Yes, read this whole script.

Yes.

That's great.

Okay.

So the one thing that is a little different is we have our soon to meet at 7th number, but currently he's our commission of the Amazon hasn't yet been appointed.

So he's not going to be looking at this doctor's participating this evening.

Okay.

Good evening and welcome to the February 2nd 2026 meeting of the community development board.

Community development board is a seven-member citizen advisory board comprised of volunteers appointed by the city commission that fulfill requirements of state law and meet twice per month to make recommendations regarding land use recommendations, regulations to the uh Bozeman City Commission.

Final decisions are typically not made here.

Thanks for joining us.

We welcome the presence of everyone here in the commission room.

Um before we start the meeting, I'd like to remind those not physically present here of the ways in which you can follow this meeting and provide public comments.

You can watch this meeting in real time and provide public comment should you choose by joining us via video conference.

You'll find the link to join us by going to the city's website at Bozeman.net.

Click on departments, then on City Commission, then on live stream and videos, find the meeting under upcoming events list, and then click on the copy of the meeting agenda, it's highlighted in blue, then click on via video conference, also highlighted in blue in the second paragraph of the agenda, and follow the prompts to enter the meeting.

If you're joining us via video conference and would like to offer public comment this evening, use the video conference raise your hand feature when it is your turn to comment.

Staff will call on you by name.

Please note that we will take public comments from those physically present here first, followed up by those joining uh via video conference.

In addition to joining us via video conference, there are three other ways you can follow this meeting.

These are for viewing or listening only, and you'll be unable to provide public comment using any of these methods.

You can dial in and to listen to the meeting, you'll find the phone number and the access code under section A of the agenda uh for this meeting and under the via video conference heading on the city's website as I just described above.

You can also watch the meeting on cable TV channel one ninety, and you can stream this meeting on your computer.

Go to Bozeman.net, click on departments, then on city commission, then on live stream and video, find this meeting under the upcoming events list and click on view live event.

You can always provide written comment before meetings by sending an email to comments at Bozeman.net or by visiting the city's public comment web page.

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

And with that, I don't have a copy of my agenda in front of me, but I do know that it's a one-item agenda comprised of ethics training manually.

We do uh not have any changes to the agenda, and we do have some minutes for action before we thank you for that process.

We have two sets of minutes, one from last year and one from last meeting.

I think I would entertain a motion to get those approved at this point.

I move the approval of our minutes from November 17th, 2025 and January 26, 2026.

I can second that.

Any discussion?

Trevor Burrus Mover Eggie.

Aye.

Secondary Egnets.

Yes.

Member Bonnet.

Aye.

Member Mitro.

Aye.

Chairman Lloyd.

Aye.

Motion passes, I believe it's five zero.

Thanks for your help.

Thanks for the assist.

With that, I think kick it over to Chris for annual ethics training.

Chair, do we do have a minute or uh public comment on our agenda?

Yes.

Thank you.

I didn't bring my binder and I'm completely lost.

Any public comment on things outside the agenda or on the agenda?

Outside the agenda.

Outside the agenda.

Anything at all?

Nothing in the room?

Anything online?

Nothing online.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for your mind.

Can we do ethics training now?

Yes.

Okay.

So ethics is an annual process for all city employees and boards.

This is a part of our charter that was approved 10, 11 years ago by the voters.

And so the city's been developing the program uh each year.

We're trying to refine it a little bit.

We've tried a variety of different kinds of approaches, and uh basically what seems to work best is when there can be some conversation.

Um folks can discuss well, what if and maybe then and um so we're gonna have uh little uh overview for some principles and then also opportunities just to go through some scenarios and ask questions.

Um these questions are deliberately written so that there's room for discussion, it's not yes or no.

Um so just warm up your ethics cogitating powers.

So the charter uh section seven specifically includes some provisions about ethics, as I mentioned, um that the city manager provides annual training and education.

Um this is something where you know fundamentally the thing that often comes to mind first is conflicts of interest, where there's um a clash where uh between a private interest and a public interest, sometimes that's in a business area, sometimes it's a personal area.

Um it's important that um the way that the city operates, uh whether that's at the staff or official level, is um independent, impartial, accountable, and responsible, and that channels uh are followed when decisions are made, um, and so that folks can see that they have a uh government which works well and which works fairly uh in uh serving and doing their duties.

So ethics training purpose and expectations.

Um I've been in a number of these over the years, and sometimes the question has been so how do we pick this stuff?

Why do we do this stuff, that kind of thing?

And ethics, you know, fundamentally that's principles of conduct governing the group.

Um we're not necessarily uh saying that this stuff is all rocket science, but if you think about it, you know, why is it that at 25 miles an hour you can drive down the street and at 26 miles an hour maybe you get a ticket?

Or maybe at 16 miles an hour if you're in a school zone, right?

So that we have created these agreed upon expectations so that everybody knows what it is that should be done, could be done, et cetera.

So by publishing these and making them available, and um the city's ethics code as was provided uh in the packet materials is available through the municipal code for anybody who wishes to browse it and uh review it.

And so we've uh gone through that in order to accomplish uh these purposes and help folks have a good understanding of what constitutes a reasonable expectation for all the folks they interact with on behalf of official city of Bozeman business.

them available and the city's ethics code as was provided uh in the packet materials is available through the municipal code for um anybody who wishes to browse it and uh review it and so we've uh gone through that in order to accomplish these purposes and help folks have um a good understanding of what constitutes a reasonable expectation for all the folks they interact with on behalf of official city of Bozeman business so Bozeman's best uh code of ethics is generally considered best practice in the state I'm not aware of anybody else who has this kind of a uh annual obligation and so we have been working hard to uh integrate this not just in a once a year class but in our daily operations and so there are uh times where you know issues come up we discuss things amongst staff there's other resources that we'll talk about in a minute that can help us being able to identify that and we're continually working with reaching out to additional staff members to help them be the trainers and so train the trainers all that kind of stuff then you help learn what you teach and the city Bozeman's ethics is a layer on top of these ethics requirements from the state of Montana there's some that are specifically in state law you can see the the citation there in many ways Bozemans ask for a little more than what the the state does but that's okay and it's not a requirement we don't check them but I just would like to acknowledge that there's a lot of professions who their own professional organizations have a variety of ethical requirements that they also follow within their professional practices so we do this online excuse we have done it online before those tended to end up with a little bit more of a black and white yes no kind of a a thing it that's not usually the way ethics delebas show up and so we found that the in-person seems to work a little more effectively in helping folks understand and work through some of the nuances and hopefully we're also building a culture that it's okay to ask the question it's not a problem if you say I'm not sure about this and you can find folks to to visit with and get answers rather than feeling like you're stuck somewhere without a without a clear path forward so of the resources that are out there the code of ethics as I mentioned is available through the city's website as part and parcel of the municipal code purchasing policy that's more providing direction for staff members of the boards typically don't have purchasing authority mentioned Montana code annotated resolution 5323 that's what's called the high performing boards resolution it kind of sets out the general expectation of all of the city's advisory boards and we'll talk about some elements of that as we go through and then of course the administrative work more for the staff again on administrative orders employee handbook those kinds of things and we certainly hope that if you think you're in a situation that you will consider the staff also as a resource we're here to support the board and help folks be able to act in confidence.

So jumping into the fun so I think we have five different scenarios here to chat through inevitably somebody feels like the fingers being pointed that's not anybody's intent and by the way I didn't write any of these so just so we're all clear so a member of a tax 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 are diligent about filling out their financial disclosure form each year.

That's a form where if you're a member of a board and you have certain duties and responsibilities you need to disclose any business interests you have that may uh impact your board your responsibilities on the board each year and notes the business and property interests on the form.

The 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 conversations with the owners and expects the two to share some parking facilities.

The hotel will bring in customers for now they don't mention this at the board meeting because there is no direct business interest in the project and since their form is on file staff can bring it up if they think it's a conflict the board member enthusiastically approves the hotel what are the ethical considerations and anybody can jump in that's fine it's clear to me that the they could benefit financially from a decision that they made in their capacity as a a decider okay so there's a it's not explicit right they're not an official partner but there could be some interaction back and forth that's favorable okay thank you that's a that's a good observation

It's clear to me that the they could benefit financially from a decision that they made in their capacity as a decider.

Okay.

So there's a it's not explicit, right?

They're not an official partner, but there could be some interaction back and forth that's favorable.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's a that's a good observation.

I guess along those lines, I would also kind of argue that if they have plans to share parking.

I mean, that is really a business activity.

Okay.

I guess sorry, I disagree with that part of it.

They don't have any direct um, you know, that that's a business cost.

Okay, thank you.

Chris, you look like you had something to say.

I guess they saw Mark turn on his mic, so I'm gonna defer to him.

Still cogitating.

Um I mean, I think at a minimum they need to either uh disclose their interests prior to voting, uh, consult with the city attorney, all right, or um recuse themselves from the vote.

Um, just because even the optics of it after the vote, right?

The town, the city, the people, it's not necessarily great knowing that they're an adjacent property.

So if those are options, I think they should pursue them.

Okay.

You raised several good issues there.

Um part of what we deal with a lot is there's what you know from a like a legal regulatory standpoint, and then there's how it's perceived.

And um very often what is understood by folks outside the room, as it were, is only the perception.

And so thinking carefully about how would this be understood uh is always a good thing to keep in mind, not to be running scared, but just to be aware.

We in the office we call it the front page test.

If this was put on the front page, would you be concerned about it?

Um it may be completely legitimate, in which case, great, you'd be very happy to have it on the front page.

City staff does their job.

It's like good.

Um board members, etc.

So thank you for bringing that part up.

Other elements folks might want to toss out.

I think I think I'll just add that often when we're um I think just almost every disclosure I've seen, either boards I've been on or the city commission, um, has been, even though the city attorney or or others had confirmed that there is no real conflict here, but the appearance of a conflict is worth it enough.

Maybe you don't you're not recusing yourself, but you're at least saying, hey, this is the case.

This isn't gonna be enough to you know im impede my ability to be impartial, um, but even just you know putting it out there for the sake of public benefit.

Because along those lines, as a as an active member in the in the in the TIFF board, there's a viewpoint there that's valuable, and one of the reasons that that person might be sitting on the board is to be able to contribute, but be recognizing a potential conflict and sort of flagging it and um not trying to hide something intentionally or otherwise.

Right.

No, that's very good.

And very frequently, um, as the mayor mentioned, you know, they'll they'll make an inquiry, they'll check, make sure things are okay, and as part of their disclosure, they will say, I checked.

Things are okay.

It's not just you know an individual making a supposition for themselves.

Um, especially for the city commission, that can become a little tricky because they actually do have to make the final decision.

And um jumping into story time, there was a plat I worked on many years ago where it was a two-two vote, and the fifth commissioner had a financial interest in the project, and there was a whole process he had to go through with the Secretary of State's office and everything else because he had an obligation in that case to break the tie.

And so there is a little bit of difference there uh between the commissioners and the rest of us who do advisory work.

Um, but yeah, we don't want to block someone out from offering good input.

Another item I just bring to mind is if you are attending a meeting, let's say there's five items on the agenda and you have a conflict with one, that does not prohibit your participation in any way with the remaining four.

So uh we've had folks where they did have a specific interest, it was identified, they identified disclosed the interest, they excused themselves, they physically left the room.

Um not smiles or nods or anything else going on to influence any decision making, finish the work, and then they came back in, meaning picked up again.

So items that were identified here, great on this one, conflict of interest.

One of the other items is the financial disclosure statement.

It's great that that's on record.

I never see them, so I have no idea what anybody has written down.

So as valuable as they are, staff isn't back checking those against the agenda.

Um it's helpful, but it has some limitations for its function.

All right, next one.

Um 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 them, 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 the city commission and writes a letter to the Chronicle expressing their concerns about the district, acknowledging the experience with a project given their membership on the UPF board.

They make sure to include on behalf of UPF in the letters to reinforce their legitimate opinion, and so that others will take their opinion seriously.

What are the ethical considerations?

I can just jump in.

I mean, I don't believe they're authorized to speak on behalf of the board.

Um so that seems like a pretty clear overstepping.

I think you know, until that line, that sentence I was thinking, well, okay, that might be fine as long as they make it very clear that they're offering their opinion in a personal capacity.

Uh they do serve on the board, but they're not speaking on the behalf of the board.

Um, though obviously, like you're saying, kind of the front front page uh view, you know, they are are going to be seen to some extent as connected with the board, no matter how much they try to distance themselves.

So you know, they probably should bear that in mind in terms of how they uh communicate.

That'd be my thoughts.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate that.

Other thoughts.

I don't know if it's a matter of ethics, but it does violate the principles of the high performing boards resolution for an individual board member to then go directly to city commission with their separate opinion dissenting from the board.

Okay.

Although I don't know how strictly enforced that is anymore since uh the city manager who's I think the driving force behind that uh is no longer with us.

Yeah, we do still have that resolution, it's 5323.

And for those who may not be familiar with it, uh part of that is uh one body, one voice is the uh principle, as uh Ms.

Greggy said.

So we don't do minority reports from the board or other things.

The advantage there of modern technology is we have a literal word-for-word recording of the dialogue that happens at the board.

So we're not dependent on the minutes or other uh summary materials to help uh folks understand the concern board members may have had.

Um so when uh things do move from this board to the city commission, uh, staff will identify there was a meeting, it was held, here's the recording link, here's when it starts, um, and then the commissioners will have an opportunity to review that.

Uh typically um the minutes get end up getting approved after the time that the city commission ends up being able to act on the item, but the recording when Trenton finishes it, closes out the meeting, it's publicly available in what, 30 minutes.

Um, so it's very rapid turnaround.

So folks have got some time to digest and understand.

So that's part of that one one body one voices.

We do have this comprehensive record that is available to everybody who wishes to be uh aware.

Um so looking at uh the board or the the ethical components, the definition of um officials includes elected and appointed officials, so this person was acting as official, and they need to all city officials need to act in the course and scope of their position and on the behalf of the municipality as a whole.

So this person was acting as official, and they need to all city officials need to act in the course and scope of their position and on the behalf of the municipality as a whole.

Um that's an important piece that happens that we're we're asked as staff members, as board members to uh keep in mind all 60,000 plus people who are currently resident and those who are yet to come.

And part of the reason we have uh liaison to each of the boards is so that they can hear the full discussion and help convey that up to uh the city commission when there's a decision to be made.

Um is our previous member did that frequently in helping the board uh excuse me, the commission be aware of discussion that the board had had, especially as we were going through the very long process of the UDC, and there was lots of conveying to be done.

Uh so that's a very important in this case specifically of the example um, you know, this person that this theoretical person is reaching out not only within the organization but outside the organization to advocate for their position and representing that they're speaking for the board.

And um certainly as an individual, uh you are entitled to speak on any issue that you feel is uh worthy of your attention, and that does not block um uh anything by virtue of being on the board.

Um we just need to make sure that folks know that you are speaking as a private citizen and not on behalf of someone else.

I guess Chris I would just add to this that even um even the insinuation of the like writing on behalf of the urban parks and force like that that's egregious, but I think even the like subtle insinuation that someone might have standing with their opinion, I think can be a little bit of an ethical gray area if they you know like put in a little like you know, wrote a guest column and signed off, you know, like so and so uh as a member of this board, um, if it's not directly pertinent or not endorsed, like even that can be a bit of a gray area, kind of just like claiming membership in a board in a capacity that might infer that um you're somehow speaking on behalf of the board.

No, that's a very good point.

Um there is uh oft times an expectation from members of the public that board members are experts in their field, and sometimes there is a professional skill set that helps people be on the boards and engage effectively, sometimes not, and so it's important for folks to understand what the role of the board is and uh you know helping to be clear about speaking as an individual versus speaking collectively as a board helps to draw that line, I think to to avoid the kind of concerns that we're identified with Mr.

Eggie.

So anything else on this one?

Okay.

So the chair of the downtown urban renewal board handles setting the agendas.

They also own a hotel in the district.

Recently, the agendas have been pretty full of new activity in the district, so they 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 downtown urban renewal district and does not go before the city commission, but doesn't want to put it on an agenda as their hotel is covering the needs of the district at the moment.

They didn't get the incentives when building their hotel, so if they are in a time crunch, they can proceed without the incentives.

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

What are the ethical considerations?

What do you think, Ben?

Well, I'm sure there's a rule, but I don't know what it is.

That's fine.

About um, it's basically when the the um the chair recognizes that their hotel is covering the needs of the district at the moment.

That's very um individual, and I don't think recognizes the process um that should be fair and accessible to everyone.

It's also this sort of I didn't need I didn't need it when I did it, but I think the the dynamic nature of process, it changes and that it should be um clear and consistent for everyone.

Bring it, thank you.

Yes, appreciate that.

Other thoughts?

I mean, similarly, it seems like they're manipulating the priorities of the board in their own best interests.

So there is kind of a semi-conflict of interest in a sense that's happening here, not directly incentivized by money, right?

But it is incentivized about prioritizing, right?

Prioritizing what is going in front of the board so that they can, in a sense profit, quote unquote, on the back end.

So I would definitely say it's it's a semi-conflict of interest.

Just one thing to observe is how hard this would be to observe that any of this was happening.

Like if you were just another urban renewal district board member or even the applicant, um, it'd be very, very hard to see exactly what was going on, what the motivations would be.

Okay.

So in this case, um, this is starting to get into some of the state law elements on um conflict of interest, fair treatment to others, um, those kinds of things, as was mentioned, um, citing here from the statute that says a public official may not perform an official act, in this case at the agenda, directly and substantially affecting a business or other end undertaking to its economic detriment when the official or employee has a substantial personal interest in a competing firm or undertaking.

So lining up very much with what was what was said.

Um it doesn't take away from the chair's authority to set the agenda, but in this case, it's going to take some extra scrutiny to ensure that things are being done fairly.

They may want to bring in other members of the board, they may want to uh speak with whatever staff liaison they have or commission liaison to help make sure that there's extra eyes on this process, making sure that there's no deliberate or undeliberate um bias that's skewing things.

Um the idea that well, I didn't get it, so you don't get it either, that can also be considered as a retaliation, which is definitely well outside the scope of allowed behavior.

Um that's that's definitely a concern.

And then also uh as was mentioned, uh financial interest.

Um sometimes that is literally immediately dollars and cents, but not always, sometimes it's that longer term, like uh Mr.

Egnes mentioned.

Um if the other competing or potentially competing hotel is you know delayed by however long, um, that changes the dynamics and the and the benefit to the existing hotel year.

Um even if they were being very open and honest about it, uh, there's the perception component where it's gonna be very important to be careful about how that's handled, how that's conveyed in the process.

I think it just highlights that sometimes it's you can identify a very clear transaction that's occurring, and that as the mayor mentioned, is like this is like a strategy or this is like a long-term thing that you it would take a lot of work to identify that, but the payoff happens down the road later, and need to be aware and disclose those, I think, um, if it affects you individually.

And so that may be one, you know, every board has a chair and a vice chair, so this might be a situation where it would be very appropriate for the chair just to step back entirely and say, hey, Vice, this is time for you to step in and be a little more objective on this process.

That's that's partly why we have vice chairs.

It's to provide a little bit of a relief out, not get people in corners.

Okay.

A member of the community development board also works for a local nonprofit that helps to coordinate placement of low-income individuals in affordable housing.

They are 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 CDB are fully aware of the different resources in the community and gets frustrated when someone asks for 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 only votes yes on projects that maximizes these resources.

What are the ethical considerations?

In some cases, it would differ based on the nature of the action item.

If it's a clause of judicial uh consideration, like uh then uh their personal opinions really don't have much matter.

If it's less legislative, um perhaps there'd be more uh could be that could be valid.

Okay, so there is some difference depending on the nature of the work.

Um, and that's something that this board is gonna have to deal with going forward.

We'll talk more about that at your next meeting.

Um traditionally, you've done mostly legislative kinds of things other than subdivisions, and under the new laws we're under, uh, you'll have a role in the appeals process, which is a decision making role for that's the quasi-judicial uh component of things.

So we'll talk some about that on the 23rd.

Um so yeah, that's one aspect of it.

What scope are we working on?

What are the criteria that we're evaluating, making sure that we're staying tight to what those are?

Okay, others.

I think what stood out most is just they're probably deviating from the whatever the item is the review criteria of it.

Um it's it's hard to say necessarily like what if there's a conflict of interest or I don't think ethics are necessarily what came out here.

Maybe there's some sort of retaliatory dynamic here of saying of some developers that went through the right, did the right things and some did the wrong things.

Um but the thing that stands out most is just that assuredly that's not part of the the review that they're being asked to do.

Okay.

That's a good observation.

Thank you.

It feels similar to I've lost track already, but that um the board member that wasn't being listened to, it's very individual in nature, and that the one board, one voice, it's like treating people in a different manner because you're on a board.

And and I don't know if that really applies, but there's something there that feels similar, is that we need to be very consistent and broad in your administration of this stuff.

Yeah, yeah.

No, it's a very important principle that you treat all people equitably under the regulations that apply to that particular kind of application.

Um, it's one of the one of the challenges that comes in, certainly even at the staff level as well as on our way up the decision making.

Um that the decision is to be evaluated is does it conform to the code?

Not is it the way I would like to do it, or would it be the way that I would do it if it was my property?

Um it's the question of this is what it says, they did it or they didn't do it, um, and being able to kind of step back, take that one that that step away from personal interest.

Um in this case, uh, elements that they included were financial interest.

In this case, financial interest doesn't have to be tangible, like you mentioned, it's not transactional in the earlier one.

But in this case, um their employment, uh, their acting in a way that can skew where the money goes to some kinds of firms versus other kinds of organizations, uh, which is a benefit in job security and community relationships.

So that kind of it's a it's less direct than somebody gave me 50 bucks to approve the project, but um, it is still something to watch out.

Um so we have to sometimes take off our daily employment hat and put on our city of Bozeman official hat in in looking at these things.

The other piece is the ethics handbook that supports the ethics code says that officials must discharge their duties impartially and fairly not apply standards not expressly given by law.

So that's similar to what was mentioned.

Chris, can I say one thing on this one?

Because it's something that jumped out at me when I've read it.

This is all I'm gonna say.

Often opposing discourse where they didn't agree with me.

But I can definitively say I've never been frustrated with the level of conversation or with people opposing me.

It's just they had different viewpoints, and we landed at a center point for the community, and the community is stronger because of it.

So I guess when I see a word like frustrated, back to your point, then it gets to that like this is about me and this is individual.

And this board and what we do is not about being an individual, it's about being part of a board, speaking on behalf of a board and do the right thing for a city.

So that's all I'm gonna say, but I saw the frustration.

I was like, no, that's the that's the trigger word because it it suddenly takes something that should be um less about you and makes it about you.

And that's not the case here.

So that's all.

Yeah, no, that that's a good one.

Um the question of why I'm being motivated to do something is an important one to ask ourselves uh for a lot of reasons, including this one.

Yeah.

Anything else on this folks might want to share.

Okay.

So I would just add that it uh it may be uh annoying, but not unethical to editorialize a bit.

I think it's a privilege of being on the board.

Board member could say, I wish this developer had taken advantage of all the available incentives.

However, that will not affect my judgment.

Yes, I think that is that can be very appropriate to say there are other alternatives.

This is the one we have.

That's gonna be the basis of my decision.

So the transportation board is working to coordinate an expansion to the downtown parking garage.

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.

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 of 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 did.

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

What are the ethical considerations?

I mean, they I'll just start off.

I think again um they have the responsibility to disclose the relationship at the beginning of the meeting at publicly, exactly.

Thank you.

Yeah, and it's um even if there is no conflict and they're not even thinking about it, it's again perception and optics, um, and it's better to come out and just expose, say, hey, I'm an architect and this is my daughter, and um and go from there.

And similar to those those financial forms, the fact that the member emailed the board chair, they still need to, as you say, put it on the record, make sure it's plain.

Um if they didn't, hopefully the board chair would say, I had this conversation, and and we would bring it up that way.

But don't put Ben in that position.

So just disclose first.

I guess to argue the other side, like at some point a like a connection becomes so so tenuous that um like it may not be worth disclosing.

You may be wasting the time of your fellow board members and everyone participating in the process.

I say, well, like I have uh a cousin twice removed who works for an architecture firm that is subcontracted to a firm that may be involved in future construction.

Like this this seems like I I look at this, I'm like, man, that's a that's a very tenuous connection, you know.

Like architecture firms have lots of projects, like the daughter be involved in any way, shape, or form.

And construction firms hire many subcontractors.

Personally, I don't think that any disclosure, I I the connection seems so tenuous that there's no.

I don't think that a disclosure would be warranted.

Yeah, I can I I agree there's a gray area, but where is that threshold?

And I think that's where the challenge is, because that's up to perception as well, where somebody can say you're too close, or somebody can say you're too far.

And that's like, yeah.

So I I appreciate the push, I do.

I'm like, yeah.

Well, and I'll I'll note that uh when this board voted uh to recommend the city commission to approve the uh the draft UDC, um, there was not like we didn't go around the dias and disclose who's a property owner and Bozeman.

Like we all, all the property owners have like some sort of financial interest in the development code.

Um but those disclosures were not made.

Yeah, and there's a little bit of a distinction, as you mentioned between the quasi judicial and the legislative.

And I think that's where at the legislative level, when you're talking about something that's generally applicable, everybody will go through a site plan this way, kind of thing.

You're right.

The fact that you happen to be a property owner is probably not material to that uh kind of situation.

So there are some of those opportunities, and um that's also why there's opportunities to give a call city attorney and say, look, I don't think this is worth bothering with, and they can say, yep, sure enough, you're clear, and then you're good.

Um but you don't have to carry the burden yourself.

I think I appreciate some of what um what Mark was saying.

Of you know, we're sort of in this era uh of politics where sometimes the it's not always a good faith conversation, right?

And so there's times where to be really to be safe and say, okay, there's a there's a potential perception of a conflict of interest, so I'm gonna disclose.

But actually, that was you know by doing so made it seem worse than it was.

Um created the image, right?

If everybody goes around and is constantly disclosing, like, well, my best buddy works at this place, and you know, he's gonna take me on a vacation sometime in the next couple years, you know, he's the best man at my wedding, and he also you know has a financial interest in this, that there's sort of this odd way in which we actually churn up.

It's it's hard to practice that discernment of when is when is it building trust and when is it actually injecting an uncertainty into something that didn't need to be there?

Yeah.

That's why there's lots of gray that they write into these things is to get us to think about some of the edge cases.

But in this case, um when we look at it, um MCA specifically defines nepotism, uh having an interest in contracts if they are directly involved, defined as a person who directly monitors, extends, amends audits, or is responsible for procurement of the contract, of which the member in this case certainly is.

Whether their daughter is a subcontractor is irrelevant, as she may stand directly stand to benefit from this contract if approved.

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

If the board member knows their daughter will not work on that project, they should still disclose informate that information prior to the vote to avoid any misperceptions of favoritism later down the road.

So again, in this case, airing towards the disclosure side of that, but you're right.

There can be we're we're still a comparatively small town, and um sitting in some trainings over the years where you know we're going through these kinds of exercises, and it's somebody from a town of 2,000 people where there's one paving contractor in the whole county, right?

It's gonna be brother Bob who gets the contract.

There's not a question here, but what they do that have to do then is they just have one person step aside, somebody else does the work, and Brother Bob gets a contract, and the road gets paved and the work happens.

So it does seem um quite a process on occasion, but that's you know where we try.

Does the MCA define you know I think that's kind of part of Chris's question of where you know where how many steps removed?

You know, is it you know, half sister, half sister's daughter, you know, second cousin?

I I would need to go look at that.

I know that there are places where they have in state law defined relationship for a variety of purposes.

Um for years there's been, for example, a provision under subdivision law where if you're this kind of a relative, then they could break off a piece of land for you, but not if you're the next cousin over.

Um so some of that stuff does get written into the law, and I don't have that section enough to memory to tell you exactly what it says.

But you're welcome to look it up.

Thanks.

Thanks.

And so that for the purposes of this definition, there's the relationship, but you're kind of best man at your wedding would technically be outside of that scope, though.

I I would certainly think so.

Regardless, yeah.

Nepotism is generally specifically related to familial relationship, is my understanding.

Um there can be other kinds of relationships that you also have to be careful with, but but did you describe the the sort of contr the ability to enter into an agreement, the contractual power.

I mean, if the daughter is like a first year drafter in an architecture firm and has no direct financial interest or the ability to sway something, that feels much less connected.

Um although the the relationship's there, but the conflict of interest is not.

Yeah.

Uh shades of gray, right?

So if it's a partner in the firm or the senior, the owner, that is different.

Um in this case, there's also the situation of we didn't get the contract, we're letting you off.

Um it can reach to that standpoint.

It's hard to assure that it will one direction or the other.

Certainly the closer you get to the control of the purse strings, the easier it is to make the argument that there's a direct connection.

Good conversation, thank you.

So that's the end of our summaries.

Um, like it says on the slide, there's a bunch of gray in all of this stuff, and that's okay.

Um very rarely do we live in a world that's all black and white.

Um so uh we hope that this is something that you'll continue to think about, not worry about, but just be aware of and consider.

Um if you bump into questions, um uh absolutely feel free to reach out.

Um there's uh variety of different things, obviously the code itself directly, and then if you're still feeling like you're stuck, city attorney is always happy to answer a phone call and um be able to help walk you through it.

And he's he's very helpful and and uh good person to work with.

So it seems one one takeaway from this is if in doubt, email the city attorney, not your board chair.

Yes, yeah, right.

You might not get a good answer from me.

Yeah.

Yes, yes.

And you know, we from a staff standpoint, we certainly want to support the board as well.

And so partly the way we do that is we try to um you know make the staff reports and other information that we provide to you clearly identify what the criteria are for decision making to provide you a clear path so that you can see this is where we're going, not over here.

Um there's a uh time and a place, of course, for policy discussions, uh, usually not in the middle of an individual application.

Um so if we need to take a vote, close the door on that one, and then have a conversation, we can certainly do that.

Um so please don't feel like because there might be an application that nothing can ever be raised.

That's not the intention here.

Um just anyway.

Okay.

So that's our official ethics training.

And I'm sorry you're not gonna get a certificate.

But you have a worldwide broadcast recording of you doing this.

That's right.

Okay, that's um our first FYI item.

Second is upcoming items for the February 23rd, 2026 community development board meeting.

Yes.

Um, so number one, it's the 23rd, not the prior week because of the holiday, so that's the first element.

And the second is uh we're gonna be doing some training, as I mentioned.

There's new responsibilities for the board relating to appeals.

So we'll be going over what does that mean, what's the scope, how are uh what how does that come to you, all those kinds of things.

And then uh we'll also be doing some training on zone map amendments.

That's a significant element of the responsibilities of this board, and we have three new members, so figured we'd leverage that meeting and get some get some knowledge shared.

And we also have uh some new processing and uh criteria relating to that uh as a result of uh state law change as well.

So new stuff all around.

Okay.

Any other FYIs?

And then you can tune in to the next night to the commission meeting where we'll be seeing an appeal the very next night.

See how it got uh see how it's done something like that.

So you nothing further.

We're adjourned.

Thank you, sir.

Five minutes ahead of schedule.