Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Bozeman Study Commission Meeting - February 18, 2026

City Commission — Wednesday, February 18, 2026

BodyBozeman, Montana

SessionCity Commission

DateWednesday, February 18, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 2:00:14

Transcript — VerbatimClick a line to jump · ⧉ to share it

1:46

At this point, I don't know if you have my controller.

2:20

Ready?

2:23

I'll call to order the Bozeman Study Commission meeting of February eighteenth, twenty twenty six at four PM.

2:32

If you're able, please rise for the pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence.

2:37

You may be seated for the moment of silence, whatever you would like.

2:41

Um, and um then we'll start with the rest of the agenda.

2:48

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States in America.

2:56

One nation on your God in individual level with liberty and justice for all really.

5:05

And then finally at the end, hopefully we will have time for just public comment on anything that's going on in the meeting or anything else that people have thought of that they want to say.

5:26

And if you can't wait till then because you've got something else to do, um speak now and uh uh but don't speak twice on the same item.

5:37

Um three minutes is allotted.

5:39

Please state your name and address.

5:42

Um, and um we'll open it up to public comment at this time.

5:46

Is there any public comment at this time?

5:56

Hey, um good afternoon, commission.

5:59

My name is James Dilts.

6:00

I am resident and property owner at 2204 Buckreak Avenue here in Bozeman.

6:06

So in the past year alone, the city commission has been making some controversial decisions in ways that seem to me to try to minimize the input of the general public.

6:16

For example, a decision that was would have been opposed by college students, but supported by the snowbird population here was made during the summer.

6:26

Um there's also that meeting that occurred the week after Thanksgiving, which was during normal work hours, was obscenely long, contained multiple issues, which should have been their own meeting, and was also conducted in the lame duck session after the voters had elected commissioners with some differing views.

6:45

So right now there's very little in the city commission to prevent somewhat a controversial candidate to be appointed who can then use these kind of strategies to get their agenda passed.

6:57

Now I just want to be clear that I'm not accusing anybody of doing anything unethical.

7:01

Um we're dealing with politicians here and they are going to play politics.

7:05

That's just the way it is.

7:07

However, I'm saying that I'd like for you to consider that fact when you're deciding what changes to be made to our city or city charter and ways to try to um align the incentives of the commission members of the politicians to be with the good of the general public.

7:26

So most specifically for this meeting, I'd like to express my desire to um and the filling of vacancies with based on appointments, but instead look into trying to get make it filled using a special election or having that's not possible, having the um voters be involved in more than just public comment at a couple meetings.

7:48

So even if the turnout is low or it is expensive, that would be worth it because you're still going to be forcing the um candidates to be in front of the general public, which will result in a very different kind of candidate.

8:02

So thank you for your time.

8:04

Thank you.

8:06

Is there any other public comment presently?

8:11

Anyone in the hall?

8:12

I always ask that question.

8:13

There's never anybody in the hall, but anybody waiting for public comment in the building?

8:21

Seeing none.

8:22

Uh Caleb, is there anyone online?

8:25

Uh, not at this time.

8:26

Okay.

8:27

Let's move the agenda forward then to the consent agenda.

8:35

Mike.

8:36

I just want to uh clarification.

8:39

There are claims to approve on here.

8:42

Um so in the item itself, there are four claims uh totaling seven thousand six hundred and twenty dollars and sixty-nine cents.

8:50

Uh apologize missing that um language change from the previous meeting.

8:56

Okay.

8:59

Uh since this is a consent agenda and we're gonna vote, is there any public comment on the consent agenda?

9:05

We don't get to discuss it.

9:08

Is any uh and I should ask this does anybody want to pull any of the items on the consent agenda.

9:16

Carson, I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented.

9:24

I'll second it.

9:25

It's been moved and seconded.

9:27

All those in favor of the items on the consent agenda as listed, so indicate by saying aye.

9:34

Aye.

9:35

Aye.

9:35

Aye.

9:36

Motion carries unanimously.

9:38

Thank you.

9:39

Next up is correspondence or study commission update.

9:45

Um the first thing we're gonna talk about is a change in the schedule.

9:51

Uh I I know we've been talking about it for several um weeks now.

10:01

And uh we've been slow to change it, but um I think Becky and Barb worked through this change.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Charter Revision█████████████████████████████████████████████54%

Public Engagement███████████████████████28%

Procedural████████████14%

Election Procedures███3%

Government Ethics█1%

Summary of Proceedings

Bozeman Study Commission Meeting - February 18, 2026

The Bozeman Study Commission met on February 18, 2026 at 4:00 PM to discuss the charter revision schedule, ballot education strategy, and methods for filling vacancies on the city commission or mayor's office. The meeting included public comment, approval of the consent agenda, adoption of a revised timeline, a decision to issue an RFP for a ballot education firm, and a vote to adopt a charter amendment on vacancy appointments. The meeting adjourned at approximately 5:57 PM.

Consent Calendar

The consent agenda was approved unanimously. It included four claims totaling $7,620.69.

Public Comments & Testimony

James Dilts (2204 Buckreak Avenue, Bozeman) expressed concern that recent city commission decisions minimized public input (e.g., meetings scheduled during holidays and summer). He urged the Study Commission to consider requiring special elections rather than appointments to fill vacancies, stating that even low-turnout or expensive elections would force candidates to appear before the public.
Roger Blank (Bozeman resident) advocated for maximizing democratization of the vacancy-filling process and requested that the commission seek an opinion from the Montana Attorney General on the legality of special elections for vacancies. He argued this would give the public the best possible process.
Natsuki Nakamura (Bozeman resident) asked for clarity on whether a vacancy could be placed on the next already-scheduled election (e.g., June primary or school board election) rather than a standalone special election. She also referenced the recent plastics initiative and public safety mill levy as examples of special elections.
Jason Delmu (Peach Street, Bozeman) supported the appointment process, stating that elected commissioners are capable of deep analysis and that appointees often have relevant experience. He argued appointments are superior to truncated elections based on campaign slogans and spending.

Discussion Items

Schedule Change for Final Charter and Ballot Language

Becky presented a revised schedule to avoid the July 4th holiday week and to allow more time for public review. Key proposed dates:
- May 7: Review draft charter language and submit for legal review.
- May 13: Edits to charter language.
- May 28: Second public hearing.
- June 4: Review public and legal comments.
- June 17: Decide on any sub-options for the ballot.
- July 15: Review draft report and charter language.
- July 30: Approve ballot language (must be submitted to county by August 10).
- End of August: Final approval of charter and report.
Discussion ensued about whether the full charter must be finalized at the time of ballot language approval. City Attorney Greg Sullivan noted that the required final report date is later than the ballot language deadline, but he urged the commission to be “pretty considerate” about having the charter completed when voting on ballot language.
The schedule change was approved 4-0.

Ballot Education Firm

Becky reported that the contract with Working Ventures (communication strategist) is nearly complete ($20,000 remaining in that contract). She recommended hiring a specialized ballot education firm to handle voter education without advocacy, as is standard city practice for ballot measures (e.g., public safety center, parks and trails district). Estimated cost ~$50,000.
Proposed timeline: issue RFP in March, due April 1, start June 1. Mike and Carson would develop the RFP and bring a recommendation to the April 15 meeting.
Deanna wanted the full commission to evaluate candidates, citing concerns about the prior ward initiative education possibly crossing into advocacy. Others preferred a subcommittee approach due to time constraints.
Motion to issue RFP with Mike and Carson developing it and bringing a recommendation to April 15 passed 4-0.

Filling Vacancies: Appointment vs. Special Election

City Attorney Greg Sullivan distinguished between two statutes: one allowing charters to define vacancy-filling methods (MCA §7-3-? ) and another prohibiting charters from altering election procedures (MCA §7-3-? ).
Gallatin County Elections Administrator Eric Semarat and Election Manager Jasmine Hall explained that Montana law (MCA 13-14-405) only permits special elections for funding measures (bonds, levies), not for filling vacancies. They also detailed logistical constraints: federal election cycles, list maintenance, and compressed timelines make standalone or piggy-backed special elections extremely difficult.
The commission considered two options:
- Option A: Appointment by existing commissioners within 60 days, with a required public forum, until the next scheduled general municipal election.
- Option B: Special election, which appeared legally unavailable.
After discussion, Barb moved to adopt Option A. Becky seconded with an amendment to change “general municipal election” to “next scheduled election pursuant to state law” to future-proof the charter. The motion passed 3-1 (Deanna opposed).
Deanna then moved to request an Attorney General opinion on special election options. The motion failed for lack of a second.

Key Outcomes

Consent agenda approved unanimously (including $7,620.69 in claims).
Revised meeting schedule adopted 4-0.
RFP for ballot education specialist authorized 4-0; Mike and Carson to bring recommendation by April 15.
Charter amendment on vacancy appointments adopted 3-1 (Deanna opposed) with language specifying a 60-day appointment process, public forum, and the appointment lasting until the next scheduled election pursuant to state law.
Motion to request Attorney General opinion failed (no second).
The commission agreed to focus the next meeting (March 5, 2026) on the mayor and city manager structure.

Meeting Transcript

At this point, I don't know if you have my controller. Ready? I'll call to order the Bozeman Study Commission meeting of February eighteenth, twenty twenty six at four PM. If you're able, please rise for the pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence. You may be seated for the moment of silence, whatever you would like. Um, and um then we'll start with the rest of the agenda. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States in America. One nation on your God in individual level with liberty and justice for all really. And then finally at the end, hopefully we will have time for just public comment on anything that's going on in the meeting or anything else that people have thought of that they want to say. And if you can't wait till then because you've got something else to do, um speak now and uh uh but don't speak twice on the same item. Um three minutes is allotted. Please state your name and address. Um, and um we'll open it up to public comment at this time. Is there any public comment at this time? Hey, um good afternoon, commission. My name is James Dilts. I am resident and property owner at 2204 Buckreak Avenue here in Bozeman. So in the past year alone, the city commission has been making some controversial decisions in ways that seem to me to try to minimize the input of the general public. For example, a decision that was would have been opposed by college students, but supported by the snowbird population here was made during the summer. Um there's also that meeting that occurred the week after Thanksgiving, which was during normal work hours, was obscenely long, contained multiple issues, which should have been their own meeting, and was also conducted in the lame duck session after the voters had elected commissioners with some differing views. So right now there's very little in the city commission to prevent somewhat a controversial candidate to be appointed who can then use these kind of strategies to get their agenda passed. Now I just want to be clear that I'm not accusing anybody of doing anything unethical. Um we're dealing with politicians here and they are going to play politics. That's just the way it is. However, I'm saying that I'd like for you to consider that fact when you're deciding what changes to be made to our city or city charter and ways to try to um align the incentives of the commission members of the politicians to be with the good of the general public. So most specifically for this meeting, I'd like to express my desire to um and the filling of vacancies with based on appointments, but instead look into trying to get make it filled using a special election or having that's not possible, having the um voters be involved in more than just public comment at a couple meetings. So even if the turnout is low or it is expensive, that would be worth it because you're still going to be forcing the um candidates to be in front of the general public, which will result in a very different kind of candidate. So thank you for your time. Thank you. Is there any other public comment presently? Anyone in the hall? I always ask that question. There's never anybody in the hall, but anybody waiting for public comment in the building? Seeing none. Uh Caleb, is there anyone online? Uh, not at this time. Okay. Let's move the agenda forward then to the consent agenda. Mike. I just want to uh clarification. There are claims to approve on here. Um so in the item itself, there are four claims uh totaling seven thousand six hundred and twenty dollars and sixty-nine cents. Uh apologize missing that um language change from the previous meeting. Okay. Uh since this is a consent agenda and we're gonna vote, is there any public comment on the consent agenda? We don't get to discuss it. Is any uh and I should ask this does anybody want to pull any of the items on the consent agenda. Carson, I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. I'll second it. It's been moved and seconded.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com