Bozeman City Study Commission Meeting Summary - March 25, 2026\n\nThe Bozeman City Study Commission convened on March 25, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. The meeting featured a learning session on electoral systems (wards, at-large, and hybrid), the review and approval of edits to Article 3 of the draft charter regarding the city manager, an update on the project timeline to meet ballot deadlines, and significant public comment on representation and campaign finance. The commission closed by outlining data needs and scheduling future sessions.\n\n### Consent Calendar\n- The commission unanimously approved the minutes of the previous meeting (4-0). Commissioner Becky Franks participated by phone and voted yes.\n\n### Public Comments & Testimony\n- Opening Comment:\n - Dan Caveney (1496 Boylan Road) thanked the commission for their work but strongly criticized the current city government for being insufficiently responsive to citizens. He argued that low public turnout does not indicate satisfaction and pushed for a structure that increases accountability. Chair Taylor acknowledged the point, stating that he did not mean to imply that lack of attendance means everything is fine.\n- Comments on Wards and Representation:\n - Mary Bateson (Bozeman resident) strongly opposed wards, calling them "a solution in search of a problem." She supported at-large elections, arguing that Bozeman lacks geographically concentrated minority or low-income populations that would benefit from wards. She stated that complicating the voting system could further lower already low voter turnout (31% in the November election) and expressed concern about the cost and complexity of maintaining ward boundaries.\n - Terry Quatrero (outside city limits but former advisory board member) favored wards. He believed they would lower campaign costs and increase neighborhood involvement. He suggested creating a candidate handbook and setting caps on campaign spending to level the playing field.\n - Natsuki Nakamura (Bozeman resident, Economic Vitality Board member speaking as an individual) opposed wards, echoing Bateson's points about demographics. She argued that Bozeman is 87% white and that minority and low-income populations are not geographically concentrated, so wards would not achieve the goal of diversifying the commission. She also noted that unopposed ward races could be less democratic.\n- Closing Comments:\n - Daniel Cardi cautioned the commission to strictly adhere to legal definitions of words like "must" and "may" in their drafting, referencing the Montana Bill Drafting Manual.\n - Mary Bateson expressed a preference for the method of mayor selection prior to the 2006 charter change, where the top vote-getting commissioner became mayor.\n - Gracie Ann Caldwell (Montana State University student) expressed interest in running for office and proposed exploring a public campaign financing voucher program, similar to models in other states.\n\n### Discussion Items\n- Timeline and Ballot Education Process: Barb reviewed an updated calendar to ensure the final charter and report are ready for the August 10 deadline to submit ballot language to the county election department. Key milestones include: May 7 (draft charter to Greg for legal review), May 13 (finalize charter language), end of May (draft report released for public comment), and June 17 (public hearing on the draft tentative report). The RFP for ballot education was released and will close April 3. A brief procedural discussion occurred regarding non-voting member Mike's role in pre-selecting respondents. It was decided that Carson and Mike would review submissions and bring a recommendation to the April 15 meeting.\n- Learning Session on Wards vs. At-Large vs. Hybrid:\n - Dan Clark presented an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of various election systems, referencing academic papers and the 1976 study commission. The commission engaged in an extended Q&A.\n - Key Positions and Inquiries:\n - Deanna proposed a 7-ward system with commissioners elected per district and the mayor and deputy mayor selected internally by the seated commission.\n - Barb proposed examining a hybrid model with a majority of commissioners elected by ward plus an at-large commissioner and mayor.\n - Becky questioned whether investing in strong neighborhood councils could achieve better representation than creating wards, contrasting them with the current adversarial relationship between the city and neighborhood councils.\n - Other topics included preventing gerrymandering, accommodating renters and families who move, handling rapid growth and rebalancing wards (triggers), and how the 2023 UDC legislation might shift the purpose of neighborhood input to the front end of code creation rather than individual project review.\n - Data Requests: The commission requested Dan Clark provide further research on voter turnout in different systems, language to prevent gerrymandering, the impact of selecting a mayor from the commission versus electing one at-large, and socioeconomic representation data for comparable cities.\n- Review of Article 3 (City Manager) Edits:\n - The commission reviewed the addition of language requiring an "annual comprehensive performance review" for the city manager by the city commission. A brief discussion ensued over clarifying the supervisory role in the sentence (noting it was already stated in Section 3.04) and the use of the word "must" versus "should" in a recommendation. The edits were accepted.\n\n### Key Outcomes\n- Consent Agenda: Approved (4-0).\n- Article 3 Edits: The commission approved the inclusion of language requiring an annual comprehensive performance review by the commission and a recommendation that norms of communication be discussed during the city manager hiring process.\n- Project Timeline: The calendar update was accepted, setting a course for the August 10 ballot language deadline with the public hearing scheduled for June 17.\n- Future Agenda:\n - April 2: Learning session on neighborhood councils with a proposed panel.\n - April 15: Potential learning session with Gallatin County Commissioner Zach Brown on compensation and vacancies, alongside discussion of the ballot education RFP recommendation.\n- Data Gathering: The commission tasked Dan Clark with providing further research on voter turnout in different systems, language to prevent gerrymandering, the impact of selecting a mayor from versus by the commission, and data on socioeconomic representation in comparable cities.\n\nThe meeting was adjourned at 5:56 p.m.