Two minute warning.

It's shocking.

Hey, Becky.

Hey.

We can hear you loud and clear.

Great.

Love that.

Oh, see, I'm not the one in the audience.

Yeah.

I'll be out there more with my sticks.

Because they end up in the side mark.

Yes.

I will call to order the meeting in the boatsman's study commission on April fifteenth, twenty twenty-six.

Um is pledge of allegiance.

So if you're able, please rise for the pledge of allegiance.

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

And to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation.

Thank you.

Next item on the agenda is changes to the agenda.

Are there any changes to the agenda?

Seeing none.

Next item is public comment on anything within the jurisdiction of the study commission.

Today we are mostly studying.

So we will have public comment at this time and public comment on the end.

And probably take public comment on anything that we're going to vote on in the other than the consent agenda.

So do we have to take public comment on the consent agenda?

And we'll take public comment on the consent agenda as well.

That one would that's what I meant by something we take a vote on.

Okay.

Any public comment at this time.

Can I ask a question?

Sorry, I'm waiting.

Are you guys do you think the fit of the neighborhood?

We're still doing public comment, so step up to the mic, tell us your name and address, and let us know what your thoughts are.

And if it's a question, we'll try and answer it.

Yeah, sorry.

Um, I might be out of turn, but I also maybe can't stay here two hours.

Uh Mark Campanelli, I'm a Booger Park neighbor.

Um I didn't get a chance really to talk with Inc.

because of the way the timing went uh about a response to Clark.

Uh the I'm forgetting his first name, sorry.

Yeah, uh to his um recommendations.

Um so I'm gonna speak for myself here.

Um I don't know if Becky's online, but she okay, great.

I am hi Becky, sorry I see you there now.

So sorry, it's a little rush, I'm super busy lately.

Um a bunch of NCOD stuff today is just I'm oversubscribed.

Um there's uh I read back through what our recommended language was, and again I speak for myself, not for Inc.

Not for my neighborhood, even just for myself.

Um I it says we are gonna have this advisory role, and the this we have this issue where we think the city doesn't really listen to us, and the two-way communication piece that Mr.

Clark mentioned, uh, I thought that was actually the piece that popped out the most to me.

Um so I don't really think as is Inc is in in an advisory role.

Um I also think that they play a role of advice advocacy for their neighbors and neighborhoods.

And I don't see any language about um adverse advocacy being okay or how and then this isn't activism.

Activism is too far, I think most people agree with that.

But it's really where like a neighbor, neighborhood, a group of neighborhoods just doesn't feel listened to.

And I don't think you can solve that problem with you know, by just choosing the right language.

I think choosing the right language will help.

Um, but it's not gonna solve the communication problem.

Um and I just wanted to point out, and again, I'm sorry, I'm a bit rushed right now.

Uh I just wanted to point out that I think there is in effect an advocacy role right now for the neighborhood councils.

I think it's a good thing.

Um, and I think it could play more of an advisory role if there was actually better two-way communication.

So again, I hope that's clear.

Um, thank you for listening.

And again, sorry, I'm in a rush.

Mark, thank you very much for your comments.

We appreciate them.

And we will take them into account when we have the conversation that um settles what we're gonna do regarding neighborhood associations in the charter.

Is there any other public comment?

Daniel Cardi Bozman residents.

Between now and the time we get to talking about neighborhood associations, I would ask that someone look up definitions of advisory versus advocacy versus activism.

Because I'm in complete agreement with Mark that ANC does both at advisory role and in the way their pie laws read advocacy is certainly a part of what they do.

But activism, as Mark indicated, is a little bit more like a no-Kings protest.

So I would I would advocate for including both advisory and the word advocacy in uh in the charter uh for neighborhood associations.

So thanks.

Dan, thank you very much for your comments.

Uh uh we appreciate them, and we will also take them into account when we have this next discussion about neighborhood associations.

Is there any other public comment at this time?

It doesn't look like we have any right now.

And then just for the record, we've been experimenting with different ways to respond to public comment, trying to figure out what the right um methodology is for doing the best we can for people to know that they've been heard and and understood um, but without um trying to um what's the word the the running the risk of trivializing by paraphrasing?

So um we're just experimenting around.

Thank you very much for uh indulging that.

Any other public comment?

Seeing none, next thing on the on the agenda is the consent agenda.

Does anyone want to uh pull any item from the agenda for discussion?

Seeing none and Becky, I'm looking at you and you're not looking as if you wanted to.

Um let's take public comment on any item on the consent agenda if there is any.

Any public comment on the consent agenda.

Seeing none, do I have a motion?

I so move the adoption of our consent agenda.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

All those in favor, so indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries four to zero.

Thank you very much.

Okay, next item on the agenda is to author the that included the authorizing the uh absence of um commissioner um study commissioner Barb Sistero.

I was thinking that would be a separate motion.

No.

Um did we all understand that to be included in the consent agenda?

Yes.

Good.

Next item up is correspondence or study commission update.

Under this item it says review calendar and goals through June 17th and discuss promotion of final public hearing on tentative report May 28th.

Do we have a I'd like to um help fill that in, Carson?

I'm sorry, Becky.

Mike, can you put can you hear me?

We can hear you, but it's not as clean as we would like it.

Okay.

Just go ahead and when we don't if we don't understand you, we'll say something.

Just go ahead.

We're good.

Perfect.

Perfect.

Okay.

Um in our last meeting, we look at a revised uh timeline because uh we have understood by reading the MCA that the draft document for the um uh the report in the charter language uh has been moved up a little bit.

Mike, that's not the document we're looking at.

It it was um submitted um at our last meeting, and then it was also I sent it out to the entire commission again to make sure that we all had it on April 10th.

Um so it's uh the study commission plan of action.

Long story short is a um we need to have uh Barb and I are working hard as directed to write uh draft charter language and then the report as well.

Um that will be uh done by May 13, and then we want to be able to release that for public comment on May 28th.

So you can see how our timeline is shortened up to be able to get all that out.

Instead of holding the public hearing on May 28, we would hold it on June 17th.

And we want to start promoting that date uh early and often to make sure that the public knows uh the time and location, and that's when they'll be able to give us comment on the tentative uh report that will include the potential new charter language that we're writing.

So uh what's important from what I just said, and then we need to talk about one of the dates.

First of all, the final approval of the draft charter language will come on May 13th.

So you can um so we have a few meetings left between now and then.

One of the meetings that we have, first of all, any questions about that.

Yeah, that's so that's what I'm talking about.

Thank you.

Any questions about this timeline?

So the the problem I have unfortunately with this timeline is I'm not gonna be anywhere where it's likely that I'll be able to attend even um by um by Zoom on May 7th.

And um we're gonna talk about that in just a second, Carson.

I wanted to stop for a second and discuss the other dates just in case there's any questions.

And then yeah, there's a few of us who can't be there on May 7th.

So that's the next question is we need to find a different date.

But I don't think we can um delete it.

I can I don't think we can just skip it because we need it.

Um questions, comments on the I just want to make sure we're all good.

Otherwise, can we discuss um possible different dates?

The week of May 7th, or on the week before our prior meeting is April 24th on a Friday, and then April 30th, we meet again.

Do we want to just meet longer on like another day that week of April 30, or do we want to um meet later like around the 7th?

Carson, when do you get back?

And Jan, I believe you're gone too.

Is that correct?

Around May 7th.

So between April 30 and May 13, we need another meeting, basically.

That's uh long and short of all that.

Um I better look at my calendar.

Um between April 30 and May 13, we need another meeting.

Yeah, I I actually I can't.

Um I'll be gone for continue that.

I think it's May 2nd to May 12th.

So you could on the first.

So we I could meet on the first, but that's we're meeting April 30th anyway, are we not?

Yes.

I know, but I just um so on May 7th, we were gonna be able to review the draft charter language.

Um to be able to and be able to have comment and discuss the minority report before giving final approval on May 13th.

Right.

So we could skip, but this is the first time we'll be able to really just sit and look at the draft charter because on the 30th, we're still doing final votes on Warts District's advisory board structure and neighborhood councils.

When do you all think you will have the information ready for the May 7th meeting?

It depends how many decisions we make on the 24th and the 30th of April.

Right.

If we are done giving guidance to me and Barb for Ward's districts, advisory boards and neighborhood councils on the 30th, then we can I mean it it's gotta be like we can do it in a couple days.

We can power that out the next day.

But the the May 7th ideas I recall was to pick up loose ends.

Um and we had a list of those loose ends somewhere.

Um Mike, did you want to also to review the draft charter language?

Yeah.

This will be the first time you see the draft charter language.

Okay, and you want to I was just gonna also pop in on this too, Becky.

I thought Barb uh was not available on the 7th either.

out the next day but the the the May 7th idea as I recall was to pick up loose ends um and we had a list of those loose ends somewhere um Mike did you want to also to review the draft charter language yeah this will be the first time you see the draft charter language Jan you want to I was just gonna also pop in on this too Becky I thought Barb uh was not available on the 7th either I could have made that up that's right okay I didn't good and I will be traveling I can be online for both the seventh and the 13th but I won't be in person but I was wondering if we could uh move the agenda back one week so the May 7th agenda would be on the 13th to add the 20th instead so we have all the meetings that we are committed to in May but I'm also thinking given the challenges and opportunities of the discussions around neighborhood wards districts and something else I'm sorry and um boards and and committees um it may take a little bit longer there may need to be something else added if we don't get everything perfectly wrapped up on the 30th which you know I'm going to add um an opportunity to talk about the municipal court which would be on the 30th as well so just wondering if um if that would be a suggestion people would be open to here on the study commission so Jen are you saying your idea is you skip May 7th put May 7th to May 13th put May 13th to May 20th yes and then continue as planned perfect does that work for we could do that we do have an open we have an open meeting agenda uh on May 20 that works best for me I won't be here May 20 but I can't be here the 7th either excuse me Deanna what are your thoughts the seventh is a disaster I already have May 20th as a study commission meeting I don't know why we kind of say that's right yeah that's in our that's in our regular timing.

Oh okay but the we added May 13th uh those dates are fine all right so so let's agree on that then we're gonna skip may 7th put May 7th on May 13th add May 20th to the thing that's in front of us and still schedule for the the big public comment meeting uh for may 28th uh as planned for um public comment on the release of the draft tentative report does that work and then still hold the public hearing on the 17th of June yes and Mike what's the time for that is that still four to eight or whatever which day four to six June 17th that's gonna be a four to six meeting I want Becky sorry Carson would you mind if I spoke?

No I was wondering in terms of is this the time to have a little bit deeper dive on those particular um areas of our work or do we need to wait because I'd like to can have uh sorry the the two major public um opportunities the public hearing on the 28th well there's the 28th and the June 17th those two are I understand are there opportunities to really try to bring in as many people in those meetings and I'm wondering if we have a chance to at least have one of them begin at 5 30 or 6 p.m.

I'd like both of them to do that but I know that's not been possible.

Well Jan right now we've got we've moved the public hearing from May 28th to June 17 because we want the public to have enough time to review so you see on on May 28th approval of draft tentative report and release for public comment so that's when we're gonna release it all and then we we're gonna give the public till the 17th to um to review it and then come on the 17th to the public hearing.

Great thank you for that yeah I miss I misstated what the May 28th meeting was.

So my mistake we have one public hearing we obviously want public comment we want everybody's involvement between now and then but this is the formal public hearing required by a number of requirements do we not need a um final public meeting on the final report did did I somehow I thought there needed to be a big public meeting so the public hearing leads into the adoption of the final report which is August 6th the final report and then the final public hearing is called the vote so yeah the final adoption of the report the report contains any potential minority report any charter any additional information so that finalizes the entire body of the work product and that's that August 6th meeting and that's when the public is invited specially to please come and comment on this no that's the June 17 that's that's when the public comes to comment on the tentative report.

And that's that August 6th meeting.

And that's when the public is invited, especially to please come and comment on this.

No, that's the June 17.

That's that's when the public comes to comment on the tentative report.

Yeah, so the tentative report.

Yeah.

That's when we have the public hearing on that.

We incorporate or um take a consideration of public comment before finalizing the final report.

And then because that would be drafted in advance, there would still be a last opportunity for public comment, but the public hearing, which has a different meaning in state statute, would be the June 17 meeting.

Okay.

Okay.

And then also I'd like to draw everyone's attention to July 15.

July 15 is where we come back and say, okay, you know, um, we heard all this public comment on the 17th.

Um Barbara and I go back and we make some edits perhaps after all that conversation.

We bring the next draft after hearing all the public comment to the commission on July 15.

And then there's more time for public comment, right?

So it's gonna another draft, another draft.

That gets us all the way to the um the August 6th, where we have that final adoption of the of the whole report with the charter.

Okay.

So there's another spot in there for people to give comment.

And of course, um, I think that um Caleb, when we are advertising the June 17 through you and uh the the um ballot ballot election uh education our uh folks that we're gonna be hiring.

Um people can come to the meeting, they can send us a letter, they can have coffee with us.

So there's a lot of ways to get public comment.

Um you know the public hearing is one of those ways.

Okay, Jen?

I just uh was looking at the calendar, and that's the um June 17th is a Wednesday.

I don't know if and we know that that has to start and run between 4 and 6 p.m.

I'm wondering, is it possible to consider the 18th and to be able to start a little bit later as I've been asking for a year and a half, as you know, to have um even a 5, 5 30 start time, have some refreshments to really build it up like we did.

I think so well at that first public hearing that we did a year ago, April.

Is that anything we could possibly do, commissioners and Mike?

Either works for me.

I can check.

Mike, we do it the 18th or 19th.

Uh we can't on the 19th, but we can check on the 18th.

All right, let's agree that we'll check on the 18th.

Um we can check the 18th.

We definitely cannot on the 19th.

This the 19th city holiday.

And so can you check on the 18th then?

Yes, I can check.

I can't give you an answer right now.

All right, okay so the answer may be in the next meeting, but f for the public, we're we're trying to get it at a time when we can handle more public comment.

Um, we could be the 18th.

If not, we'll do it on the 17th.

And if the public comment takes longer than the two hours schedule, we'll figure out another way to continue that at the time.

So one step at a time.

Um we've now hopefully clarified the schedule between now and um the election uh on at which this will be with one exception, and that is will we meet on June 17th or June 18th?

Does that work for everybody?

All right, I don't think we need to vote on that.

A plus.

Nope.

Okay.

Next item on the agenda is select a firm for ballot education services.

Mike, do you want to lead with this or do you want me to?

Oh, you put the pressure on me, huh?

Sure.

Um, we had two responses to our RFP.

Um, Mike and I looked at them both, and because we had two responses, we felt like it would be totally appropriate for us to give that information to all of the study commissioners.

But what we what we thought was approach appropriate.

And we're happy to talk about that now, or happy to hear from others as to what they think at this point.

You all, the three of you tell me what you want to do.

I'd like to hear your summary of each of the two.

Yeah.

Some research myself, but I'd like to hear what you saw as the strengths and challenges of each.

Okay.

And Carson, if that could include Mike, I'd like to know if any of these firms, either of these firms you've worked with before or not, which is fine.

It would just it would be good to know if A you worked with them and had and what experience did you have.

So that would be helpful as well.

Yeah, so I can tell you I haven't worked with either of these firms before.

I've actually never heard of either of them before.

That's weird.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, I'll tell you what my thoughts were.

Um I thought that the I'm going to refer to them as the Portland and the Missoula firms.

Um maybe that's a little inappropriate.

So I'll go with KW.

Um I thought KW probably had the uh bigger staff and larger capability.

I thought they um definitely had uh a lot of experience.

Uh on the other hand, I I felt a little bit like their approach was um uh uh a little rigid, meaning didn't seem to um it felt like sort of a proposal that would be given to anyone.

And um I thought it was definitely on the expensive side.

Um and uh I thought the the other firm uh from Missoula had the capability and um had an understanding, particularly at this point, how much do we really need um by way of education and what's going to be appropriate because at this point we don't know how extensive the changes are going to be that we need um to educate people about uh so that they fully understand those changes and what what are going to be made.

For instance, if we end up with three different, if we end up with an amended um uh an amended charter and three sub-options, that seems to me to be uh a good bit more outreach that we would want to have than if we end up with zero or one sub-option.

And um the the Missoula firm gave us um sort of uh a layered approach.

If you do this, it'll cost this, if you do that, it'll cost that.

And um I felt like um therefore they're probably um the firm that uh we ought to talk to next about uh working through how we're gonna um what level that we want, and maybe we won't know that level until we get into June.

Um but that though that was my distinguishing factors in in determining it.

I I felt both firms looked incredibly uh competent and able and experienced.

Um that was my thought process.

Mike, do you want to?

Yeah, I was um I was really taken with the um tiered approach that Dane Geld presented uh as opposed to the it it the um KW1 felt more out of the box.

Um there would be some options in there that didn't feel necessary or appropriate for this.

Um one of the other key things that I wasn't convinced by the proposal that the K West firm has a good understanding on the Montana requirements for reporting to the Commission of Political Practices based on the current and recent work of Dane Geld, I have zero doubts in their ability to meet that requirement.

So that was a that was a really big factor for me.

Uh just knowing the amount of time our staff put into reporting.

Uh I that's a that's a big lift to understand.

And so just experientially, I know Dane Geld is in that realm, and KAW didn't address it at all.

And then the more modular approach of Dane Geld was my preferred uh option.

Okay, questions of us or comments from you.

Do you just want to go around the circle?

Sure.

Do we want to start the circle with you, Becky?

Sure.

Um I would agree.

I think the Daingeld proposal jumps in, knows what they're doing, clear understanding the KW proposal is like first.

We have to have a meeting and talk about what we need.

And um, it seems like the Dane Geld has some experience in Montana already, and with great comments from the folks at Gallatin County, which is really cool.

Um like couldn't stop breathing.

You clearly listened to us and did your homework impressive, helpful.

Uh you launched us from the get-go, and that's kind of what we need.

We need someone to get in there to be able to do that.

I also like how they use different avenues of um engagement in their proposal, uh, not only social, but also video and meetings and um and they're ready to just jump right in.

Um so they have a seem to have a clear understanding, a clear line of what we need to do, and I would I would say that that this is our group.

Great.

Deanna.

Actually, neither one of them struck me as um uh wonderful options, but of the two, I would say the Missoula firm uh probably is a better choice.

Excuse me.

Um could you read the last couple of words that you said?

I just said I wasn't I wasn't impressed by it either for as being you know uh uh a really dynamic choice, but of the two, um I I think the Missoula firm uh is a little more flexible.

Uh thank you.

I think we are three for three at this point.

Um I reached out to people I knew in both of the cities that do this kind of work.

Um especially the fact that the principal in the um uh Portland happened to be on the county commission and tried to find out more about her um role there, and it was not even relevant to Portland itself, but nothing wrong with with her or the organization.

I felt strongly that the Missoula would meet our needs, particularly following Becky's analysis, really ready to go, had multiple um approach to education, voter education, um, really strong uh Gallanton County, and we could even talk to them shortly in the next hour if we had any other questions with them, but I was impressed with that.

Um I'm aware of the other groups that they've worked with and the campaigns they've worked with.

Um so I'm the only thing I couldn't find was them on social media.

I couldn't find a website, I couldn't find some other things that I was surprised to to not locate, but that doesn't mean that they aren't doing everything right with their clients, and we've already heard that they have so um I think the question is is the the scope and level that we would want them to engage the uh voters with, as Carson said, how much will we have um intended for them to do?

Well, we haven't yet made that decision ourselves, and so their uh tiered approach on pricing and the level of engagement.

I'm wondering if we can manage to negotiate that with some level of change in that pricing and still have the contract, assuming we all agree.

So that's my opinion.

Thank you.

And my vote great.

Is there any public comment on this item?

All right.

Seeing none, do we want to uh vote at this point?

Carson, I'd like to make a motion to approve the um contracted services of uh Danagel, Danegeld.

I'm not sure how to say that.

Firm as presented in their RFP.

I would like to second it do we need to say anything more about the actual funding level that I just raised I think that would get into a down the road discussion.

So the way that they presented their proposal had a base amount and then the act of engagement at the tiered levels so I can reach out to them and see like let them know that's who our choice was and then depending on the decisions the carry forward and what the level of engagement that we're looking for I think it it kind of dictates in that pricing that way and then being mindful of the remaining budget and how that's applicable there.

I I'm sorry I second the motion but I forgot to raise one one important point for me is that their tier price is it okay to see this with the motion oh yeah we're in discussion thank you excuse me so the way that they looked at their tier pricing that I was wondering about I'll put it that way is that they were good looking at the numbers of last year's municipal elections but we were a part of um a much bigger election with the 2026 correct would that affect the voter numbers at all you mean this coming election will be this coming election is is a general election they were pricing it on the number of voter turnout in the 2025 municipal election which is people voting of course for the city commission so they based it on their initial numbers were based on number of registered voters within Bozeman so that and then they in a as I read it illustrating the pricing was if we were aiming to hit the number that voted in the 2025 election or if we were looking at hitting the total number of voters or the total number of voters at double the engagement.

So I I looked at those as illustrative of the efforts and not necessarily the set number that we're trying to get those strategies would change they were giving more of a general pricing on those tiers I think and that can all be something and Mike can I clarify that to Jan's point when Jan I think what you're saying is that's the 2025 municipal general election but those numbers are about the same because this vote would only go out to the Boswa registered voters right it would not go out to the county voters so the numbers would be still Bozeman city limit voters so the numbers about the same well if I could address that I'm hoping we will have a lot more people voting because it will be hopefully with the 2026 general election bringing many more people to the polls because we are one of many items that they would hopefully care about.

So I just didn't know how linked we were to the 25 numbers as compared to being in a general election for 2026 but I understand this is going to probably be negotiable based on a number of several factors that we've talked about already so I just wanted to point that out because I hope we're going to be engaging a lot more voters.

Yeah I would I would say both things are true the number of registered voters isn't going to be significantly higher than it was in 2025 and also we're likely to see a higher voter turnout in 2026 just historically federal elections have a higher turnout than municipal only so the the draft motion or the suggested motion authorized um Mike to begin contract negotiations for professional services with in this case the Dane Geld firm um and would we rather word it as that and then Mike can come back with um their proposal and maybe we'll have a meeting with them to discuss exactly what the level is going to be as we work our way through this.

So I don't know if you you would want to reform the the motion Becky and Jan if you would give permission for that reformation.

I would appreciate it.

So I'm gonna um I I can amend my motion to approve the engagement of Dane Geld firm for our ballot election education and ask that Mike Moss work with them to engage us to decide which level lowest active or transformative level that we are wanting them to do.

Is that all right with the second?

That work.

If it's all right with Mike, it'll be fine with me.

Thanks.

All right.

Is there any further discussion on the amended motion?

Seeing none, all those in favor, so indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Motion carries 40.

Thank you.

All right.

We have 18 minutes before the county people are gonna get here, and uh I thought we'd start with them right away.

There are about three things that we could do in the intervening time.

One, Deanna had asked that uh I always get the numbers wrong, is it 532 or 30?

5323.

5323 be produced for us to discuss it related to um advisory boards.

Um or um we could take up the the Becky question that we deferred from the last meeting, which was what is the problem we're trying to solve when we're talking about wards and districts.

Um three, we could talk about future education and discussion needs for April 24.

Uh or five, we could talk about discussion on neighborhood associations, kind of where we all are with that at this moment in time.

Um and we could talk about what we're gonna talk about right up until the moment that um the people arrived and we will have ended up talking about nothing.

So is there a is there a preference here.

I think that given the 17 minutes that we have, I'd like to ask our commission members about neighborhood association things, but uh but we can I can I can certainly do either of the other I I think the wards and districts, let's hear from the commissioners first in my mind.

So I would either say the advisory board, if there's anything further than the advisory board.

Maybe we stick with that and then if there's time go to the uh neighborhood association.

Other thoughts given that there was um a lot of public comment and also from the um uh uh advisory board um representatives about 5323.

If we we need we do need to discuss it and whether or not we want to um uh uh include the um that provision in our charter language in regard to the advisory boards.

So I mean if we don't talk about it now, we've got to talk about it.

We need to get it on the agenda.

Uh I I see as when we have the discussion about advisory boards, we're gonna talk about all of that.

Um and that in my mind is is part of it.

Um so don't do not worry.

Um that's that's definitely Carson?

Yes, Becky.

I I feel like in the writing of what we captured from everybody about the advisory boards and from the samples that Dan Clark had given us.

Uh Barb and I have you know really feel like we're doing pretty well on the advisory board.

So if there's anything further on advisory boards, we could actually kind of push that aside then and now just focus on neighborhoods and wards.

So um if if if you wanted to indulge this conversation now, because part of the thing is I don't understand how this policy or referendum has anything to do with the charter in terms of advisory boards.

Um if there's something that this has to do with the charter, then maybe we discuss it so that we can know and kind of take put that section to bed or at least set it set it aside for now and just focus on the neighborhoods and wards given the time we have available.

I Jen.

I'd like to suggest we talk begin the discussion around neighborhoods.

I think that we have people here that are very interested in that, and there's been quite a bit of uh public comment and opportunity to watch their last meeting.

And I think the meeting we're going to have at uh 5 p.m.

will bring the perspective of the county commissioners in on both their uh advisory boards and um the way the county has been working with them as well as um um districts.

So I'd like to have that first before we move into that, which would be the next meeting.

All right, so in the next 14 minutes, let's talk a little bit about neighborhood associations.

Um and who wants to lead?

Can I leave that?

Sure.

Um I'm curious to the the key important pieces for you know what has the commissioners come forward with to say when we revise if we the revisions that we make to the neighborhood association section of the charter.

Um what are some really top of mind important things that would make sure to address this?

Make sure to what I pen.

I so you're asking us, what do you want us to make sure you address in any new neighborhood association article that would go into the charter?

Okay.

Right.

What it what issue?

You don't have to wordsmith it, just make sure it does this.

Like I'll get us started.

Like I want to make sure that there's a clear connection to the city commission, that there's an avenue of of communication.

Um that I want that that's the one thing I really want to look at and listen to.

What are the pieces that you you all think that are you know, make sure to cover this and Mike if you can answer as well, too.

That'd be great.

Okay.

Do you want to do a what should be part of the neighborhood association section of the charter?

I would like to hear from the neighborhood association people in the room who uh I'm sure have uh really good input for us and their public comment who's gonna direct this.

Um they sent in a bunch.

Yeah, I I I think it wouldn't be bad for us to go around and then if we have time to go to the rest of the room.

I I so I'll I'm gonna lay mine out.

Um while I do not think that it's reasonable to think that we would have a city that was 100% neighborhood association, meaning I don't think the city should mandate or draw up neighborhood associations.

I also think it's something that we should strive for.

We need to strive for more act more neighborhood association coverage throughout the city.

And that means to me, um, and and let me put it another way.

If 10 years from now the neighborhood associations still cover 28 to 30 percent of the city, then I then I think it would be time to change it.

And so in the next 10 years, I I think we need to find a way in the charter to um urge the city to put the time, money, and energy into building more neighborhood associations.

Um I don't want to start dictating the way it is or what whatever it is, but my experience when I was on the board was it was not simple to start your own neighborhood association.

I think we need to simplify the process, which may mean things like have one set of bylaws, um, have um more um money available from the city to reach neighbors on a regular basis, have um uh the city um help neighborhood associations organize events that are not necessarily a and some of this goes in the charter, and some of this is maybe it goes into the recommendations, but have events that bring the community in the neighborhood association together uh around something fun to do.

Um think of uh movies at story on uh movies on the story mansion lawn uh as a way it brings people from across the city, but it certainly builds kind of a sense of the neighborhood association uh in uh in uh in that area.

There are other things that we could do and other ideas if we had someone who was organizing neighborhood associations, and that was the sole job of that person, maybe developing those kinds of things would be helpful as well.

So that's my two sets of the moment.

Jen.

Yeah, I'll go fairly quickly so we all have a chance to at least begin what needs to be a deeper dive.

And I want to appreciate the information that we've gotten from both the Inc.

group, um, individual members that have written us, spoken to us, and I'm gonna uh also reference the public comments sent by um Zara uh Osman that uh all of us uh had a chance to read.

And I I also had prepared, and you'll see in the agenda under a large number of resources uh that Becky put pulled together, but I had done the research particularly around Seattle and their neighborhood.

I lived there for 10 years.

I saw the neighborhood program in in action and lived it.

My friends were working in the city around that, and it offers, I think, some really exciting models to cover some of the things that Carson just referenced, but it also uh was resourcing the city itself to not only have the staff, and when you get a chance to look at that, um you'll see it just if you might if you wouldn't mind clicking on the uh Seattle, a new new chapter for development of neighborhoods.

Um this is their website, and they're calling it the front porch uh approach.

And it's uh designed to really help newer people avoid the what I think they describe as kind of the chaos of too much not not understanding how the city works and can the neighborhoods be an entry point, which we've talked about many times in different ways, and how can that best happen?

They're not required, and I want to emphasize I don't think we ought to require them, but I do think in our charter we have a smart approach to be able to say there's a way to recognize neighborhoods so that there's still an organic process, but also to have standards for neighborhood associations.

Perhaps those need to be reviewed, and I'm not sure, and I apologize if they have been reviewed recently by the Inc.

But I think that's a place to start for us to make sure these the process itself and the and the uh standards to become a neighborhood association are still working for the neighborhood associations.

And as Carson said, to maybe streamline some of the um ways to become a neighborhood association for groups that are being uh spurred on by all kinds of sectors in our community, and we all know that.

Um and as a member of my own neighborhood association, I value that so much and would love to see it reproduced, especially uh in conversations uh Becky and I had about whether or not developers ought to be asked to help uh facilitate the costs of strengthening staffing and engagement and commitment in their proposals, just like they can buy out the green space.

Maybe they need to buy in the neighborhood uh engagement piece and association costs uh to look like something that Seattle does.

But one of the things they do, and I'll close with this, have a lot more to say when we revisit, is that they have a grant program that these uh recognized neighborhoods can apply for, and they have a range of interests, but they are are that they are organic coming out of the neighborhoods themselves, and they've had you know everything from activities and street dances and you know, gatherings of all kinds, but to also make some beautification and neighborhood improvements that have helped with accessibility, with inclusion of the range of people that live there.

So I think we've got some models, there's additional models we can we can have at the next conversation.

I would ask the Inc.

folks if if they are satisfied with the charter uh direction right now in terms of what those standards are and those places that, as Carson uh has said, how do we make it more um easy for for groups and yet still meet uh what the neighborhood standards should be?

So thank you, neighborhood people.

I've appreciated you.

And I think, oh no, there is one more point I want to make.

I think if we have a strong, strong neighborhood association, well-staffed, well-resourced, I'm not sure we need warrants.

I see a lot of duplication in that.

I think that many of the items people are suggesting for wards, such as you know, um town halls and things like that every four to six months, uh, could be done by neighborhood associations to make sure that kind of engagement and those recommendations are grounded in a variety of ways that people can participate.

Thank you.

I think it's really important that uh neighborhood associations have a very defined mission, and it's not just having street dances and getting to know one another.

Um their mission should be clearly defined, and um I believe that the uh intent of the uh neighborhood associations is from bottom-up uh communication to the city council.

Now I'm an active member in the university uh neighborhood association, and I know that there has been frustration in the bottom-up communication, and that in my uh and I'm I'm not I'm active as a member, I'm not in the leadership.

Um my experience has been it's top down.

Uh we have a meeting and the city comes and tells us what they're doing.

And um there has been some bottom-up communication, but it clearly is not defined as um uh as a mission or a goal of the neighborhood association.

So I I I believe that that should be in the charter, and that there should be a clear channel for that communication to the city departments and city commission on the concerns that um neighborhoods have.

And I do believe they should be organic and and encouraged.

And I I'm not so sure that uh the bylaws shouldn't be written by each group.

Um I think it's a point of self-government.

Um so in a nutshell, that's what I have to say.

Cool.

Yeah, I definitely think clearer definitions as to what the roles are of the city, the city staff, Inc.

and the neighborhood associations would be would be very helpful.

So I'm gonna agree with that.

And then um do we have more comments?

Becky, do you want to add to this?

Because then I thought we only have two minutes.

Yeah.

We might ask the public if you're gonna they want to react to what we've said.

So go ahead, Becky.

Um I've I've dug in some about how neighborhoods can and should have uh input on development.

So the Montana Land Use and Planning Act from 2023, NCA came in, the UDC was developed, all of this takes full effect in July of 2027.

And so when I look at 711 uh 113 and 7114, um in terms of having input into the process of development, um, I think we have uh only one option, but I'd like to make sure that that is included, and that is that affected neighborhoods must be given notice upon application or or the submission of an application for development.

Um I think that having something in there would be uh is important to remind everybody that we need to let the neighborhoods and that that's the voice of you know, if they want to have comment, that's the time.

And then there's avenues in which to do that that are gonna that are very clearly laid out and very limited by the state MCA and the law that went in in 2023.

But I want to make sure that that's in there.

Um I I think that if we have strong neighborhoods, and I like some of the ideas that I'm hearing from everybody, um, that the the clear defined mission, the clear channel uh of communication, and uh I think we need to say we have to have at least one FTE from the city to help the the neighborhood associations be strong.

That was the intent, but that person has been cut back significantly.

And if we do all that, this I think will become a nice pipeline for people to run for city commission, because they'll get people get engaged, our committee will get engaged with the city commission and with the governance of itself.

So you have all provided some great guidance, and thank you so much.

I think that's gonna be helpful.

I just like I just have a um couple quick thoughts on making sure in this discussion we're clearly identifying what we're looking at as charter language versus recommendations to the to the city commission and staff, etc.

Um so Becky, to your point, are you recommending those provisions that came out of the ordinance be included in the charter, or are you saying that that's part of the record recognition or recommendation?

I think that the affected neighborhoods must be given notice upon submission of an application for development should be in the charter.

Then that wording is going to be extremely problematic.

Then you're gonna have to help me with that, Michael.

Not every application moves forward.

So if the time of notifying the if the time of notifying the neighborhoods is at application, they may never actually be affected.

Because an application can come in and then it can just fall apart and never happen.

It can never meet adequacy.

It can never get to a point where it's ever even reviewed by staff.

So if the intent is to give notice to the neighborhoods, the trigger should be when it's noticed, not when it's applied.

So an application goes through a series of steps before it qualifies for public notice.

At that point would be separate, a separate timeline than when it an application is received.

And then also to your point, the scope that is allowed for project specific comments was greatly reduced by MLUPA.

So the I understand that.

So the putting a trigger in the charter to say we're gonna take we're gonna notify you on a project-specific thing that you may have limited input on, seems um like it's not gonna be the most effective way to address the issues underlying the concerns of the neighbors.

Whereas if it when it's when it's so the law refers to them as issue plans.

So when we talk about like a transportation plan, when we talk about growth policy, things like that are gonna be the front end that MLUPA put out there.

So that's where policy decisions are made, and that's where the burden of input needs to be shifted.

I'll reach out to you to clarify that language.

So thank you so much.

All right.

Um of the county commissioners is here.

We're waiting for the other.

Um why don't we use this moment to ask the uh those who are in attendance or who are uh online if they have any comments or reactions to the things that we've said from up here in the last uh 17 minutes, 20 minutes.

And you don't have to have one.

It's just not required.

I'll make a quick comment since I missed some of your prior discussion.

Um Natsuki Nakamura Bozeman resident, um, member of the economic vitality board, which speaking as an individual.

Um I just wanted to, again, this might not be relevant to the charter more to the recommendation, but um note that creating a neighborhood association is actually pretty easy.

I think you just need 11 signatures of residents, you just need to decide your map, and you need to just have one annual meeting, which the city helps notice at least and helps you find a location.

So creating one is pretty easy, but I think the hard part is sustaining it.

And that's making sure that there's enough people who are willing to run for office, hold meetings, send out updates, get more emails, um, and then also like inspire people that those are reason to have a neighborhood association.

I think it's easy to form one when you're angry about something, or you know, those something kind of more agitating.

But if you in order to keep that like community, it takes a lot of work.

So I think that's the hard part intuitive to Becky Frank's point about having that staff full-time to support it, I think would be make a big difference in terms of sustaining that support.

One of those having difficulty, how do I reach out to more people who who's in my neighborhood?

Just having that support to sustain it.

Um I think that another big piece about sustaining it is that they have to feel um I think there was some previous comments about the advocacy role of a neighborhood council and the neighborhood association.

So having like there's some feeling that you're being heard as a neighborhood, and that that there that gives point to have it.

So if there was a traffic issue, like some roundabout that you know that's causing a lot of traffic issues being able to report that and being heard by the city, then that gives like meaning to the neighborhood association as well.

So um I think I've spoken to uh being in Anchorage before in the neighborhood uh councils that they have there.

Um the city has a full-time person to help with all those administrative pieces, and they also provide funding for the annual meeting that they do.

They like give you the place to rent, they provide food for the block party.

So right now those right now that's coming out of people's personal expenses.

Um the community councils in Anchorage also get asked for the opinion about like which capital improvement projects that they would prioritize within their neighborhood.

So being asked and that opinion being respected would wouldn't go a long way for sustaining the neighborhoods, I think.

Thanks.

Thank you very much, Natsuki, for your comments.

And we will surely take them into account when we start drafting and then approving any changes in the neighborhood ordinance in the charter.

Commissioner Brown, welcome.

Do you want to wait for Carson?

We do have an online comment too.

Oh, let's take the online comment.

And Zach, we invite you to come up here and use the microphone when the time comes.

Commissioner Boyer is going to run up away anyway.

Right.

So we'll start to take this public comment and then you gotta come up.

You know, you gotta be, yeah, you can't sit lower.

I I will say this.

I I wish we could have done a better system of us being done on the level with you all.

The only advantage to being up here is if there's a big crowd, you get to see all the faces in it, like in a the reverse of a movie theater.

But I'm not comfortable having real discussions when we're up here and you're down there, and uh I wish we'd figured out a better way to do it for what it's worth.

Okay.

Okay.

Um we have Zara Osman um, and I will give you three minutes and you can start whenever.

Hi, my name is Zara Osman, and I live on the West Side of Bozeman.

And for uh disclosure, I am on the steering committee for the Valley Unit Neighborhood Association, and also serve as one of the alternate representatives on the Inner Neighborhood Council or INC.

However, I am representing myself in the submission of this public comment.

My goal is to inform City Commission to make specific changes to their already proposed final language for the City Charter Section 4.06 or neighborhood associations.

And thank you for reading my written public comment on these ideas, and thank you for compiling ideas as presented by, I think it was Commissioner Sistero.

I wasn't sure because it was um I couldn't tell by the video.

Um while we do value the fun aspects of gatherings for the neighborhood associations, we're also spending a lot of our own time, i.e., volunteering, to be a conduit between the city and the neighborhoods.

I don't know that our steering committee has the bandwidth to make this a more fun and social organization because we are spending a lot of time with just being that conduit between the city and the neighborhoods uh regarding uh project policy and that sort of thing.

We would need to be better resourced by the city if we want if we were to do more.

I encourage members of the study commission and also members of the public to listen to the recording of a very important discussion that happened at last week's April 9th Interneighborhood Council meeting between the INC delegates and the INC commission liaison, who is Deputy Mayor uh Douglas Fisher.

Um over the course of a few months, our Commission liaison sat through a a few of our monthly meetings while the bot this body of 15 representatives seriously deliberated on how to ethically and effectively poll their neighborhood members on an issue that would potentially adversely affect a single segment, a significant segment of the city.

The City Commission liaison also sat through the meeting where we discussed the results of a survey or poll and how 428 members took that poll and informed the neighborhood representatives of their preferences, with over 80 percent voting in favor of us, the INC submitting a formal ref recommendation to the City Commission.

I learned last week by viewing the INC meeting that via report from Commissioner Fisher that the Commission declined to even discuss the INC's recommendation.

Apparently, the topic lacked the votes or the just the support, not even a vote, to even place it on the agenda.

Um so this refusal to hold a public discussion on this matter is deeply concerning and raises seriously questions, serious questions about the respect the city commission holds for the INC.

If you listen to the April 9th video recording, you will hear a tense yet civil discussion between the INC and the Commission liaison.

Um we were insulted.

Um our volunteers put in excess extensive time gathering input from neighbors, compiling resources and sharing results.

Thank you so much for um reading my comments and for accepting this public testimony.

Thank you.

Zira, thank you very much for your uh comments, and um we certainly will take them into account.

Um I think I know some of us have listened to the recording that you requested um and found it quite interesting.

Um it will affect, I think, a little bit how we look at the situation.

And I've said more than I promised everybody I would say in response to that public comment.

Sorry.

Uh anything else.

Uh we do have one more.

All right, one more, and I notice that Commissioner Boyer is here.

Thank you.

If you all could wait for one more public comment.

Um we have Jason Delmule.

I am gonna let you talk and you can begin whenever.

Uh good afternoon, study commissioners.

Um in uh hearing the discussion about uh possibly raising um application notice to the charter level, just made me think that um you know a charter is almost like the constitution of the town or the city, so um I think it's important to leave out things that might be considered good policy for a given issue at a given time.

Um I would also know that for development applications, um, the time for practical input of a neighborhood is at the outset.

So this would be a policy suggestion that uh given you know, planning or community development department and commission might choose to enact into the UDC, but by the time a project has been conceived and designed to the point of even submitting a first application, regardless of adequacy, I mean, most of the decisions have been made, and the money has been paid to the professionals, the architects, and engineers um to develop those plans to that degree that um it's just usually not feasible or practical for them to change.

Um that's definitely beside the main point of uh this is probably not charter level uh things.

Um and then also if you have not gotten um this is switching topics to that that poll that was sent out by the INC or the survey, if you have not had a chance to see the actual survey language and including the letter that was attached in support, um it was essentially a pitch, and uh like a very one-sided argument in favor of the proposition.

And then the question is essentially asking you agree, right?

There was no effort made to try to put out in like the context of what development is, uh the fact that you know whoever's doing it thinks it's some space that somebody wants to live in or buy or work out of or make something out of, run a business.

Um and there was also no uh benchmarks given um for building sizes.

Um people think, oh, 20,000 feet, that sounds like a really big building.

They didn't not give any reference buildings.

Um the buildings that people are objecting to, five and six stories downtown are over 150,000 square feet total.

Um there also wasn't any clarity, and in fact, there seemed to be the opposite confusion between the historic downtown B3 core, the the B3 halo around it, uh, and then how exactly how big, which is quite large the NCOD is.

Um, because this whole topic sort of progressed from the height of B3 to the entire NCOD.

Um anyway, thank you for listening, and thank you for your service on this commission.

Jason, thank you very much for your comments.

We will uh consider them in our deliberations as we move forward.

Thank you very much.

All right, is there any other public comment?

There is nothing welcome to Zach Brown and Jen Boyer, commissioners.

Um we invited you because we're facing a few issues which um you have already faced in one way or another or have not.

Um but um but they're out there.

The one of them, uh and I'm gonna introduce it and then ask for your comments out, and then we'll move to the others.

And uh I think Jan sent you some questions, but I'm taking them out of order because you know we don't anybody be relaxed in this situation.

Um the first one is we're we're talking about wards and districts.

And um you all have what I think is called um normally called districts, meaning each commissioner has to live in a specific area.

And so we're curious as to how you think that is working, what if any advantages there are to it, what disadvantages there are.

I can think of one that I read about in the newspaper recently.

And then secondarily, sort of how you how you redraw them.

And you don't need to tell me how you let people know how you've redrawn them or how they've been redrawn.

I don't want to go there.

But if we could start with the districts, that would be helpful to us.

Okay, well, we Commissioner Boyer and I divided and conquered a little bit, but we both reserved the right to fill in after the others' comments, and I thought she was gonna kick this one off, but um I think the yeah, you summarized it well.

So the county commission general form uh of government, uh general powers form of county government under statute sets it up so that um there are three districts, three commissioners, they're meant to be proportional by population, um, and then the commissioners each have to live within those districts in order to for two years prior to the filing date in order to qualify to run, but then it's a countywide election for all three.

Um so one disadvantage of that system, as you just pointed out was the confusion over where those boundary lines are and how to communicate that and present that to potential candidates.

It's a it creates a map with districts that are only used in a singular context, which is candidate filing requirements, they're not used for anything else, and so um it we're experiencing the really challenge, the interesting challenge of how to make those usable and really clear right now because we're in the thick of um trying to find a replacement, but for the most part they kind of go under the radar.

I think my assumption and understanding of the purpose is um to create geographic distribution for county commissioners and their representation.

Um example, I'm probably the second county commissioner in the last 25 years who has actually lived in the city of Bozeman, and I think part of the design is deliberately to not allow a population center like Bozeman to drive the um elections and also select all the candidates and so forth that's meant to geographically distribute commissioners, which sometimes which is great in theory and also sometimes creates some challenges because you're trying to recruit uh people to run who um are in have to qualify in a certain district and be ready to take on a new full-time job.

Um so those those are a couple thoughts.

Um and then the other thing to say is the process is that it's it's like redistricting, it's laid out in statute, I believe, but it's like redistricting for legislative districts.

So after the um 10-year census, uh the redistricting legislative redistricting process, which happens at the state level, happens in the two-year of a decade, so 2022 in this case, and then there's a statutory deadline for counties to do um these redistricting processes.

So our new map was redrawn by the clerk and recorder in this case in 2023, went through lots of public meetings and such.

Um the qualifications or the requirements under laws, I remember them, or that they have to be approximately evenly distributed from a population standpoint.

So you can't give that perfectly, but you have to get it to some reasonable proportionality where they're mostly even, and then you can't district out a sitting commissioner is the other part of it.

So, for example, Eric Semron had to look at my residence, which is in the city of Bozeman and draw a line that includes my home in the district because the law precludes the clerk and recorder's ability to draw sitting commissioners out of their districts.

So, anything to add?

Um I I just think in that um new mapping effort, they made a big effort to also have approximate same um geographic sort of areas um as well.

And I think um they really worked hard in this last round to have one of the districts not include any of the municipality of Boseman, city of Oseman.

Um, so that um was part of the plan as well.

And I if I remember correctly, you actually can't have three districts that have Bozeman in them, just the way the math works out in Gallup County.

So I that's kind of my recollection there.

The other thing I'll say is it's the same issue exists in counties that would exist with a ward system, and I'm sure you've thought a lot about that.

So for example, in Madison County, they have a slightly different form of government.

I don't know if they have a charter or have just made some tweaks through study commission processes over the years, but they have a system set up where they're elected by district, and then they act my understanding is that the county commissioner for each district is the road supervisor for that district.

So you're the elected administrator and advocate for the road network and the operations of that road network and maintenance of it in your given district, which on one hand is a nice idea that would have pros and cons.

Hey Carson.

Yes.

I don't want to um Zach, we can't hear you well.

We can hear Jen.

Well, we can't hear you well, whether you're not close enough to the microphone or whatever.

But perfect.

You could fix that so we could hear what you're saying because it's important.

Thank you.

Is this better?

Ah, A plus.

I'm talking into the microphone, so that's Zach, maybe move the microphone to between you and us.

Perfect.

Um so the what I was describing is Madison County has essentially county wards.

Um, and they even take their situation to an extreme where county commissioners are the road supervisors for their district.

And so that hits them that puts them in a position where they're kind of advocating for their district, um, both from an operations resource allocation perspective, issues perspective, that's where their votes come from, all the things, as opposed to having a countywide view.

And I think that's one of the things you probably all are thinking about with wards, is uh I think that's a challenge.

You on one hand, it's great to have an elected official who represents their neighborhood, and on the other hand, it creates a dynamic where perhaps that elected official does isn't incentivized to take the broader view of the city issues as a whole, and I think that as a in a countywide context could be a really interesting challenge that's even more um broad than a city or municipality.

But no, I think that's an important point, and I um I personally appreciate that um the election is at large because most of the problems and um issues that we're dealing with are systems, right?

It's a transportation system, it's not just I mean, certainly there are some potholes on particular roads.

I understand that, but largely what we're grappling with are systemic changes that cut across a lot of jurisdictions, and so it really creates this opportunity to approach um issues as a team and think holistically about them rather than just trying to band-aid individual locations or address um single issues by constituent.

So, Jen, you live outside of the city, as I recall.

I do, not very far, but yes.

Does that help your perspective on countywide problems?

Um, or does it change it in any way?

Um that's a really good question.

Um, you know, I think perhaps a little bit.

Um my neighbors and my neighborhood, right?

Um are sort of rural agricultural, like 20 acres and up generally.

Um so I think um that that's useful, but everybody running down Kelly Canyon to get to Crosscut or Bridger or ride their bikes, a lot of them are city residents, right?

And so um I I guess I just don't see a huge distinction.

Um, we may have more wildfire concerns potentially, um, we may have more dust concerns, weed concerns, although there's weeds in the city as well.

Um yeah, that's really interesting to think about.

I don't think it's a dramatic difference, really.

What do you think, Zach?

Do you think it helps that you are on a commission with two people that don't live in the city?

I like the geographic distribution part of it.

So, for example, um Commissioner McFarland represented the western part of the county, lived in four corners, four corners is a community that isn't incorporated but has massive community challenges.

Um for example, I thought it was great that he brought that perspective.

Um geographic distribution has its benefits for sure.

But on the other hand, like the system we have, as Commissioner Boyer was saying, because we are voted countywide does incentivize us to zoom out and think about the county as a whole instead of just our neighborhood or our district's concerns, which I also appreciate.

Cool.

Other questions from uh other commissioners before we move on to the next topic.

Dean?

Uh just uh one question.

Who who did the redistrict?

Who drew the new maps?

Uh the clerk and recorder, the county clerk and recorder.

I see.

And um this is done um uh when a new census is so every 10 years.

Any idea of the cost of that?

Uh this not of the census or the state's redistricting process, but uh for our county it's very minimal.

Okay, it's just I just meant for the kind.

Yeah, and I for the municipality, Belgrade has wards, and so the clerk and recorder would have to be involved in um redrawing those ward district lines in the city of Belgrade, and so I think it's a fairly routine activity for him that doesn't uh it's not a huge lift.

Okay, I'm sorry, did I get that right?

The clerk if we had wards or districts, would the county clerk and recorder redraw ours?

I believe so.

Not totally sure on that dynamic, but at the end of the day, the the clerk and recorder uh administers elections, and so they have to um figure out where the ballots go in each neighborhood.

Um so the clerk and recorder office is kind of the keeper of all district boundaries and and that sort of thing.

Cool.

Becky, questions at this point, Jen.

So the um vacancy filling.

How if you could change anything about where you are right now, it's easy to say that.

Um, but but what's from a structural standpoint?

What would you what would you do differently or what might be helpful?

One one thought, and this is the only substantive change that seems to be gaining traction with the county's study commission that I'm aware of, is uh proposing nonpartisan elections again.

And I do think that would probably be a process of improvement in this case, like going through the um central committee to recruit somebody.

It's a it's a logistical step and barrier.

Not everybody who wants to serve in local government wants to go through a partisan party affiliation process.

So I that would probably if we didn't have to deal with that, I bet we would have a a lot more interest than we've gotten.

But because it goes through that partisan filter, it has to have an extra layer of process and bureaucracy with the central committee.

Um so that's one thought.

I I think the other um sort of challenge that we have right now is given the timing of the vacancy and the um closing for filing for the general for the primary and then the general um offers at this point an opportunity to be a write-in candidate if you wanted to um run to fill the remaining four years because the appointments just to the end of the calendar year.

And I think that is a a fairly big hurdle as well for people considering um throwing their hat in the ring, the idea of a write-in candidacy versus um having your name on a ballot.

So we don't make those rules.

Um state does, but uh it doesn't seem helpful right now.

I would say yeah, and a big difference the this year, the legislature in 2025 changed the filing window.

So before there was a rolling file filing window where you had a deadline where you had to file before X date, um, usually in March, but now they have a constrained two-week window.

So you can't file outside before or after that filing window.

So it created the and the timing of our vacancy got all mixed up in that, and it was very confusing and stressful and um constrained our options in the process even more.

But but I think that would affect the city moving forward more than likely is um same thing is that constrained two-week filing window.

Um because we have uh self-governing powers, we can't we've it's been 30 days in the past, and we're attempting to move it to 90 days.

Interesting um to deal with that.

Um I'm not willing to admit that whether that's a legal issue or not, but we're that's what our thought process is 90 days would be much better.

Um Mike, just one thing specific to the municipalities case with the change in that filing window.

That bill that passed the legislature was signed during the active filing window that existed previously that made some candidates that had already filed outside of the filing window.

So just the timing of it gets transmitted to the governor, the governor signs it, it goes into effect.

We had candidates that had filed.

That bill was signed and became law, and then that window shut until the newer time frame came.

So then they had to have the filing in that narrower window, and the um Eric said anybody who had filed up to that point, they would consider within because that was the law at the time that they filed, and then they closed it and told the other person who was interested in filing you have to wait a week and a half or two weeks, whatever that date was before they could come in and file.

So it like those filing deadlines not being something in our in our control and wouldn't be in the ward or district either, is something that we're subject to, and I think the um to your point that the redistricting is a different beast for a charter self-governing powers than a general power county.

So just want to the 90 days is 90 days from a vacancy for the commission to pick somebody, and I don't want to confuse that with filing, which I don't know anything about and don't intend to ever know anything about if I can avoid it.

Thank you.

Um should we move on to county commissioner pay and benefits?

Because where this comes from is we have a uh a clause in our charter about how um commissioner pay is set, and um it kind of leaves it on them, and um if they do it, it won't take effect till the next general election, so it might take two years for uh for it to take effect.

And um we're kind of looking around for is there an objective way to do this so that um so that you don't put it on um individuals to to determine.

Um I my understanding was there's some objective way that county commissioners um salaries are set, and if I'm wrong, tell me that, and then tell me how you do set them.

Start with this one.

Um so each county is different in how we do pay.

That's the number one thing to say.

Um, and you can imagine petroleum county, they may not pay their commissioners anything, um, and they may only have to be in the office once or twice a month versus Missoula County or Yellowstone County has a very different context.

So each county, there's 56 of them deals with the question you're answering a little differently.

The general powers um form of county government that we operate under is pretty prescriptive under statute uh um in terms of putting some sideboards on compensation.

Um so we uh from a process standpoint, we're required to have a salary compensation committee meeting that involves other elected officials besides the county commission as well as a couple of public appointed members, and that meeting we just had it maybe a month ago or six weeks ago.

Um it just happens once a year, but essentially this committee makes looks at the um other counties compensation schedule and uh makes a recommendation to the commission about how to set um raises for all the elected officials, the sheriff, the county attorney, um, the justices of the peace, um, the clerk and recorder, the treasurer, the school superintendent, etc.

Um, and then we essentially at by practice at the at Gallatin County try and treat ourselves about the same as we are able to treat our employees.

Um so we try and advocate for to that committee, and then through our budget process to commensurate-ish raises.

So, say this year we recommended three percent for classifieds as well as elected officials.

Then the big in our form of government, the big um ball and chain that really limits the process, so to speak, and it's by design.

Um so I don't mean that in a negative way necessarily, but is uh the sheriff's salary, if you look at statute for county governments is connected to there's a very formulaic um requirement that connects sheriff's deputies pay to the sheriff's pay.

And so for example, uh we can't pay our sheriff anything close to what the city of Bozeman pays your police chief.

Um it's pro but um the thing that holds that back is if we wanted to give Sheriff Springer a 20% raise, which I could sit here and argue he his position and the responsibilities there probably demand that kind of thinking, the cost would be way more than the cost of his position because it would bring all the deputies along with him, and we have I think 67 I was gonna guess 70 or 80, but yeah, 65 to 80.

Um so those numbers become really big really quickly.

Um so there's I hope that helps.

I don't know what would you add to make a messy thing a little clearer.

Well, it's an awkward conversation to have in public about your own salary.

Um we recognize that though to recruit people who are professional and excited to serve uh in these full-time positions, um it also requires compensation.

There's you know, um not everybody's able to serve um with limited compensation like that.

Um and I'll just add that yes, we have a salary, we also um have a benefit package um with Gallatin County, you know, health insurance and all of that goes along with that.

Um the county attorney also has some constraints with their salary, so there's a couple of funky um aspects of it that i is the commission that determines it um stack it's state statute that determines who what kinds of people are on it, or do you all get to pick uh it I was just looking at this the other day for some reason?

So the um it ha all three county commissioners have to be on that salary compensation committee, and then I believe three other elected officials, and the commission appoints those three others.

So in this case I believe the and then the county attorney, so that's seven, and then up to four public members, and in our case we have two.

So I think we have a nine-person committee.

And the committee appoints to two members from the public or the commission.

The county commission does, not the salary commission.

Correct.

Okay.

Thanks.

Can the salary compensation committee just meets one time per year?

So that their only function is to make a salary recommendation for elected officials.

Um I would just quickly add too that this ties back to the conversation about the appointment process.

I mean, we what we're asking uh somebody to do right now if they want to apply to be a county commissioner, is they have to live in the right district.

They have to be able to take on full-time employment, which means they're either doing nothing else or um have to leave their job.

And yeah, I I think I can it's fair to say that none of our elected officials are getting rich.

Um, and so it's it's a limiting a series of limiting constraints that limit our applicant pool, the people who can afford to um take take on this kind of work, who the timing works out appropriately in the li in their life, people who are willing to have some partisan affiliation, um, people who um live in the right district, all those things, it's just uh it does limit who's available to do the work.

Yeah.

Questions Deanna?

I had a question.

On your uh salary committee, how did you choose those members from the public?

They both predate both of us.

Um so that it's we we appoint lots of boards um through the commission office, and so they were just noticed in the newspaper and on our website like others, and um I bet commissioners in the past, one was Tom Engelho, one is Tom Engelhoff, who was the talk radio guy for a while, and the commissioners were going on his show, and then the other was uh Greg Metzger, um, who was kind of involved in various county politics.

So I think I bet the commissioners just recruited them candidly.

Um one of our really good ones, uh, and I don't know how she found out about it, but is Ann uh I'm forgetting Ann's last name, but she was a lake county commissioner and then moved to Bozeman and she's a realtor.

So she just she's been a county commissioner.

So it's cool that she brings that perspective and kind of knows how the budget process works in statute.

But uh just to be clear, was there a public notice we're looking for some and this was in the paper, or how was that notice?

They're listed with the long list of big of um board service areas uh or seats that we have available.

And recently at the last Chamber of Commerce meeting, I I kind of promoted it.

I was like, look, this is the easiest committee ever, one meeting a year, and you get to you know influence potentially what your elected officials make.

So thank you.

Becky, questions.

I do not actually.

Um what what you're saying is very clear.

I understand it.

Um for once in my life, I have nothing to say, Carson.

But I am paying attention, clearly.

I appreciate it, Jen.

I know we're gonna move beyond the question that was just asked into this larger topic of your boards and commissions, so I'll wait on that.

But um, I just wanted to point out for folks that want to do a bit of a deeper dive that uh Zach had furnished uh their the um states uh sorry, I'm looking at it.

Oh, the Montana, sorry, the Montana County elected official salary survey results, which I found very, very helpful to read uh before this, it would encourage people to take a look at that because it really does help you understand the diversity of our counties and the diversity of the fact that even when we did this, the um uh five studies of city charters that were similar to ours, five or six, um, that they range from people totally volunteering uh to people that were you know able to afford to to serve, and that's as many of you know is one of my major issues, and I salute the fact that I think you, from what I know, have livable wages with good benefits.

So while there is a challenge of the amount of time living in a district, the challenge of whether you can stop your life professionally or in your income level to do this work, um, that it can be at least a livable wage job and can attract a diverse group of people.

And I know it was a very strange accident that we are not having that happen in this particular vacancy, but hopefully um all of us might work more closely together to really promote um participation on these uh boards, which are volunteer, but also the employment opportunities in both places.

So thank you.

No question, just a comment.

So my only other question is how do you all um uh police is the word that comes to mind, it's probably not the best word, the fulfillment of the county commissioners' responsibilities.

So you say it's a full-time job.

Um what makes it how how do you how do you uh um all pull your own weight and make sure that it's a full-time job for everybody?

Um I text Zach all the time, just joking.

Um I I think we each what's really lovely about the position is that um there's a lot of flexibility in it, and um we we can um kind of create our own schedules, so to speak.

So um for I'll just tell you how I do it.

I don't like to work at home.

I like to have separation in my home life and my work life.

So I generally approach it as I'm at work from eight to four Monday through Friday.

Um we all serve on different boards, those meet at different times.

If I'm out late one night at a board, I will kind of flex later that week potentially.

There's not you're not kind of keeping a time sheet or anything like that.

That's it's a salaried position.

Um I believe that there is plenty of work to do to fill up your week's work.

Um we have a lot of decisions every week at our regular commission meetings.

We serve on different boards.

There's always um projects that are um being promoted by various departments, there's public meetings, so I think we have a lot of discretion to allocate our time according to our interests and our um appointments, but um we do also each um kind of kind of run our own schedules.

Um so there's some flexibility there.

Yeah, it's an existential question, and one of the challenges of the general powers form of county government is we have a lot of elected officials, and all of them have to abide by certain laws and also policies that the organization promulgates.

On the other hand, uh that that question at its core is between each elected official and their constituents.

I can't go tell the sheriff how to spend his time or the clerk and recorder, right?

Um, if and by definition, we're treated as exempt employees who don't keep time cards, don't keep vacation hours or sick leave and that sort of thing.

Um so it's a it's a bit of an organizational norms, expectation, relational thing, and it's at the end of the day somewhat personal between each elected official and their uh duties and their relationship with their voters.

Like that's how it's set up for better or worse.

Thank you.

Yes.

I was just gonna add one clarifying question in my learnings from you all, and that is that you don't have job descriptions, and we're in the we're in the process of um recommending that our city commissioner have job descriptions.

What do you think about that?

I probably wouldn't be qualified then.

No.

I don't know.

Um I I'll say I have appreciated in my short experience on the commission, the fact that um Commissioner Brown, Commissioner McFarland come from different backgrounds and have different expertise and life experiences, and I think it's created um a real learning opportunity, and it also offers us to take leadership in different areas where we may have that past experience and a diversity of um perspective and and in some ways priorities.

I mean, a lot of what we do is we talk about what the pride priorities are for the community for our budget and kind of have to work through that.

And I think that's really healthy when you're coming from um different backgrounds.

So I also think that there's probably some core experiences or skills that would set people up for success if they had those coming into the position.

Um for example, just even comfort and familiarity with like running public meetings and forums and decision making and those sorts of things, if they've served even on another volunteer board, for example.

Yeah, and there's some of the elected officials' positions have job description or basic minimum requirements in statute.

So, for example, the sheriff has to be a sworn um law enforcement peace officer, uh the county attorney needs to be admitted to the state bar and be a licensed attorney, um, the superintendent of schools needs to have certain uh teaching credentials or licenses.

Um I and then I think beyond that, we're as the governing board of the organization are trying to set do at the soft skill part of that with um setting expectations, doing orientation with elected officials, sort of setting organizational norms, but um that that's a like I said, a very soft skill type of a dynamic and process.

So in that six minutes we have left, which could be stretched to seven, if I would stop talking.

Um a little bit of advisory boards.

Um what are your thoughts on their role, their importance, how do they does it work for you all?

Um maybe focus on county advisory boards as opposed to joint advisory boards, which is a different topic, but we don't want to go there right now.

Yeah, I have a soapbox here, which is just in in brief is that not long ago, like Gallatin County has grown up quickly in a lot of respects and grown quickly.

And one of the old ways that a lot of business was done was that a lot of our volunteer boards, appointed boards were empowered to do things like set compensation, manage budgets, uh do performance evaluations for employees, hire and fire.

Um, and we have tried really hard to get away from any of that.

And it's been a struggle in some cases.

I've uh we've had some conflicts with boards that didn't want to give up those duties and powers.

Um in an attempt to professionalize, maintain basic standards, make sure we're covering the taxpayers behind, so to speak, from a liability perspective, um, we've really tried to professionalize those things.

So we've moved away from those types of authorities and really tried to restrict them to advisory status, but that's been a bit of a process and caused some heartache.

Yeah.

Um I would say overall, I think that we have certainly great um oh, sorry, go ahead.

Go ahead.

So Zach, are you saying that if if I can read into what you're saying?

Are you saying that that you're trying to get away from advisory boards that are actually managing the organization versus truly advising from a governance or policy perspective?

Is that what you're saying?

Or am I overgeneralizing what I'm hearing you say?

No, you're you're nailing it.

Yep.

Great.

Um I was just gonna say that I think a lot of our boards have really great board members, and we benefit from having expertise by different professionals serve on those boards.

I think particularly around land use, um water quality and some of those more technical um boards, landfill even.

Um some of our boards really struggle um recruiting and maintaining quorums.

I think that is probably true across the community, right?

Um so that that is a challenge sometimes.

We've had some boards recently, like our our DUI task force just recently reduced their board, their advisory board from 22 to 11, I think.

Um, just because there were so many vacancies, they could never ever have a quorum.

Um, but I would say that um overall we have so many really wonderful dedicated um local residents who are willing to serve.

It's been really helpful, and I listen very carefully to um though the advice and the um recommendations that we get from them.

Cool.

How many advisory boards do you have?

Two to three dozen.

It depends on how you slice and dice that question.

So, for example, we appoint some fire district area boards, uh, we appoint some mosquito district boards, the county owns an airport, and we appoint the board for that.

Um so it just depends on how the scope of that question.

Yeah, that's probably right.

I think um the active the superactive ones who meet regularly are um planning um landfill or solid waste, um, our local water quality district, um, of course the um health board, um our open lands board also does really great work.

They meet less regularly but um make some really um important recommendations on um significant funding.

Cool questions.

I have a question.

Do you um have um a commissioner liaison on each one of those boards?

Most of them.

Most of them, yeah.

Not the not the planning board and not the board of adjustments, but the commission serves on our planning and zoning commission.

So but a good example of that.

My favorite board is the landfill.

The landfill is awesome.

If you want to talk about it, I'd love to talk trash anytime.

But we we have a really sophisticated staff operation out there, but the staff does a really good job of um asking for input on all their directional decisions, and so the board, which is community members and volunteers and representatives of private companies that haul trash will give input, but any actual final contracting decisions or allocation of resources has to come to the county commission as a recommendation from the board.

But I go to all those meetings because I love it, and it's it's just good to have a liaison, and we do that.

The commission does that for most of our um advisory boards that uh previously may have supervised county departments or employees or operations.

Becky.

How often do your advisory boards meet?

I know the one meets once a year, but in general, are they you know, when you talk about talking trash?

Monthly is probably the most common cadence for those advisory boards.

Okay.

Yeah.

One more question.

I'm interested in knowing how much diverse life experience and expertise.

Do you do you track the kind of um how representative your board membership or leadership might be toward that population of the county?

That's a good question.

I would say that when we're reviewing applications for our boards, generally um we don't have more applicants than space.

So I think there the rule is that the exception is sometimes we have really content contested or a lot of interest for only a couple seats, but and we don't keep any data about that.

Usually if somebody's willing to volunteer, we are delighted to put them on one of our boards as the general practice.

Well, unless there's other questions, I want to thank you all very much for spending the time with us and um just helping educate us so that we can make better decisions as part of the Bozeman City Study Commission.

Um so thanks a lot.

We'll see you at our next meeting in our next two after that when we think of other I'm just kidding.

Think of other things.

And uh I I do need one last shot.

Is there anybody that would like to give public comment uh tonight on anything that's going on?

Seeing none here.

Caleb, none.

Any other business?

Carson?

Yes.

Um the one thing that we will not have time for, but we've done we've run out of time before, and I've just sent an email before is the future education discussion and needs for April 24.

So I if with your permission, either I or you can send out an email um to the study commissioners to ask, you know, what what further information that we would like, although I think we're starting to move toward discussion and decisions at our next meeting.

Um let's send out something promptly that talks about what's given for the agenda.

There are a couple items that are definitely on the agenda and then what the other areas can be.

We will do that.

Um can we confirm that time on that one?

I thought we were 11 to 2.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Okay, yes.

That's what I've got.

Yep, Deanna.

Uh I've been uh asked to give a an update to the University Neighborhood Association at their annual meeting on the 28th of May.

And I accepted that invitation and said we normally went out in twos and I would find someone to accompany me.

So is there one of my commissioners that can attend an evening meeting on the 28th of May?

That's when we do work.

That's the night of the public hearing.

Is it scheduled?

No, no, the public hearing is public hearing is the 17th of June, but the 28th we do have a meeting.

That's the draft report was.

Oh, okay.

Well then I will let them know that uh what time is their meeting?

If they meet at 10, I can go.

At six.

And I think maybe because I did look at my calendar, and I think that day 28th is on a Wednesday.

So it was over over at 6, and I felt I could make it.

I'll have to confirm tomorrow.

Pardon?

I'll have to confirm tomorrow.

Oh, okay.

Uh the group University Neighborhood Association.

I I can go if need be.

Okay.

And we can't.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right.

Anything else?

This meeting is adjourned at 6.59.

No.

Thank you, everybody.

I'm sorry, this meeting is adjourned at 559.

Thanks you guys so much.

Goodbye.

I'll help you out back here.

Well, um, yeah.

Goodbye.

Oh.

My favorite thing.

Dina, right?

It's like Jim Webster.

Doing okay.

Trying to stay alive, just trying to get rid of these nasty cases.

Because every time one of the things your call cannot be complete, it is dialed.

Your call cannot be completed as dialed.

Please consult your directory.