the signers of the petition that Jim uh mentioned earlier, and um have actually offered oral public comment to the commission asking them to delay the implementation of the 90-foot maximum allowable building height limit in B3.

And in addition to that height limit uh degrading our historical character and sense of place, it also affects potentially affects affordable housing because the city is giving away the extra height in exchange for nothing.

So uh recently in the city's um published 2025 Q2 economic and market update report on page two under the heading multi-household inventory and vacancy.

And the report reads the vacancy rate for the approximately 1900 units built in 24 and 25 was 44.2 percent compared to 9.2 percent for existing apartments built before 2024.

And the multi-vocal vacancy rate is likely to remain high for up to two years.

Such a high vacancy rate, 44%, is much, much higher than the city was willing to admit in the run up to the November election.

And it indicates that the multifamily rental housing currently being built in Bozeman is not affordable to the vast majority of Bozeman's workforce, which desperately needs multifamily rental housing price no higher than 60% AMI.

As such, the city needs to take action now to see that sufficient affordable housing gets built in the near future.

One action the city can take now is to allow buildings in B3 to go from 70 feet to 90 feet only in exchange for on-site affordable housing or cash and lieu of affordable housing under the city's affordable housing ordinance.

If the city does not get affordable housing for this extra 20 feet, they'll be throwing away millions of dollars in much needed affordable housing either on site or in cash.

Consequently, I just want to bring to the attention to this board that not only does the 90 feet compromise our historical character and sense of place, but it also prevents much needed affordable housing from getting built because the city is giving it away for nothing.

Thank you.

Is there any more public comment in the room?

I mean, while I'm here.

Danielle Neglas, a proud resident of the Cooper Park Historic District.

And I second Dan.

Is there any online public comment?

If you would like to provide public comment, please use the raise hand feature.

We have Marcia McKinnon.

It's actually Marsha Caveney, Marcia McKinnon Cavany.

Thank you.

I just want to ditto Dan Cardi's comments as well.

I agree with everything that he said.

And I think it's great for you guys to know about what's happening there.

All right, thank you.

Okay.

Move into FYI and discussions.

City ethics training.

Yes.

Because somebody went up and said first time doing this.

Bear with me.

I don't think they do.

Should I start and say that?

Okay.

Good evening, HPAB.

My name is Rebecca Harbage.

I'm the deputy director of the community development department with the city, and I have the honor of providing your annual ethics training.

You may notice that this says 2025 ethics training, and yet we are in January 2026.

That is correct.

This is to cover the year of 2025, so you can expect another ethics training to cover 2026.

This is an annual training, as I said.

Yay, ethics are fun.

We'll go through several different scenarios as part of this training.

Feel free as we go through them to discuss amongst yourselves and ask questions.

A few caveats before I get started.

These are wonderful slides that were prepared by our city clerk's office.

I did not prepare them, so I may not be able to answer all of your questions about this specific scenarios.

Also, I am not an attorney.

Ethics can be complex and very gray.

That is either fun or very frustrating, depending on you.

So if you do have questions, I encourage you to reach out to our city attorney to get legal advice about ethics concerns.

His contact information will be on the last slide.

So to get started, let's see.

Why are we doing this?

So first of all, we look to conflicts of interest.

And since you are a public board, we are talking specifically about the use of public office for private gain.

And that is specifically prohibited in the city charter.

This is also covered in Bozeman Municipal Code.

So you can read through this on your own time, or you can check it out in the city charter or in the code.

But to get to the bottom line here, we're doing an ethics training because this the city manager is directed to provide annual training and education to city officials, city boards, and employees regarding state and city ethics codes.

And so city employees are also required to take ethics training.

We got a whole bunch of additional scenarios more related to scenarios that staff might find themselves in compared to what boards might find themselves in.

So the purpose and expectations related to ethics training.

Really, what we're hoping to do is set forth the standards of ethical conduct to assist public officials and employees in establishing guidelines for conduct, fostering the development and maintenance of a tradition of responsible, accountable, and effective public service, and prohibiting conflict between public duty and private interest.

In coordination with the city attorney, city manager, and other appropriate city personnel.

We're what this arranges for that we arrange for the conduct of annual training and education.

This is an orientation for any new board members and an opportunity just to refresh memories in case you don't remember from last year or needed to get updated on something.

So in short, um, we're establishing standards at the city.

We provide guidance to boards and to employees, and we provide these annual trainings for everyone.

So we can all be on the same page.

As an overview, um, the City of Bozeman Code of Ethics is a best practice for local government in Montana.

The goal is to have all employees, board members, and commission members complete this training annually.

Ethics is now more integrated into staff and board or commission meetings all year, so you may see things come up throughout the course of the year versus just at one annual training.

And then equipping additional staff to facilitate training tonight is an opportunity for professional development.

Um just for background, I have been with the city since June, so I have a brief tenure with the city of Bozeman, but I do have 12 plus years working for the state of Montana.

So I'm very familiar with government ethics as a topic.

Um the City of Bozeman's code of ethics is in addition to the requirements of Title II, Chapter 2, Part 1 of the Montana Code annotated.

So I said we're gonna go through some scenarios.

Here is the why.

Um this makes the material more familiar if we get to actually scenario plan and discuss.

Um it helps us engage in conversation with each other and we can learn together as a group.

Uh we each have individual knowledge and experience, so we can all contribute to the discussion and help each other understand.

It helps us reach conclusions that might lead to more unanswered questions.

So as we talk through the scenarios, someone might have a question that they would not otherwise have thought of as we are just going through the discussion, and that's wonderful.

Please, if something comes up, ask the question.

Uh, group discussion of the challenges is essential.

Um, it keeps us all accountable.

We all know that we sat through this training together.

And then it highlights that ethics questions rarely have an easy black and white answer.

So I said they're great.

That's sometimes very frustrating.

Um, but that is ethics.

A few resources in case you want to do some more research on your own time.

We do have the code of ethics.

Bozeman also has a purchasing policy.

Um you can look up ethics in Montana Code Annotated.

There are various administrative orders, the city employee handbook, and also please feel free to reach out to colleagues, the city manager, HR office, and of course the city attorney's office.

And that again, contact info will be at the end.

So let's get started.

As we go through these, we're gonna read a scenario, have some discussion, and then we'll talk through what are the main ethical concerns.

These are long and wordy, and I do recognize there are some typos, so um, please don't be offended by the typos.

All right.

Scenario number one: a member of the tax increment financing board owns a restaurant in a district and is very invested in improving the district for both their business and Bozeman in general.

They're diligent about filling out their financial disclosure form each year, and they note that the business and property interests are they note that their own business and property interests on the form.

A developer recently brought before the board a proposal for a hotel in the adjacent unused lot.

The board member is very excited about the hotel as they had some previous conversations with the owners, and they expect the two to share some parking facilities.

The hotel will also bring in customers for their restaurant.

They don't mention this at the board meeting because there's no direct business interest in the project.

And since their form is on file, they believe staff can bring it up if they think it's a conflict.

The board member enthusiastically approves the hotel.

What are the ethical concerns in this scenario?

Feel free to timing in school.

The board knows this, but I love ethics training and I love the questions.

So ethical considerations is the perceived perceived conflict.

So it's thinking about how right an outside perspective perspective could see the restaurant.

Oh, they're gonna, of course, he approved the hotel because he'll get customers, they will get customers from the new business.

So probably should have disclosed the conversations, I would say that they had previously before the vote.

So they do they it says that they did fill out their disclosure forms.

So when you say they should have disclosed, do you mean elaborate on that a little bit?

Financial disclosure is just what we fill out, right?

Like if we have it's not, it's not discl disclosures like is what Jim did it before.

I'm I'm actively having conversations with another city advisory board.

Um so that's the disclosure I was talking about.

That before the restaurant owner voted, that should have been brought up.

But they should have recused themselves from the vote.

Yeah, I think that that's like where you we could talk to our city attorney and ask, do you think we should recuse yourself?

I'm also in the vote of just recusing yourself if it ever appears to be a conflict.

Yep.

Any other thoughts on this one?

Spot on.

So it section 23520 talks about conflicts of interest.

Um section two, three, five fifty talks about the financial disclosure statement.

So a couple points here.

Um yes, the board member should have disclosed verbally at the beginning of the meeting their conflicts.

Uh sometimes that means you should recuse yourself from the vote.

It doesn't always mean you have to recuse yourself from the vote, but you should, for the record, publicly disclose any conflicts involved, including the conversations that were had.

Um the financial disclosure form, also for everybody on the board's information, um, those are on file with the city, but staff who are here do not have access to those.

So we would not necessarily know what conflicts exist that you've disclosed in those forms.

So we wouldn't be able to just bring those up or mention something for the record.

So keep that in mind as well.

And then the perception of conflict, I think is a really important one.

I'm not sure that that specifically comes up in any of these scenarios, um, but I think that is one of the more important parts of ethics.

Um, it is are there perceived favors being given or um do you have a perceived conflict?

And I think that goes a lot farther than actually, you know, yes, there's breaking the law or not breaking the law, um, but what do people think about what you're doing?

And if there are folks in the room who are listening to this vote and they know that he is owner, the owner of the restaurant right next door to the hotel that he just approved, that doesn't look good, regardless of whether he has a conflict.

Next scenario.

An active member of the urban parks and forestry board vehemently opposes a proposed change to the tree maintenance district.

The subject has been discussed at the board a number of times, and while a few members agree with this board member, the majority of the board supports the changes to the district.

The board member feels like their voice isn't being heard.

So they submit a public comment to city commission and write a letter to the chronicle expressing their concerns about the district, acknowledging the experience they have with the project, given their membership on the urban parks and forestry board, and they make sure to include on behalf of the Urban Parks and Forestry Board in the letters to reinforce their legitimacy, um, and so that others will take their opinions seriously.

What are the ethical considerations?

Well, there's a big problem right there at the beginning, because it's like when somebody gets up to make a public comment.

I know I've done this, and I say I'm a member of the historic preservation board advisory board, but I come here speaking for myself only.

Very important to separate yourself from whatever, say board or entity you might be part of, because again, as Allison said on the first one, it's that perception.

And if you're trying to insinuate that it's okay to do this, or maybe you are speaking on behalf of this group, no.

Any other thoughts on that one?

Yeah.

Spot on, Jim.

Just a big no-no.

Don't do that.

Uh so the one other piece of this that I think needs to be brought up is the this bottom one resolution 5323, one body, one voice.

Um essentially the city uh expects representation as the board.

So if board members, all officials and staff for that matter, have free speech, they all have free speech rights and can express opinions as private citizens.

However, um individual members cannot write on behalf of a board on any of their communications unless those communications were expressly approved by the board at a public meeting.

Um so they don't speak on behalf of the board unless they've been given that permission and should not represent themselves as such.

So if this board did come together and decide we want to provide a letter to the editor or a public comment, um, and they appointed somebody to do that, then that would be granting permission in a public forum for that person to represent themselves as the body, essentially.

And the person could have, I mean, you could still write the letter, but you clearly just say this is I mean, do you call out that you're on the board, but this is just an opinion, a personal opinion?

That is up to you.

I think that's a one of the areas that is gray.

Um certainly there are going to be members of the community who know that you're on the board.

Um so you might as well recognize that you are on the board.

Um there may also be people who say, don't do that, because that is in essence saying that I'm representing the board.

It's really it could go either way.

It's what you're comfortable with.

Um I think of examples where um folks would testify in front of the legislature, for example, who work for a city or state agency and they're expressing their personal opinions on a bill.

Should you or should you not mention that you're experienced and knowledgeable on that topic because of your career?

Right.

Or does that bring your employer into it inappropriately?

Yeah.

It's really a gray area, and you'll just have to kind of determine that on case by case basis.

Same with issues.

Like I've had employees who've wanted to make public comment about an issue that they live in a city, a city issue, but they're in you know, an employee in the community development department.

So I've always just said as long as you just say it's like you're speaking as an individual and not a representative from the department.

It's fine.

Can I just add the please?

Like I always I've given a lot of public comment at that podium.

And Emily Talego and I would always joke that we should be given an extra 30 seconds for all of our disclosures and then speaking on behalf of myself, right?

And now, as a commissioner, I think it is actually really important to have all the context, and then couple that with speaking for myself, because context is really important.

I you know, the resolution, maybe we'll look at that.

But yeah.

Yeah, good addition.

Thank you.

Anything else on this one?

All right.

There are a lot of these scenarios, so buckle in.

All right.

Oh, this I just went backwards.

Sorry.

Here we go.

Chair of the downtown urban renewal board handles setting the agendas for the board meetings.

They also own a hotel in the district.

Recently, the agendas have been pretty full of new activity in the district.

So they really want to prioritize retail and food service projects, as they view that as a gap to fill with new development.

A proposed hotel has asked the board to be considered for financial incentives.

The chair knows that this level of request needs to be approved by the board and does not go before the city commission.

But he this person does not want to put it on the agenda as their own hotel is covering the needs of the district at the moment.

They didn't get any incentives when building their hotel.

So if they're in a time crunch, they can proceed without the incentives.

The chair informs the applicant that the board is focusing on other priorities and that the request will not be considered at this time.

What are the ethical considerations?

I guess I'm assuming the chair did not talk to the board about this.

That seems to be an example.

Oh, okay, because the chair sets the agenda.

So they wouldn't they wouldn't have to.

Well, I mean it just seems like since they're in the same industry and they're um intentionally cutting this other business out.

So that would be a pretty big negative.

If this other entity wanted to bring this forward, it would make it.

I don't know.

Definitely.

Any other thoughts?

No, it's kind of a protectionist thing.

I mean, that's one way to look at it.

Um, you have got to keep an open mind and certainly bet that with the board, because that's gonna come back to bite you real quick if you think again that's called playing favorites and playing favorites with your own entity.

Oh, that's a supreme no-no.

Yeah, you guys got it.

So 22105 Montana Code annotated talks about the ethical requirements for public officers and public employees, and that specifically covers that public a public official may not perform an official act that directly and substantially affects a business or other undertaking to its economic detriment when the official or employee has a substantial personal interest in a competing firm or undertaking.

While the chair has the authority in this situation to set the agenda, they've already made the call that the new hotel doesn't need the incentives at this time, um, which they use to justify keeping the item off the agenda.

They may even be retaliating against the new applicant if the chair views it as unfair that this person could get incentives that they did not themselves get.

Um the definition of improper government action, improper governmental action in Bozeman's municipal code includes action taken by an official that is intended to retaliate against a member of the public.

If the new applicant chooses to come back later when he can get the incentives, the actions of the chair have directly resulted in delaying a project, which will lead to potentially less competition for the chair of the board.

The chair needs to act on behalf of the city in this decision and not on their own personal interest.

And then also this scenario covers financial interest.

Um pursuant to Bozeman municipal code, financial interest does not need to be tangible interest, regardless of whether the chair is intentionally creating a barrier for the new hotel.

If the hotel is delayed due to their actions, they stand to keep business in their own hotel that the new hotel may have taken away, and they need to be aware of this level of financial interest.

And even if motivations are in the right place, like, oh, I want to focus on other priorities, um, the perception of a conflict may still exist.

So they should take this into account in their decision making.

All right.

Next scenario.

They're happy that their involvement on the board can help facilitate a community need their job also addresses.

Since they are an expert in the area, they make sure that developers coming before the community development board are fully aware of the different resources in the community, and they get frustrated when someone asks for an incentive when they haven't gone through all the steps to minimize development costs.

They vote no on these projects since there are so many local organizations that could also benefit from a developer utilizing their resources, and they only vote yes on projects that maximize other resources.

What are the ethical considerations?

Maybe that there are other income levels that need development projects also, not just like they're not servicing the entire community, they're just segmenting the community.

And um they're, yeah, they're that I don't know.

It's a tough one.

No, again, it's showing favoritism to say one group over another, and you may be frustrated that some of the developers don't appear to be utilizing the resources, but again, you've just got to keep an open mind and not stack the decks as Ashley was saying against others because there are other areas, not just low income.

So gotta keep an open mind.

I'm not really bothered by this one.

I mean, because it's like it's there, it's there, it's they're they're on the board, likely.

I mean, I guess you have to factor in like there's criteria that would be presented to the community development board on how they vote, right?

So everyone on the board should be saying, right how they find it to meet the criteria or not.

You're assuming that this person is doing that.

But in the end, I mean they are an expert in a certain type of field, and I don't know.

It's it's like it could almost be argued that it's their professional opinion and how they're voting.

Yeah, so I think that gets at section six of the ethics handbook, um, and it says that officials must discharge their duties impartially and fairly.

And so it specifically talks about a decision maker must consider the information before them with each application and not apply standards that are not expressly given by law.

Um, and so if if there should be a requirement that folks look to other resources first, let's put that into the requirements so that everybody knows that those are the requirements to get a yes vote.

Um this slide also mentions that there's potentially a concern about financial interest.

Um it doesn't need, again, doesn't need to be a tangible financial interest.

So this board member might have good intentions, um, but they are using their position to potentially drive up business for other local nonprofits and organizations, um, and they benefit directly from that position.

Um, it's not the role of board members uh who you know, as city officials need to put on a different hat to be able to advise the city commission and act on behalf of the city.

So a couple things to think about there.

Anything else on that one?

All right.

Next scenario.

This week, the board is considering the construction contract for the garage, which includes as a subcontractor, an architecture firm for which a member of the board's daughter works.

Yeah.

The member wasn't sure if approving the contract would show favoritism to a relative, so they emailed the chair of the board to let them know about the relationship.

The chair thanked the member for letting them know.

When the board got to the item, the member did not disclose the conflict since they already had to the chair.

Since the relation was once removed from the contract before them, they voted to approve the contract.

What are the ethical considerations?

Seems like maybe they did it halfway.

They should have disclosed it at the also at the start of the meeting.

Like what they did first, yes, and then they needed follow-up.

Yep.

Anything else on that one?

Again, I think there's like exact wording in the code that says perceived conflict of interest, and that's what we're trying to avoid.

So like just get it out there.

Right, which follows like when in doubt, take the high road.

Always disclose.

Better to over-disclose than not, and that person could have simply recuse themselves.

I think we all might agree with that.

It's um like the saying, I think we've all heard it, and what we might consider adhering to is the opposite of the saying that we've always heard.

It is better to ask for forgiveness than it is to ask for permission.

And I think we've heard that kind of in a humorous sense, but in a professional sense, whoa, no.

It is better to ask for permission.

And I've certainly seen that in the industry that I'm in and wood at the person that is a little bit loose on that, and then they get fried and it can cost you your job very easily in certain industries.

So better to say a little too much than not enough.

Yeah.

Yeah, I think you guys got it.

So 22301, Montana Code annotated defines nepotism.

Um, and then section 23520, um, proposed municipal code talks about conflicts of interest again.

Um, in this one, I think the main issues are as we heard disclosure.

So they contacted the chair and let them know, but it should be on the record, um, so that it is it is public record.

Um, and then relating to nepotism specifically, state officials are not to have interests in contracts if they're directly involved, defined as a person who directly monitors, extends amends audits, or is responsible for procurement of the contract, of which this member certainly is.

Uh whether their daughter is a subcontractor is irrelevant as she might directly stand to benefit from the contract if it's approved.

If a member knows their relation will or may work on the project, they should disclose that publicly and recuse themselves from the vote.

If they know that their daughter will not work on the project, they should still disclose the information prior to the vote to avoid any perceptions of favoritism, but they might not need to recuse themselves from the vote.

Anyone else on that one?

That's our last scenario.

Well done.

Good job, team.

We got in summary.

These are all complex scenarios.

There can be fine lines between disclosing versus recusing, as we talked about, speaking as an individual versus speaking as a board member, et cetera.

There may also be more nuanced ethical issues within any of these scenarios, and we've really only talked about the main issues that have come up.

But these situations come up frequently in the city.

So please never hesitate to contact the city attorney's office for assistance prior to any decision making.

And I think one thing that I saw somewhere in these slides, but um didn't happen to come up tonight.

There are ethical concerns that come up frequently.

So if you feel like you need to disclose something before a vote or recuse yourself from a vote, please know that like lots of experts in the fields serve on our boards.

So if you're an expert in the field, there's a chance that work that you're involved in is going to come before that board.

Don't feel like it's embarrassing or that you need to never have conflicts, that it's a bad thing to do.

It happens all the time, so please just feel comfortable just closing the conflict, taking the vote if it's appropriate, or recusing yourself from the vote.

In conclusion, what steps should an individual take?

Please review the code, ask the city attorney's office.

Greg Sullivan is our city attorney.

His contact information is on this slide.

Please follow up with him if you have questions.

Thanks, all.

Great job.

Congratulations.

We don't have certificates.

Yeah, right.

Do you want to use it here?

No, I'm reporting.

All right.

Thank you.

No, I'm really excited to have sat through this because the last time I had it was on ink like a year and a half ago.

So, you know, I've watched them in the audience, but this is good.

I mean, I speak with Greg Sullivan all the time and email all the time and get direction, and pretty much I'm afraid to talk to anybody about anything at this point.

I thought the commission might be getting like an onboarding program, including ethics.

I have the ethics handbook.

I was getting fantastic.

Yeah.

Good.

I hope you read it every night.

Okay.

Nighttime reading.

Next we've got historic preservation project update, local landmark program, and NCOD design guidelines by Sarah.

It's been a minute since we've been like New Year, Sarah.

Happy New Year, HPAB.

It's been already a year.

I don't know about you all.

Great.

Good seeing you all.

And we'll just dive right in.

I'm gonna just I'm just fighting a little bit of a cold, so bear with me as I sniffle.

So as I said, we're gonna be talking about uh the historic preservation, the local landmark project and the design guideline update.

So that is what we're talking about tonight.

And these two um related efforts are the development of the local landmark program as well as the updates to the neighborhood conservation overlay district design guidelines.

And these work response, community interest, evolving preservation practices, and the need for clear, more consistent tools.

And these two projects are about clarifying roles, strengthening the protections, and improving usability for property owners, staff, and the design community.

So here is our agenda.

We're covering a lot in this presentation, but um fear not, because this will not be like a one-and-done discussion.

We have a lot to cover over these next several months.

So the focus of both these projects is how we are evolving the program to be clearer and more effective.

So uh we're gonna start off with why do we have a historical preservation program?

Where do we apply it today?

Why is this change needed?

And we'll go a little bit over project one, the local landmark project, project two, which is the NCOD design guideline update, how these two projects work together, and then we'll conclude with just talking about the upcoming schedule over the next several months.

So can we talk about how cool this photo is?

So, why do we have a historic preservation program?

So the preservation program exists to protect Bozeman's cultural, architectural, and community identity.

Our effort to um historical preservation began nearly 50 years ago with the creation of many of our historic districts and individually listed properties.

We have 11 of them and over almost up to almost 50 individually listed properties with the National Register.

The city made a conscious effort to create the historic preservation program in the late 1980s, showing their dedication to the community's culture and heritage.

Preservation is not about freezing places in time or stopping change.

It is about managing and guiding change thoughtfully in a way that respects what makes places meaningful.

It helps connect the community to the stories, traditions, and places that define Bozeman.

And to do that, we need clear tools to apply in the right places and the right scale to enhance this preservation program forward.

So, as part of that bigger effort, as many of you all know, in 1991, the city established the neighborhood conservation overlay district, which is a boundary that consists of over 3,000 properties, and many of our historic districts and landmarks.

As shown on the screen, it is the pink dotted line as the conservation overlay district, stretches from the Northeast Neighborhood down towards MSU, along the Galligator, over towards 11th, and upwards of near North 7th Avenue.

The blobs within that map are our historic, our National Register Historic Districts.

So we have applied the preservation program only within this boundary of the confined boundary of the NCOD, and that is still where the bulk of the preservation review happens today.

This our review, which is through a certificate of appropriateness application, is our development application that reviews exterior alterations, new construction, and demolition of properties solely within this district.

And so when we are reviewing these certificates of appropriateness, certificate of appropriateness, staff applies the Unified Development Code, the NCOD design guidelines, and the Secretary of Interior Standards to them.

So why is change needed?

So there's limited options for recognizing and protecting historic resources outside of the NCOD, which leaves out a lot out other historic areas.

Well, and oftentimes the NCOD standards are perceived as unclear or inconsistent, and that they have no not evolved alongside the other code.

And there hasn't really been any sort of large update to our historic preservation and neighborhood and COD standards like the rest of the code.

So we need this change because we need to have strong cool, we need to have these strong tools and to be clear and effective as to be clear and effective so that property to owners, designers, applicants can better understand what is required, what is encouraged, what is needed.

The change that we need with this is so that we can identify the gaps and emphasize what is important to us as a community.

But I want to encourage that's like what these issues don't reflect a failing program, but they just reflect a program that has outgrown its original structure since it's been around for over 40 years or almost 40 years, and these two projects will help grow it.

So moving on into project one, which is our local landmark project, which all of you are very familiar with because we've been under uh doing this since November of 2023.

Uh this project has um we have hired the consultant community planning collaborative who've been working with us diligently along this, and there are two components with this.

There is the landmark component and the code component.

Um the land uh so I'll elaborate on both of these components further in this presentation, but just wanting to kind of highlight because I think um when we first defined this project, we actually talked a lot about what we were gonna call it because the big portion of it was like this local landmark part of it, but it's also like policy and code and preservation, our preservation standards.

So this is just to really um show off that these two components, our landmark component and our code component.

So our landmark component is crafting a program to identify and recognize individual landmarks and districts across the community, and this includes establishing designation criteria, nomination process, and requirements around documentation and surveying.

The code component focuses on revising the existing historic preservation code section, like the certificate of appropriateness standards that I had talked about before, which is our development application review process for anything within the neighborhood conservation overlay district, the neighborhood conservation overlay district in itself, the standards live in that our code chapter 38, our review processes, as well as HPAB's roles and responsibilities.

So we have this programmatic kind of side of things and this like technical code side of things, all underneath this local landmark project.

So what has occurred with our local landmark project so far?

Any of you were part of this when we did our kind of listening, you know, listening with our sessions with our uh with our consultant.

Um it's also included research and evaluation, our community engagement efforts, which happened a couple of years ago, where we had a really great turnout of community members just vocalizing their desire to see a more robust historic preservation program.

So based off of that listening research, evaluation, and community engagement, a comprehensive report was completed.

You all reviewed it.

I mean, we're coming upwards on a year ago now.

Uh, and then it was adopted by the city commission in May 2025.

So this report identifies where the code works well and what updates may be needed.

And this is what established the roadmap for phase two, which is drafting the code amendments.

So phase two, which we're in right now, is drafting the code language.

Uh, before we actually bring the code actually, so been working very uh pretty diligently internally as staff as well as with the consultants on um all of this language, and it's a lot, I think with a lot more than we figured what was gonna be we would we're gonna bite off, but um, it's all really good stuff to be focusing on on.

So before we just be like, hey, here's the code language review as such, give us comments.

We are going to be bringing you concepts of the code changes to consider, and we're splitting them into these different topics.

So this is a process that we got the idea from, similar to the UDC after we picked it back up, that there um are just kind of these topics to instead of the actual technical load code language, you all would be um getting uh brought up to speed just some general training all around like what it is that you are going to be reviewing so that you just have a uh stronger foundation for when reviewing this language moving forward.

So um, and then also it's gonna kind of help with getting some general feedback from you before getting into the technical component of the link of the code language and sending it off for all those to see.

So we are going through these multiple rounds of edits up front internally, because we want to make sure that it is a well thought out proposal without errors or significant legal issues.

And so a pretty typical process of this code review is multiple rounds of internal and legal review.

And that's kind of some of the stuff we are doing right now before we bring you kind of these overall concepts.

But you all are our primary working board to on this.

However, state law does require, because this is some zone uh text amendment that the community development board also has to review this since it is amending this code.

So both HPAB as well as the CD board will provide a recommendation and ultimately in the end to the city commission who would be the final adopter adopting.

But this really is like you're gonna be the working board in terms of like really these cons the concepts of it and kind of getting into uh the meat of a bit more than just like diving right into the uh code language itself.

Sorry, can I add something?

Yeah, just in case it isn't clear, you will be reviewing the code language itself.

We are just hoping to be able to bring specific pieces of that to help you understand.

Here's what we're trying to do with this technical language, and here's the technical language.

Please look at it and let us know what you think.

You'll be able to see all of it before anything gets adopted or decided upon.

Um, and the purpose for this is to try to make sure that we have the opportunity to have a more detailed focused conversation about each of these different portions of the code, instead of as Sarah said, just sort of throwing the whole code at you.

But rest assured that you will see the entirety of the code before it moves forward.

Yes.

Absolutely.

Yeah, so these topics that are being brought forward to you, or just kind of divvying up into different sections.

So the first will be actually the local landmark program that will be coming first, followed by the code standards.

A lot of that is like what lives uh what is the language that lives in the code today and how that will be revised.

And then the review process, that is like how staff from the submitting of an application for an applicant all the way through to decision making.

So however, the code um we're still working out a little bit of just like what does make most sense of like um what uh maybe the code standards come first or the review process.

So that might switch, but in general, these are kind of the topics that we will bring to you to get you again get you this foundation of um and some general feedback of some of these like kind of larger concepts that we are thinking about prior to you all reviewing the code language itself.

So first and foremost, the topic one.

So these are what I'm gonna be kind of getting at is just what are these larger components of these changes, or in this case, an actual creation of an entire of a new program, right?

So the local landmark program.

We're calling it the local landmark project as the project in its entirety, but the program in itself would be called the local landmark program, which is what is establishing the defined criteria, categories, and nomination process.

So as stated as before, right now we have the NCOD, and it's that is how we apply the historic preservation standards today.

That is within the confines of that boundary, not really anything external.

It doesn't mean that you can't, that someone can't individually nominate uh um under the national register outside of that district of that boundary, doesn't mean you can't become a historic district, but as it states of like these additional levels of review parameters and protection, that is confined within the boundary of the NCOD.

So the local landmark program is meant to provide recognition protection for historic and cultural rest resources citywide.

And so that, but it can also still apply to the NCOD.

But since we don't have anything, because since we don't have anything that applies outside of the NCOD, that is where this local landmark program uh takes into effect or will take into effect.

So this product this project will the local landmark program will uh define criteria, uh established categories and a nomination process.

So this program will be distinguished differently than the criteria for the national register, which is what we use.

That's how all of our districts are defined, our individual landmarks are defined.

Um the reasoning for that, although like we're still encouraging and um of national register status and of things of that nature, but um it is also important to set I mean, so to set something that like we as a local community can recognize as historically significant.

That might not necessarily be meet the criteria at the national register, uh, just because their um review process can be a little bit more onerous.

Um it tends to be very expensive, time consuming, lengthy, and things of that nature.

So this program would establish one that is a little more clear and accessible to uh um to our community.

Um that would be establishing that.

So what we will uh bring forth to you like what is what are these categories.

We talked a little bit about that in phase one, and uh it's in the phase one report of like what are some potentially um possibility of those uh categories, how those categories like how you have to meet this criteria in order to uh be established as a local landmark pro uh as a local landmark, and then what is actually the nomination process.

So that is something we will bring forth in front of you to uh lay out what that could look like.

Uh so and then create the review standards for the local uh for the landmarks.

And so this tool will just kind of help set something similar to what we already are doing with our NCOD, but just as these maybe landmarks or districts come online, we'll have something that we can point back to on what that means for additional review and protection parameters.

So but instead of like the NCOD, which is a zoning overlay that requires state statute requirements because conservation overlay districts require some things all on that are more focused on yeah, that are focused on state statute.

A local landmark ties more into the cultural and historic components of a site or area.

And then the level enforcement is going to depend depend on the type of designation.

And it's not necessarily about over-regulation, but it's about choice flexibility and long-term stewardship.

And then within this as well, because we're starting a whole new program with this, we will have to reorganize some existing code sections.

So when we bring that forth to you, it will be laid out of like why certain code sections went where, because it's something brand new.

So topic two, which is code standards.

When I say this, I am talking about like what when it is certificate of appropriateness application comes in for a whether it's an exterior alteration, new construction, demolition.

There are these standards that we review as staff, um, as well as like the applicant has to show that they meet.

So it's the standards and that criteria to be able to review the application, its entirety to being able to make a decision.

So the ones that are tied into, and so we just did a lot of that with the UDC update, but the ones that are tied to the preservation historic preservation specifically is going to be surrounded around uh updating our demolition review provisions and clear clarifying some of that review criteria as well as revising our certificate of appropriateness standards to be objective and enforceable.

And so our COA standards do include things like architectural appearance.

Um, and then this is, but it's a very like minimal list.

It just doesn't really have a lot of um emphasis on like what architectural appearance means, how can you actually enforce it, how do we um regulate it.

And so this is where there will be an overlap with the NCOE design guideline update.

And so this is where we're going to be looking at the guidance guidelines and determine what we want to say that is going to be mandatory and what is going to remain something that is a guideline and recommendation.

Um so the code updates are part of this project, we'll propose initial items as standards, but um we want to make sure that the list of oh yeah, so sorry.

Uh we will be looking at some of these COA standards kind of higher level, but we know that these will possibly change as we get through with the design guideline community engagement.

And so when we come to you with some of these uh concepts of what a design, like what a code standard could be, we will come with you just again at this high level because we know that um through the engagement process that we'll hear a lot of like what the community desires to be in guidelines versus what could potentially be in code.

So we will be looking to HPAB and the community to help identify what are like the non-negotiables of enforcement and what can be more subjective.

Uh another thing that's part of this is that there is a deviation process.

A deviation is more or less just a uh relief from a code standard that only applies to properties within the NCOD.

Um it's to encourage restoration or encourage um rehabilitation.

And um, but this section of code has not really been touched in a really long time.

So we are looking to clarify these uh standards and this criteria.

So and then also as I say again, this we will probably be rearranging a lot of like where these code standards live in it, especially now that we have a we'll soon have a new UDC.

Um the uh UDC is organized.

So topic three is the review process, and so that's what I was saying, is just like from this pro the submittal of the application where the applicant, property owner, designer, what have you submits it all the way through to decision making.

And so this will be clarifying the certificate of appropriateness review process and further define what is required to be submitted with an application so that aligns with other development review and state statute or the Montana Land Use and Planning Act.

This is what staff looks to when we review these applications, and then also making it so that it's just very clear that when you are submitting as a property owner and applicant, you know what you are submitting.

We will also be formalizing HPAB's role in landmark designation and um how your role is as an advisory board to the city commission.

So there is a section of the code that will be or that uh discusses who's on the board, what's your roles and responsibilities, things like that.

That is going to be something that we'll be bringing forth to you, and then but a big part of that is just that you all are going to be the first stop shop for the landmark designation.

So, to recap what was stated on the previous slides, we're hoping to achieve the following goals to improve transparency and predictability and review process, create a local landmark program as an additional tool for recognition and protection, ensure preservation tools support community goals, as well as align with the NCOD design guideline update, which is what brings us into our next project to the update to the design guidelines.

So the uh Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District will now set before be announced just as NCOD design guidelines, because the other ones really long, and let's face it, when we talk about this uh document, we just say NCOD design guidelines.

So we're shortening the title as the first course of action.

These were adopted in 2006, and then there was a minor update in 2015 that really only focused on the downtown Main Street historic district.

And um it hasn't really been touched a lot since, but it is a need of a major update as we have been seeing as staff as reviewers over time, as well as um the frustrations that come from what we hear from the public of just like how do you enforce these and how um can we really follow these.

So we um bet we hired the Lakota Group, which is a firm outside out of the Midwest in October, who have done a plethora of update uh preservation plans, updates to design guidelines across the country.

Uh they are very equipped in this and have um a lot of experience with it.

So they're first and foremost, you know, we um are just wanting to update them and uh address a lot of these components because our current guidelines that do not address new construction to a scale that we have been seeing over the years because this was done in 2006 and stuff wasn't being built like it was in 2006 as it is now.

So our the scope of the project includes updating and refining the existing design guidelines, incorporate public feedback and community input, coordinate with the landmark project, improve the usability organization and visual clarity of the guidelines, as well as align with Secretary of Interior Standards and address local conditions and priorities.

So this is currently currently in process.

You know, we just kicked this off in we hired them on in October, but we did the kickoff in November, is right now they're just doing kind of some like background research, data gathering, conversing with staff to learn more about the pro historic preservation program as a whole.

The goal of the update include defining a clear link between code standards and guidelines, and this is where the local landmark project and the design guideline updates will really work together.

Uh the document has a lot of vague statements, so we will hope to make it more objective guidance that will both strengthen the NCOD, but not complete, but not completely remove flexibility.

We'll also be adding more visual examples to guide the guide the intent of what we are looking at when terms anything from uh restoration to window replacement, kind of the minor things all the way to new con new construction in this place within the NCOD.

And that ultimately is better to um create a better support design review for applicants and staff.

So these projects, you know, as we've been doing the local landmark project over the last several years, and we're just kicking off the NCOD design guidelines.

This is going to be what we're doing over the next year.

So buckle up.

But we're really making sure that these tools will allow us to be more specific where warranted and more flexible where appropriate.

Both of these projects feed into a broader preservation program, which is ultimately the goal, as why we've been pushing for this.

This program did not get a lot of attention over the years, and that um now with it has beencome very apparent that historic preservation in the NCOD is important to the community in the last seven in the last um few years and I um applaud HPAB as well as our community members who have been pushing for that because I definitely needed your support along that way to be able to actually get this to be a priority.

So we need clear pathways and more consistent review, which will create better outcomes for our historic and cultural resources.

We want to make sure that we don't look um yeah, that we can continue to tell the story of our community as well as what is important to us.

We recognize that um until something so recognize though also that the NCOD is going to maintain the bulk of what this um what our historic preservation review will continue to be because the local landmark program until districts or individual landmarks come online, we're not gonna have other places to review.

So it will still stay within the NCOD until we get um uh nominations.

But it is important, so it's important to tighten the NCOD design guidelines and code standards because that's where that is where our historic preservation program is encompassed at this point.

Um but then but then also making sure that with these tools that we are being a little bit more proactive about how we can recognize and uh protect some of these other cultural and historic resources.

So reviewing these in tandem will help guide what we want to be kind of our again, non-negotiables versus what are can be our more flexible guidelines.

So as I said, this is gonna be a lot of work over the next year.

And but right now we're just kind of showing you our upcoming schedule and through the spring.

I've highlighted the items in red is gonna be the local landmark project, while the purple is the NCOD design guidelines.

You're going to continue to hear from two separate consultants, community planning collaborative, which is part of the local landmark project, as well as the Lakota group, um, which is the uh for the NCOD design guidelines.

And as HPAB is the working group, it is important to stay as engaged and present these next months.

So this next month, February, um, we will be introducing Lakota virtually and doing a project introduction.

And they uh just like kind of um what they've seen so far, just general kind of um overview on design guidelines and things like that nature.

Also, we will be provision presenting you an overview of our community engagement plan.

So the city has a um community engagement plan process that is um required for projects such as this that needs to get city commission way in.

It's a just a template that we fill out to just be in like here is our timeline, here are the methods that we want to take use to take place uh to um engage with the community.

Uh we will be bringing that forth to you with kind of an overview of it, and then you can provide some comment because then ultimately what we would do is we would present it to the city commission for uh adoption sometime in March.

We need to have that done because um they will actually be visiting us and doing engagement in April.

But before before, so you're gonna have to kind of keep I have to do this because like uh of just balancing the two being the project manager on both of the projects is um kind of the back and forth between uh the two and making sure that um we're moving them forward um effectively, but that also we are um ensuring that HPAB as well as the public is really kept informed and educated about all of the stuff that is gonna be going in through with this.

So uh as I stated earlier in the presentation, we have these code topic discussions where we'll be bringing you these concepts prior to the actual code language.

And so starting in March, and that's the March 31st meeting because we needed to rearrange for spring break when our typical meeting, we have um solidified that.

And so that will be talking about the local landmark program on on March 31st.

And then in April, as I say, we will have Lakota here to do some commute to uh visit in person, and they will be doing community engagement that entire week.

They'll also attend our HPAB meeting on our standard April 15th one.

And then this also we are hoping so that again we can just kind of continue to move these along that we will bring the uh code topic discussion about standards uh in front of you.

And um, yeah, the point of Lakota's visit is not that there is not going to be any draft language.

It is literally just for feedback and to get um input on what the community wants to see in these design guidelines.

So this is just the first step of engagement.

And then in May, May 20th, our HPAB meeting.

Somehow we're gonna have to figure out how to plan for HPA for historic preservation month in the midst of this.

I'm taking suggestions.

Um, but we also want to ensure that we will be having a code topic discussion, and that will be about process.

Uh after all of this, staff will be kind of compiling, a staff and the project team will be compiling the community engagement, uh, your input on these code topic discussions, uh, and um starting to do anything with like draft code.

And so um down the road we don't have a date pick because we want to see what happens these next several months.

Are we going to need an extra month to talk about things?

Are we going to need an extra engagement effort to engage with the community?

So ultimately, what would come um forth after all of this will be the public review of the draft code as well as um the actual the formal adoption process.

So draft code to you all, draft code to CD board, final adoption city commission.

We'll make sure though that the we keep the public aware of these projects through um community engagement FYI at um different advisory board meetings as well as our engage bosem page.

We don't have an engage boseman page for the um design guideline update yet.

We will be having that once our community engagement plan is finalized.

That's kind of I guess a step um that is required of the city, but that is the detail, the details about the landmark one is all on there.

Um time for a few questions, comments, anything.

Uh uh clarification from deputy director.

Why are we presenting all of this to you in such an overlapping parallel pathway?

Uh we have recognized that this is all related and interrelated, as Sarah said.

What we discuss related to code updates and what we discuss related to design guidelines are going to inform each other.

And so we need, because we started the landmark project much earlier than we started the design guideline project.

We need to let the design guideline project catch up a little bit so that that has a chance to inform what we make edits on in code.

And our goal ideally is that we would have them sort of one catch up with the other, and then they come to a decision point and adoption around the same time or at the same time.

That would be ideal, and that way you're making a decision, seeing everything in front of you, knowing what you're voting on and what's gonna go in which place.

So that's why it all is overlapping and feeling like a lot.

And because it is so you mentioned the Lakota group.

Um will be here in April, so I guess they're here for say a couple of weeks or something.

No, it won't be a couple of weeks.

I would say just a um a hand a few days or a handful days.

Yeah.

So um, you know, we won't have you usually with consultants uh we'll have engagement, and it's if it's solely around like engagement efforts, uh those the consultants will be at those engagement efforts, but um knowing that or that we'll have to expand opportunities outside of that week, that will be when just staff is there.

Um, but for the week that they are here, they will be attending uh those engagement efforts.

And the other consulting group, the community planning collaborative, do they ever come to town or based?

I guess I'm based kind of all over it's a mix of different groups.

They um but are the uh they came during the community engagement um part of phase one, which was summer of 2024.

They have been here, they came um and presented to HPAB another time, I think um a couple times in during that year as well.

Uh we do not have a time uh because uh the community engagement kind of around that effort is has Rapno.

Now we're getting the code language, they'll probably be doing more things just virtually presentations.

I have a lot of questions.

Um please remind me.

Uh with the UDC change.

Yes, there was no change to the conservation overlay district, correct?

Correct.

So the current boundaries remained unchanged.

But the reality is so what when do we expect the the design guidelines to be updated?

Oh this year.

This year, by the end of this this year.

The end of this year.

Yeah, I would just like to just put it on the record.

Whatever the city of Bozeman can do to avoid massive code updates around the holiday season, I would be hugely in support of that.

Yeah.

Um, okay, so in theory, we're gonna have a new code start in a couple weeks.

And then we have these very outdated design guidelines for, I mean, there's no so I guess I'm just trying to ask the question how the city is is a uh the fact that we're updating a guidance document while also approving development seems a little bit concerning.

So I guess I'll just put that out there.

Um there are like sometimes cities will choose to actually do a moratorium on development until design guidelines are completed, but that doesn't seem I know Montana has some unique rules there.

Um so June after, so would we would we meet in May is the thought with the preservation?

Yeah, yeah.

Oh, yeah.

I mean, the the whole like every month from here until when there's adopted is gonna be full of something.

Yeah, we I mean, so I get I think I would just like put it out there, friends, that I think we should do something very, very, very simple for preservation board month because this is this is gonna be a huge priority with the goal to get it done before the holiday season.

Um then we could just focus on the award ceremony again in the fall.

That's what I would is what I would recommend because like you know, we do a story mansion event, maybe the cookie event, like like two things at the most because I think this is gonna take a lot of time.

The nerd in me is very excited to read code, but I also just know it's it's very um it's gonna be pretty complex for us.

I appreciate the overlap.

The two are gonna be coming at us at the same time.

I think we actually all requested that before when we were seeing things in piecemeal.

Um yeah, it's gonna be a lot, just thinking about the fact that we also have this new UDC that's at play too.

Last question, and I'll stop talking.

Has staff talked about um you know, with the new code adoption, how is staff going to be tracking um problems that arise with like interpretation of the code?

Because every time a new code is adopted, of course, we know that it's not perfect and something.

So I just didn't know staff had talked about like a formal way that you're gonna be tracking that and how you're gonna be providing those updates to commission.

That's above my pay grade.

I would say yes, that's very much on our radar.

We have talked about it.

We do not have a formal plan yet, but yes, we are we recognize as we implement there are gonna be issues that pop up that no one expected, and so we will Chris Saunders, I'm sure has something in mind already.

Chris Saunders probably has it in his brain already, an Excel sheet that's like already populating.

But um I just think I learned that as you dive into community engagement for future code updates, it's very helpful to have like active, like an active list of um what do you kind of call it?

It's like staff identified issues, right?

With the hope that there's a a little bit of a cleanup effort, you know, on a more frequent basis.

That makes sense.

Um sorry, I did have one more question.

The community engagement plan.

I must have missed that.

Do you what where is that in the code?

Is it just a policy thing?

It's a policy thing.

Okay.

Um so it's not a code.

This is something that is coming out of um Mlupa about just like that.

There's required um community engagement plans for efforts of this that um then our community communications division came up with.

So a lot of times these are just brought up as something that's placed on like the consent agenda for city commission, um, where um it's it's not it's it's kind of just an over a fairly high overview of just like this schedule and like what methods are going to be used.

Okay.

But because this project is um has a lot of interest, we and because um you all as a working board, we thought it would be uh if effective to um get some kind of feedback from you all before we dive into what the actual community engagement weeks are uh in case there's just some thoughts from you all as well as city commission.

Okay.

That's all I had.

Yeah, but I mean yeah, the the neighborhood conservation or really district pretty much uh in the the only thing that changed with it is where it's now located based on the new codes layout.

But that's about that's so so the new zoning code.

Correct.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

So the um boundary, I mean, is not the the boundary was proposed to be changed with phase one, but then you all said do not do that, put it uh nail in that uh coffin and said let's just um uh do the design guidelines first.

Uh this staff has like always been a I mean aware that or known that we needed to update the guidelines um for a very very long time.

I just kind of expect that we would maybe do it after the landmark project, but uh I think bringing both of them in tandem will have its advantages because then we can really understand like what um what this design review looks like.

Yeah, and I and my planner brains already working over time.

I mean, do we envision the design guidelines to talk well?

You know, design restrictions or that might emerge with local districts.

Like are we are we seeing that?

No, these is design guidelines are gonna just be for so this this these design guidelines are solely going to be for the NCOD.

Okay.

When low when like landmarks come on, there will be um there'll be a process to create different design guidelines for particular yes, or if there's maybe not necessarily like a full set of design guidelines, but you could be like, okay, this is a landmark that like this is the stuff that like it follows under Secretary of Materials or something like that.

Like it's gonna be a little bit more flexible of like how um what is the level of enforcement for that.

But these design guides are going to be solely for the NCOD.

Okay.

No, so yeah, I just think um for these future months.

Um if you aren't uh able to attend any of them, please go back and watch the videos.

That would be very beneficial to set up so that when we get into these discussions that you feel prepared.

And um if you have questions, comments, concerns, anything, want just kind of um uh a little bit uh more guidance on some things you can always reach out and ask.

Sarah, do you recall is there any particular meetings from say 2023 or 2024 that would be advisable, say to watch to build more of a back and get up to speaking?

Since I didn't come on the board.

For sure.

That's a good that's February of last year.

I will compile because I think that would be very beneficial for you as well as Mitchell, as well as whoever is going to be coming on as a new board member in the future.

I don't know.

Alison, you have been very in tune, but I think also as a liaison, uh commission liaison probably.

And if you all just want to go back and like listen to it, but I will compile um meetings and send those out.

Great.

That would be awesome.

Yeah, thank you.

Okay.

Can I ask a question or two?

Yeah.

Okay.

So one of the things that has been mentioned by a lot of the people in the community from all different backgrounds.

Uh is the zone edge transitions.

Mm-hmm.

And is that something that could be part of the NCOD conversation?

Or uh it is part, I would say not zonage transition, but in terms of like thinking about how new construction next to historic resources plays in is stuff we have been talking about.

Okay, nice.

Yay.

And then um we haven't, so okay.

The little calendar said um February 18th, HPAB.

Yeah, uh the community engagement plan.

So maybe some of that community engagement is gonna be taking place in May, and we could use historic preservation month to get people to participate.

Oh, that's a brilliant idea.

I don't know.

Great.

Yeah, because all right, great.

Preservation month is planned.

Uh yeah, no, that that's a good idea because like I think I I mean, because when we did community engagement around the local landmark project, um, you know, we had our really intensive week of uh with the consultants there, but we did engagement over a course of six weeks.

I mean, all the way through they did it from the middle of July all the way through beginning of September.

So I definitely see that like we could have where from the middle of April through May is like engagement efforts around that.

Because the coda is coming in April.

Correct.

To kick off community engagement?

Yes.

Okay.

Just wondering if you know if there was a way um yeah.

We wanted to bring them, we were trying to keep them to come to a week when HPAB meets so that they can come to a meeting.

Oh, okay, fair.

Okay.

And then if we wait till May, it's too late.

Yeah.

All right.

And then I also just want to say your presentation this evening was so informative, and I'm really grateful for all of this information.

I've been starting to feel like lost of like what is the trajectory of these.

Tell me about it.

So thank you for putting this together and clarifying some things.

Um, I'm really glad you guys are gonna that like clarifying the criteria around deviations is on the radar because MLUPA is really mandating um public participation in policy, but then it's forever hold your piece.

So that won't go in front of the city commission anymore.

It won't be public review, it will be all administrative.

So like it has to be really clear.

Guidelines.

Yeah, the deviation criteria says historically appropriate.

Yes.

What is historically appropriate?

So uh yeah, that's that's a section that you know, just further defining that criteria.

Because the whole point is it's like the the reason it came to be was that most of Bozeman were or like the NCOD was platted prior to and built up prior to zoning code.

So there's lots that are weird, they're narrow, there's buildings that are built not in set back, like nothing that meets current zoning code, or not nothing, but a lot of it.

But it has kind of evolved in some ways, and I think in a way that doesn't necessarily um tie back around to the like ultimate like intent of what it is supposed to be.

So that's something we were looking at too with this.

Cool.

Um great.

So I will for recapping for mine, I will compile some videos, mid me videos, videos, medium videos.

Definitely the one with Greg and talking about the powers of Yeah, that's a good one.

Does uh whatever it was?

I need to actually re-watch that because I understand.

Um yeah, Greg Legal, I was gonna do the phase one report.

Yes.

Um there's a few other ones that I I can think of off the top of my head.

I'll send those in the next week or two.

And then just to echo uh Commissioner Sweeney, just the your presentation seriously could be like when we get this on engage Bozeman, just as a kind of I mean don't redo the work, just put post that presentation.

I mean, seriously.

And then uh just because of my realities, everybody's but the sooner we can have like the schedule of what you're thinking for the rest of the year, Sarah and team would be super appreciative.

Yeah, just as we get into the summer months for sure.

Like with traveling.

Yeah.

Can I clarify?

Do you mean just the dates or the subject matter and what you're gonna be doing?

Just basically, well, it's as much as you can do like what we have.

I'm pointing to the up, I'm pointing to that screen.

Uh just what we can do, like what we intend to be talking about at the next HPAP meetings.

Um, because I'm thinking I so for the board's knowledge, I have a conflict on February, so I'm missing February's meeting.

Um, June, I'm the rest of them I'm good.

Um then have to uh sorry, and like I have a quorum in what February it is.

Uh August might be tricky for me.

Okay.

Yeah, so I mean keep the days of your, I mean, like the the dates are gonna have I mean the typical HPAP dates are what we have.

If we find that like we're not gonna have a quorum, like what I'm kind of here right now, is that we might actually not have a quorum for February.

Um looking to potentially uh uh bump it um reschedule it.

So um yeah.

So that's because I know you say you'll be virtual, Chelsea will be there, but virtual and later you're gonna be gone.

I think Mike will be back.

You'll be here.

I don't know about Mitchell.

So we should be okay, but I'm I I think if you know of like your schedule, like in advance or anything, please just like send it to me so that um and you know, I'm not saying like for November, like I'm just saying for like over the next few months, especially like with this uh schedule on the screen, that um if we do need to find a different time to meet, the sooner we can get that scheduled the better.

Just because we have we a lot of time that the reason we're doing March 31st is because it's the fifth Tuesday of the month, and that's not when city commission meets.

So uh we just have a lot to between other advisory board meetings and stuff.

So um I'll yeah, just please let me know.

Yeah, I think the the takeaway we want you to leave with is there's a lot of work that needs to go forward this year for HPAB, and so it is important that we try to make sure we have quorums every month, even if we have to move a meeting to make that happen.

Um it is consequential with both of these projects if we miss meetings.

Yeah.

Especially when we're working with consultants.

And just to confirm the quorum can be satisfied with a virtual attendance, correct?

Yes.

That is a new thing, which is fantastic.

That is new.

That's like that's new.

That's in like late last year.

Yeah, like only a few months, only a couple months ago.

Yeah.

So before it was like you still had to have the quorum in the room, but now you can so we should be good for next month.

So there's no limitations.

Well, that's a that's a question.

Are there limitations of how many times you can attend virtually?

I think that was the plan still.

I don't remember I I don't have it off the top of my head, but we can find that language and share it.

I think there's a limit on that.

I think it's the number of people in it, not necessarily times.

I think that got it.

Okay.

And then can you still not be on two advisory boards at the same time?

Isn't that a rule?

That's a rule.

I don't know.

That's a Greg question.

Oh, I thought I spoke to that because that came up with me, but Greg letters.

Greg said it's a good one.

I mean, I didn't even bring it up.

Somebody brought it up on my behalf.

Yeah.

And Greg told me straight away.

It's okay.

So I would just say at least maybe it's a case.

And all my free time.

And all the but I was just curious about that.

I wonder if it could also be because of Inc is a special type of board.

That's what I'm wondering.

Traditional.

And so yeah.

Greg didn't.

Greg didn't give me the details because I you know fine as long as it satisfied him, I was happy.

So we didn't prolong the discussion.

But he said you're good.

But I think Commissioner Sweeney's right.

Uh Inc., yeah, it's a different animal, so may not count as say a second advisory board.

I did get an answer on the virtual attendance.

Quick.

So we would need to have three in the room with one virtual to have a quorum.

And there are only four times per year that an individual member can be virtual.

Hopefully by February, we have our newest we have a full board.

Now that we have a commission liaison confirmed, uh, we will have to set we have a couple applications to interviews to conduct.

So looking at Chelsea and Commissioner Sweeney.

Two applicants?

Three?

Or I don't I I don't remember.

I think the some uh I I'm confirmed two.

We have one open seat, it's an at-large seat.

That was my little concern because both of the the if we needed a professional one, but um one open seat, we have a couple applications and we'll be setting up interview and those who do the interview as staff, board chair, and commission liaison.

And then the commission liaison uh is the one who then makes the recommendation to the city commission.

So we'll go through that process and hopefully we can have a new board member set for February so we don't have to run into a quorum issue.

Cool.

Anything else?

Great.

Thanks all for what go ahead.

Can I just give everybody my city email address?

Because it's a weird one.net.

Nope, it's changing.

What?

Yep.

Little balanced.

No.

Yeah.

We're getting we're getting we're getting new like at the end of an era.

I know.

I'm really I'm really sad about it because it's just a lot easier.

I don't it's like Bozeman.mt uh okay it's our full names too.

Right.

What?

With a double.

Which means you gotta spell it right.

You're gonna have no date more for business cards now.

I mean, how's it all gonna fit?

It's a much longer email.

Yeah, actually I could just give you a business card, all of you.

That's what I'll do.

Rebecca, while we're here, is your would yours be our harbage at Bozeman.net because you came on last year.

It is currently still our Harbage at Bozeman.net.

Yes.

Still could be okay.

I think they're I think they're changing them over the next several months.

Yeah, and what is the best phone number for you during the day that's appropriate phone number?

Do I remember?

Still trying to work it out.

It's I will add that Jim.

Wow.

I will give you my work cell phone number.

Um so that phone number is 406 579610.

Yep.

It's not okay.

Anything else?

We could during the meeting soon February.

All right.

So is yours is gonna bounce now or no, not yet.

So is yours is gonna bounce now or no, not too well find you if I use the new address?

No.

So I actually have no idea.

IT told me that with when we get our new addresses, I'll sorry.

Oh I don't think I think we I think we're gonna be able to do it.

Oh when IT when we get our new addresses, our old addresses will still be like linked for one year.

Oh yeah.

That makes sense.

So like even if you're send stuff to Truffla Bozeman.net it's gonna send to me for one year.

It gives us a year to adjust to this massive change.

That is a big change.

That's long time to adjust for the general last year.

But you are is yours a lot because you're gonna be able to do that.

It seems like you guys are adjourning.