I'd like to call the Butte Silver Bowl Council of Commissioners regular meeting for Wednesday, December 1st, 2025 to order.

Clerk, could we please have roll call?

Commissioner Healy makes that ten present, two absent.

Ten present, two absence.

Please note that Commissioner Shea and Commissioner Mankins are excused from tonight's meeting.

So that we clean the Sure Six.

So um with that, I'm going to close out my chief executive's report and uh and move on to section one bid openings, public hearings and/or presentations.

We do have one public hearing, it's communication number 2025-466, Kelly Hazlet, TBID executive secretary requesting council commissioners' authorization to schedule a presentation on September 24th, 2025, regarding the BSB Tourism Business Improvement District work plan and budget and schedule of the public hearing which we're having tonight.

Could we have Ms.

Hazlet come forward, please?

Okay, uh hold on one second because I forgot to say one thing.

Uh County Attorney Anarch, do we have proof of publication?

Yes, Ms.

Hazlet provided uh proof of publication in our last meeting.

Thank you, County Attorney Anerath.

Welcome, Ms.

Hazlet.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gal.

Okay.

Um and so today after the presentation of last week, we're scheduling the public hearing.

Do you have anything to add or do commissioners have any questions prior to the public hearing here?

I know Commissioner Dan Callahan brought up some concerns.

I do want to let you know um about the mathematics of the rooms.

I do offer grant reading opportunities and uh open trainings to individuals if they are interested in the grant and want to figure out how to calculate that.

My door is also open during the grant cycle.

So I I just wanted to make sure the commissioner knew that those were being offered to the community.

Thank you, Ms.

Hazlet.

Commissioner Callahan.

Thank you, Chief Executive.

Well, thank you for that.

I just some people just don't know how to figure, you know, they got an event going on, and one of the questions is how many heads will you put in bids?

And they just don't know how to figure that out.

So thank you for that information.

We can pass it on to those folks and hopefully we can help them get that figured out.

Thank you, Commissioner Callahan.

Thank you.

Are there any questions of commissioners for Ms.

Hazelett before we open the public hearing?

I'm squeaking here.

All right.

Okay.

I will open the public hearing.

First call for proponents.

Second call for proponents.

Third and final call for proponents.

Next, I'll move to opponents.

First call for opponents.

Second call for opponents.

Third and final call for opponents.

I'll close the public hearing.

Thank you for being here.

Next we'll move on to the section two consent agenda.

Uh A one through four and B one through.

We should always have this ready, and I think and B one through 13.

Do we have any friendly amendments and or segregations?

Commissioner Healy.

Thank you.

Um I want to segregate number five communication number 2025-475.

Four.

It's item number five, communication number 2025-475.

Are there any other friendly amendments and or segregations?

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I'd like to segregate number three, twenty-five-three seven three.

That's item number three, communication number 2025-473.

Are there any other friendly amendments or segregations?

Seeing none, Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

At this time I make a motion that we approve section two, the consent agenda.

A the committee reports one through four.

B the communications one through thirteen, with the exclusion of number three, twenty-five-three seven three, and number five, twenty-five-four seven five.

Second, but just a quick clarification.

It's communication number 2025-473, not 373.

Thank you, Commissioner Thatcher.

Okay.

So we have uh motion and second to approve tonight's consent agenda.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

Why did I write three?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

10, yay, 0 nay.

10, yes, 0 nay.

Motion passes.

Moving to item number 3, communication number 2025-473.

JP Gallagher, Chief Executive requesting Council of Commissioners authorization to respond to the State of Montana, Department of Corrections request for information on a possible on possible locating and building the state's women's prison in Butte.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I I just wanted to segregate this communication to give you the opportunity to talk about you know what your path moving forward would be and to really just allow any of the commissioners to have any input or questions that they might have just to start that open dialogue up.

I have received uh a few phone calls from from my constituents, and it's always good to get because they have you look at other you would have not seen had they not called.

So I do appreciate you know people reaching out and and asking questions.

So I would just open it up to the body.

Thank you, Commissioner Morgan.

I'll I'll uh I'll weigh in on this.

So the reason I put this communication on here was because the state of Montana put out an RFI.

I haven't really seen that in the past of uh uh to communities about if they want to participate in the building of a uh a prison or correctional facility in the past.

So um and they sent it out specifically to a number of communities, I think hoping to get a response.

So I wanted to bring it to this body so that you guys could weigh in whether you wanted to do that because I I didn't want to make the decision that no, we're not going to respond if it's this body's uh direction to respond to this RFI.

It's asking about what our workforce is, demographics, um, all of those type of things that that take some work and and as I you know probably most of you saw in the paper, it kind of sent us uh our homework to do for something that they're really were interested in locating here, and so um I had some concerns with that in the paper, it was quoted as well as I hadn't heard anybody uh you know reach out to me about the possibility of of building a prison here and positively uh on that side.

I did receive a couple phone calls that uh of people that support the prison being built in Butte, but still the majority of responses that I've had within the community have been that they're they're not really uh very optimistic or or like the the aspect of a women's prison being located in Butte.

So with that, I'll open it up to the to commissioners to maybe have discussion here and then and then uh you know, then we'll move forward with the motion.

Is there any commissioner morgan?

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I I guess the only question comment that I would have is that I have looked at the RFP or the RFI and and I think it's just important that this community stick to the facts when we respond.

Yes.

And and you know, just give the facts of what the questions are and try to not be as biased as is we could be, but just stick to the facts to it because they they really do answer the questions when you answer it that way.

I I would agree with you, and that that was kind of the intent to bring this forward because it does put requests on on staff to to do this, and we would want to do it thoroughly in response to this to um doing sending this in in the request for information packet.

Commissioner O'Leary.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

I I guess I feel the same way.

I don't have any uh problem with us responding to this uh with the facts.

I would say that you know, of all the the phone calls and emails that I've gotten, I have not received one single response from somebody who is interested in having this in our community.

This would be in district five.

Um most of the people affected would be my constituents, you know, at least directly impacted by the by the location.

Um seems like there's very little appetite to have us in our community, uh, but I I think it's reasonable for us to respond with facts, you know, about workforce and whatnot that's in the RFI.

Commissioner O'Neill.

Thank you, Chief Executive.

So if we do we look bad if we don't respond?

I mean, if we do we have if we like I feel like if we're responding, then it's something we want.

We're just responding because it's the nice thing to do.

Commissioner O'Neill, I you know, as I said, I don't think I've ever uh had a request for uh such a you know corrections facility or anything request for uh information.

I think a lot of times these go to private companies.

I know um we have a representative from CCCS, and that I think that they re they respond to requests for information uh many times, but uh I haven't seen too many where there have been requests directed at the communities, and it seems to me that they are requesting specifically on specific on uh specific uh communities that they're looking to possibly locate at.

Um a response from us does it mean that they they think that we're we're proactively looking to locate it.

I don't know.

That that I d I don't know if that's it.

Um, but they didn't put it out to all the other communities in the state.

They, you know, I think other communities could, but they sent these specifically to I believe four or five communities for us to respond.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I guess my approach on that would be I would want the state to respond to any questions that they have about Butte, saying Butte answered it this way, rather than letting them fill in the blanks of Butte never responded, so we're gonna assume that maybe they didn't have any issues or any concerns with it because they didn't even respond.

Whereas if we respond, they have our answers to show that we at least care enough to fill out the RFI.

But Commissioner O'Neill.

Thank you, Ms.

Chief Executive.

Um, I mean, with that being said, obviously we had people come here presenting that one night after it was you know, it's their their land, if you will.

And it was already a big thing in the paper.

The head chief guy or whatever, he was here, kind of promoting how great it would be, and so on and so forth.

So that's what leaves the community thinking that um, you know, that there's a possibility that this could happen.

Um it is their land, correct?

I mean, so they could possibly do that, but I just want to make sure that we're out in front of it.

Then you know the community speaks on a lot of stuff.

Look, we get we got two gas stations we didn't get here, we couldn't put a we got a guy who couldn't put a solar farm in.

I hope we highly speak if we don't want a women's prison here as well.

I mean it's kind of the um the the same format, if you will.

Um obviously we've got to respond, that's fine.

But I hope on the other back end of that we realize that the community is I mean that's a big topic.

Nobody wants the women's prison to come to be Montana.

So Commissioner O'Neill responded to that.

That Director Guggen did come here and and promoted the positive aspects of what could happen if they built here in Butte.

Um with that, they've been pretty I non-communicative with us since then.

And you know, they promoted that uh Highlands College would be moved to up to the North Campus, and they put budget authority in in this last year's budget, but they didn't put any money into that.

And I've talked to the representatives at Highlands College and up at Montana Tech, and they don't know where anything's at.

And it it worries me a little bit that if we're sending response to to the because there the questions are specific to to what they want to hear, you know, the workforce and different things like that.

I'm concerned more about Highlands College.

I could almost be more supportive if I knew that the money was set aside for Highlands College to be moved up to Montana Tech and that was there, it was solidified there.

But I haven't heard any of those um uh commitments that there's any money there.

And the fact that the Department of Corrections has not come back and had any communication with us since that day that they walked in here, other than sending out an RFI now, it it concerns me.

Um and so um I we will do what this body wants to do, we'll respond to the RFI, um, but I just wanted to make sure that we had a conversation up here, knowing that as we respond with an RFI, they haven't communicated with us, but they're requesting us to communicate with them.

Commissioner Callahan.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

I just think you know, this is just kind of the footwork just to keep our foot in the door.

Um I've had several uh emails and people call me and they're basing it on they don't want a prison in our community.

You know, once I explained to them what Mr.

Cook and explained to the council, they had a completely different opinion.

They weren't sure that that wasn't what they wanted anymore.

Uh the comment that I saw on the news, there's 250 million dollars put aside for this project.

And to me, to turn around and shut the door on 250 million dollars for economic development is a is probably a wrong thing to do.

I mean, at least if we keep our foot in the door down the road, if we don't want it, we don't want it.

But to turn around and say we don't want it now before we even have those answers, you know.

Highlands College could have a whole completely brand new college.

Um it's a state project like that, that's all union Davis Bacon jobs.

I mean, the economic impact on our community would be huge.

And once you tell people that kind of stuff, then they see it in a different light.

You know, I think a lot of the comments that I got were people that didn't know the facts.

You know, you yourself that night said you had called the mayor from Billings to see what negative impact he said, and he said he didn't see any.

So those are things that the people, the public needs to hear, so then they can base their opinion on the facts, like Mr.

Morgan said, you know.

So that's my thought.

At least send them a letter showing that we're willing to look into what it does for us.

And we can weigh in down the road and say, you know, whether we want it or we don't.

Commissioner Callahan, uh you you're correct in in some of your your comments.

The one thing about the 250 million dollars that was put into corrections.

That cannot go into um OC or Highlands College or Montana Tech.

Yeah, it's specific to Department of Corrections.

So that that part of it, they would have to direct money into higher education, the college system, if that was to happen.

That's the thing that concerns me more than anything.

Highlands College for me right now is a critical part.

Every business that comes to us anymore talks to us about what is the workforce development for our community, what can well Highlands College help um create programming that that uh that can train people for whatever reason that they have, also Montana Tech.

The thing that I would be most remiss is if we said yes, and I'm not saying we should say no and not respond to this, but if we say yes to this, and then they acquire Highlands College and Highlands College goes away that because it that's a huge asset for our community.

Follow Commissioner Callahan, thank you.

The way I understood it was this money's there for that project.

And if they have to displace Highlands College, they could use that rather than build a new prison.

250 million dollars went into the Department of Corrections, and portions of this goes to the prisons and also other facilities, but it's specific to the Department of Corrections.

Follow of Commissioner Callahan.

And that's when we could back out and say, yeah, no, we we're not interested if that was the case.

Commissioner Callahan, though, that uh that that's the one thing about this.

I don't think we're gonna have the the ability to just back out, because we're not gonna have to say they own the land.

Truthfully, if they wanted to come to us right now and say we're building out there, um, you know, of course, the the uh higher education OC would have to just say whether they were gonna sell Highlands College to them or not.

But we really um they have the ability, even our zoning doesn't prohibit them from locating wherever they want to go because they own that land themselves out there.

So I mean, as a community, we can stand up and say we don't like it, but truthfully, if they wanted to come, they could come.

Commissioner Healy and then Commissioner Fisher.

Thank you.

Um, you know, I'm hearing a lot of uh like negative on what we're not letting come in, but all you have to do is drive down Harrison Avenue to see that we are bringing in a lot of businesses.

There is a lot of positive things happening, so you know, I think we do need to listen to the community and to see what they want.

And they see a lot of changes happening and a lot of positive changes in a lot of businesses coming in, so I don't think it's necessarily negative if they don't.

We still have businesses coming in.

We just Amazon, you know, that was just in the paper.

That's a huge thing right there.

So I just want to say there's a lot of positive things happening, not just we're not letting anybody come in, you know.

Thank you, Commissioner Healy.

Commissioner Fisher.

Uh thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

Um I, for one, have not read the RFI.

I understand after visiting Russ, it's on the uh Department of Corrections site.

Uh I think we're using a lot of we in us here.

And we in us is the community itself.

And I've heard both sides of the story of people that say, I think Commissioner Callahan hit the nail on the head, you're here on both sides.

Uh I think it's better that we maybe give an opportunity, be given an opportunity to read the RFI and um then decide if we want to respond or not.

I'm not comfortable right now making decisions either way, because I don't know what the RFI asks.

I mean, you guys do it.

Uh you can make a decision, but um I think we've got to sit back, look at this, and then answer uh, you know, I think we gotta go go ahead and answer it, but I think we gotta go do it in a in a joint effort.

I mean, I don't think that uh you as chief executive should answer your opinions.

I don't think chairman should answer his opinions.

I think we as a group got to answer what our constituents want.

And sometimes I don't agree with my constituents, but um that's what I have to do as a commissioner.

And uh I'd like to read the RFI.

I'd like to make a decision on what kind of questions I'd like to uh put NA after and what kind of questions I'd like to put an answer after, you know.

And uh I think that this is uh this the little bait, you know, that the Department of Corrections is putting out.

And I think you know, you and Dan Callahan, Commissioner Cowler both correct, but I think the money is at the governor's hands, and as we know from superfund and everything else, if they decide to do something, there'll be a transfer of funds to have make it happen.

So I think we've got to proceed with caution on this.

I would uh really like to, without putting this in a motion, to hold this in advance and let us get a little better handle on what the RFI is uh, you know.

Commissioner Fisher, I I appreciate and I and I understand exactly what you're saying.

The challenge we have is we just received it.

The first meeting that we could put this on for us to make a decision is today, and it's due by the 15th.

So to hold it in a band, bring it back and have have a joint group on we our staff can respond to this.

And we can go through and we can respond to the questions that they have, um, and you know, just respond to the to the data that that they ask for on that, and that and that's how we will.

We won't we won't slant it one way or the other.

We'll just do it with the facts that we have.

But I just want um this body to decide do we want to respond to it because it's it's a unique situation that they're requesting for information to us when they're actually are the ones kind of putting the putting the fishing pole out there and seeing where it's at.

Commissioner Fisher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

Uh and I do agree, but um, you know, uh we're hearing the same thing about Seabrie, you know, and you guys went out there and come back with a really flashy report about how the site was out there and everything.

And I've been getting a lot of emails from people saying the opposite.

I don't know nothing about it.

I've never been to either facility.

So I mean, these are the kind of things that I really think that we gotta visit.

And you used the word right there in that comment you made to me.

Our staff, our staff.

What about our staff?

You know, what about my people?

You know, what about his people?

You know, they're not our, you know, our staff.

Who's the staff that's gonna make the decision to answer these questions without us reviewing the answers, you know.

I don't want to see you send off answers to questions without saying, hey, the beauty council commissioner just said answered yes to this, and they said maybe to this and no to this, and then all of a sudden come back to me and say, you know, um, why'd you guys do that?

You know, I didn't have no sense.

Commissioner Fisher, the the Butte Silverbow employees work forte Silver Bow, like you were the commissioner here, so they work for us to and they would be data-based questions that we'd fill in.

They're not gonna be opinion-based uh at any level uh that we would fill in.

It would strictly be based on data.

Um, and so those are that's how we would answer the questions.

They're not going to be opinioned by when I say our staff, it is our staff.

They they work for Butte Silver Bow.

You guys are commissioners of Butte Silver Bow.

So when I say our, it is our staff that that would be doing it.

It would be um, you know, the departments that are that pull the data of the demographics within Butte Silverbow and those type of things.

So we there would be no opinion put into any of that.

So I I can assure you that that's how we're gonna answer these.

Commissioner Thatcher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

Sheriff Lester, I see standing back there.

And if if it would be okay with the council, I kind of just want to hear maybe a little bit of your input on this.

I feel like you're the closest person um as far as butte sober bow representatives to a situation like this, dealing with the jail, being the sheriff, you know.

Could you just kind of give us your thoughts?

Commissioner Thatcher, uh, Sheriff Lesser.

Well, thank you, Commissioner Thatcher, for seeing me back there.

I probably should have been a little bit more to the right, I guess.

Uh yeah, there's some thoughts I have.

The biggest thought that I have is it's gonna make staffing at our detention center that much more difficult.

Uh whatever rate they're paying now is more than we currently pay, and that's one of the things we fight with uh when we're talking about hiring staff at the detention center.

So we see people driving to Deer Lodge instead of working here.

Uh, and you know, we have the selling point where we're we're getting we're trying to stay relatively close to them to make that, you know, they're working two more hours of shift if they're doing driving a deer lodge.

So but if they do move it here, they'll pay the same wage, I assume that they're paying at Deer Lodge, which will be higher and will be more difficult for me to staff the detention center or whoever the sheriff is, I don't know when that place will be built.

Um that's one concern that I have just from being selfish looking down the road.

Uh you know, I think you could see people who are associated with inmates uh move to this area to be close to their family and their friends, and I'm not saying that's a good thing or a bad thing, but you're gonna see an influx of some population that probably isn't gonna have housing right away.

Uh you're gonna see workers probably a hundred, and I don't know how many professionals they'll be, probably less than 50, I would think, and the rest will be detention staff, but they'll need housing too, so those are issues that we face currently with the housing.

So those are things that that uh I think could be issues that we could see.

I'm not prepared to say one way or another whether I would support it or not, but I think there are some concerns from the um enforcement standpoint.

Thank you, Sheriff Lesser.

Commissioner Callahan.

Thank you, Chief Executive Callagher.

Well, my comment to the the wage thing, maybe we need to start paying our people a better wage so we don't lose them to the Deer Lodge.

Um our people are watching the same kind of people they're watching, and if we're losing them to Deer Lodge, we probably ought to work on getting them a better wage.

And I know that's something we can all work on.

Uh my other comment would be on the jobs.

Mr.

Cooken said there's going to be a hundred full-time jobs, state jobs that pay good benefits.

Uh, you know, they they're good wages, as Mr.

Lester said.

And then there's plenty of spin-off jobs.

So to turn around and say we're getting all kinds of jobs out on Harrison Avenue, those are all fast food jobs.

Communities can't survive on fast food jobs.

You know, we got to look at this at all angles.

Obviously, there's negative that comes with everything.

But we got to weigh out the whole picture.

Uh my recommendation, if we're not paying our people at the jail enough money, we're losing them to Deer Lodge, we probably ought to work on giving them a little better wage, too.

Those are things we can work on also.

So thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Callahan.

Any other commissioner O'Leary and then Commissioner Thatcher.

Thank you, Chief Executive.

I guess a couple comments.

Um, you know, I I know that the the primary benefit of this to the community would be jobs.

You know, the prison is not going to pay property taxes on this on this uh build out.

So we're really talking about a trade-off between jobs and the impacts to the community uh that come from having a prison in your community.

So that's one thing.

Uh the other thing is we you know, we did send a letter to the Department of Corrections, and they never responded to us with uh any answers to what we asked of them.

So I am also concerned about their unwillingness to communicate with us, uh, even just simply saying we're working on it.

So that's a concern.

Uh I will echo your concerns, the chief executive's concerns about the loss of Highlands College, if that's even on the table, then for me this is a gigantic big absolutely not.

Uh Director Gukin, when he was here, said that they are not going to shove this down any community's throat.

And I hope that he intends to keep his word on that if we respond to this, and you know, they they come back and say, hey, we want to cite this here in our community, and the community says, No, actually we don't want it.

I hope that they will they will uh respect what they said when they were here.

And I guess just a question for for the chief executive.

Uh uh, you know, the there's gonna be some staff time involved with responding to this.

Um idea what what we're talking about is this, you know, five hours of staff person's time, or is this multiple days?

Um what are we looking at?

Commissioner uh Larry, I I haven't looked closely on what that staff time was.

I I can't imagine it's gonna be more than probably about five hours uh of total staff time.

That's a few people working on this.

I because we'll we'll be pulling data um just on the demographics of the of the local community and workforce and things like that.

And so we'll just be working that with that with uh community development and probably um some of the planning staff that would work on this together.

So um that that's how we would pull this together and uh and answer the the RFI.

Commissioner Thatcher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

Just a couple concerns that I have is it this kind of could be political, you know.

I mean, in a sense, I guess um unfortunately in the nature of politics, Sheriff Cook can stand or Department of Corrections had Gutkin can stand up here and tell us all he wants to get us to buy.

That doesn't necessarily mean that he or the governor or whoever will follow through on the words that they share um up here.

My other concern is, and I think that Commissioner O'Neill was kind of alluding to this a little bit, is if we do respond, I guess I'm a little concerned that and and based on the feedback that I have received from the public.

I guess I'm concerned that they will think that hey, we're all for this.

And I don't know if anybody else shares that same concern or if that's just me.

I understand Commissioner Morgan's perspective of saying, hey, yeah, we're gonna respond with the facts.

Um I just am worried that any sort of response shows some type of interest.

And if we're interested, I guess that's one thing, but I think that we really need to weigh kind of what we're gonna do going forward.

So thank you, Commissioner Thatcher.

Commissioner Callahan.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

I just want to respond to the tax thing that's been brought up a few times.

We've got to stick to the facts.

We get no taxes out of that property right now, so we gotta quit throwing that kind of stuff out there.

That's what makes the public uh turn negative on stuff when we're saying in the comments that you know we gotta show the whole picture when we're talking about this stuff.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Commissioner Fisher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

I think uh with the response you gave me about um answering the questions that are put forth uh with uh fact, I think that at this time we're ready to make a motion to concur in place on file communication 2025-473.

We have a motion and a second to concur in place on file uh communication or 2025-4.

I crossed it out for 73 473.

Is there anything on the question?

Commissioner O'Neill.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I mean, just it at that note, I mean us answering these questions doesn't solidify whether they come here or not.

If if it was chosen to come here, it has nothing to do with us answering questions.

Just a comment.

Commissioner O'Neill, I the only thing it it shows that we're we're giving them the information that they're requesting from the community.

Commissioner Fisher.

Thank you, Chief Executive.

And I'd just like to add, you know, they're asking for information, you know.

Ignoring people to ask for information is not a not a good thing to do.

I think you know, they requested information.

Let's answer them the truth.

If they decide we'll you know, we'll pick up the next one.

But I I uh I'm for you uh sending out the uh request for you know information form and seeing seeing what comes back to us.

Maybe we will get a response.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Fisher.

Commissioner O'Leary.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

Just uh quick response to that.

Again, we asked for information, they ignored us.

I I don't have any problem with with us giving them information, but the the amount of information that has been shared between the Department of Corrections and NBU Silverbow has been limited, and I'm not a big fan of of that uh particular way of interacting.

So I agree with you.

It they should be communicating with us, but they're not.

Commissioner Fisher.

Uh thank you, Chief Executive.

Thank you, Commissioner Larry.

I think by not responding, it shows an I don't care attitude, and I don't like that.

Thank you, Commissioner Fisher.

All right.

Commissioner Anderson.

Thank you very much, Chief Executive.

I think that uh I don't care attitude is a lot of the issue that uh this body has, and a lot of the uh citizens in our community think is that uh all too often the government just decides I don't care what you think, we're gonna do it my way because for whatever reason we own the land in this case and we can do what we want with it.

And I think that attitude is exactly what the uh prison, uh the Montana Department of Corrections has uh said to us.

Granted, they came over here and said, hey, this is gonna be great for your community.

Of course they are the looking to put something here, but then when we ask questions about it, they just turned a blind eye and they never respond to it.

I agree, if I ask somebody a question, I expect an answer or the least like to, or I'll follow up to try to get that answer.

I'm sure we followed up a few times to get the answers that we put forth with uh no response from them.

Uh I know that they said that they weren't gonna put it in the community where it wasn't wanted.

From uh my count, I've seen one email from a former commissioner here who thought it could be a good idea.

I've received numerous uh phone calls from people walking down the grocery store aisles or uh talking with neighbors or family, none of them are in favor of this.

Uh I am not in favor of this.

I think it could potentially have an awful lot of harm in our community if uh the prison was built here.

We're starting to see a lot of good things happening in Butte, and I don't want to do anything that's going to arrest that development.

Uh I do agree that it would be a good idea to respond to this.

I don't see any harm in responding to this technically.

But I've always lived my life, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Uh they have the uh personnel to answer all of these questions.

And uh I personally, if I was given the choice of answering the questions from them, I would just receive uh send the questionnaire back to them blank with uh we're not interested at the bottom of it.

But that's my opinion.

That's what I would do.

So I will be voting no on this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Anderson.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

Let's let's spin this a little bit and and think of this approach.

So being if this body didn't submit the letter, would they have just not asked for the RFI and maybe have just said we're going to butte.

By us submitting the letter, it showed that we were going to be responsive.

We were going to be engaged in the process, and we didn't want them to just assume that we were going to sit back and let it happen.

And so there's nothing that says that, yeah, maybe the RFI went out because of our letter, but there's also nothing that says because of our letter, they didn't do the RFI.

But you don't know the answer to that, right?

And so just showing that we're engaged and we're we're willing to say, hey, we're not for this or we have questions, it shows that we're a willing participant.

I I would be a little concerned that if we just say we're not going to respond, because to me we're taking it and we're we're basically taking our ball cap and we're covering our eyes like we used to in in in grade school and say, God, I hope the teacher doesn't see me.

And and hope that that gets us by.

At least this way we're providing them facts.

Yes, they can they can probably get most of them themselves, but we're at least being part of the solution here rather than just covering up and and hiding.

But thank you, Commissioner Morgan.

Any other comment?

Commissioner O'Leary.

Thank you, Chief Executive.

Just a quick ask.

I if this uh motion passes, I would just ask the executive branch to maybe send the responses to the Commissioners.

Uh in when they're ready, just so that we're aware of what's going on.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Larry.

Commissioner Anderson.

On uh this request for information.

Was there any uh segment or part of it that had any section for comment or any of that matter?

Commissioner Anderson, I'd uh I briefly looked through it and I was and I'll be honest, I was in the mindset that they haven't been communicative with us.

So I was really kind of, you know, you're you're requesting of us when we've asked you to come back to speak to you to this body and things, and so I I didn't look very deeply at at the RFI.

Um but uh you know I understand everybody's comments in here, and I and I don't disagree with what anybody says in here.

Um I to me the the things that that stood out are when they came, they spoke, and then they have left a lot of unanswered questions in our community, and then they turn around and say, now you need to answer our questions.

That I had a hard time with that.

And so I didn't look that close at that, so I don't have a great answer for you.

Follow up, Commissioner Anderson.

Uh thank you very much, Chief Executive.

I understand where this could be very beneficial to answer these questions.

What I would do, and I will make this in a form of a motion, is to answer the request for information.

But I would also ask you to include a letter to that, saying that yes, we will answer these questions here, they are and just state some of our concerns, especially those of Sheriff's Leicester and those of the commissioners up here, saying that we would appreciate if our questions to you were also answered, uh and that letter with some of the commit concerns of the community with that.

So that could be included in the Commissioner Anderson.

Could I, you know, instead of trying to phrase a bunch of questions, could I ask them to respond to the questions that were sent to them by this body already?

Absolutely.

Would that be acceptable to this body?

That I think because I think within the the letter that was sent to them, um the this body kind of agreed on that letter, and that would be taken.

Otherwise, we'd have to kind of ground table of what those questions would be.

No, that would be perfectly all right.

So I guess I would modify my motion to go ahead and answer the RFI, but uh include a letter of saying, hey, we understand yet you had questions for us.

We submitted these questions.

Could you please answer them for our body?

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

The only thing that I'm unaware of is if the submittal of this allows an attachment to be attached, because when I looked at it, it was a question and an answer block.

So I don't think there was an attachment section to it.

So I think you would have to include that in the actual random text box because it's all online.

It's not a it's not a uh formal submittal thing other than their website, from what I remember.

That's correct.

Commissioner Thatcher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

Commissioner Anderson, to your point, I guess could we resend the letter before we make the submittal and go that route instead and then see if we get an answer.

Um I mean to to me I I understand where Commissioner Morgan's com coming from, and it that's probably the direction I'll head to on this specific communication, but I guess to appease Commissioner Anderson if there isn't an attachment, is it something that hey, we'll take a whack at it again and then see if they respond or or not?

I I guess to answer that question, what I would do if I was in the chief executive's shoes on the very first question, I'd say, hey, I sent you a letter with these answers.

Commissioner Anderson, that was sent from this body.

So this body would need to send that.

That didn't come from the chief executive.

The commissioners drafted a letter that was sent.

Commissioner Anderson.

No, I'm just referring to uh how I would respond to that questionnaire.

I understand it's all online, so I would just put on the first question.

I have sent all these answers in a letter and communication via Snail Mail.

Please check it out.

Commissioner Thatcher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

This question is probably to Commissioner Morgan or O'Leary since you guys are kind of reviewing the RFI.

Did they, and I know it would be paid for by them, but is one of the questions about you know, like infrastructure improvements that we will greatly need out there?

Is that any of the information that they're questioning?

Because we will need that out there too.

Uh Commissioner Thatcher, uh, who would like to answer that?

Commissioner Morgan.

I I believe that is.

It's asking what kind of infrastructure we have there available by the site.

It it does have those questions in there.

Yeah.

So those are um so what we could do, and uh is resend the the letter from the council um ahead of it, but also we would respond.

If this body chooses, we'll do just respond and send that again.

Um and then I think you know, at one point or another, they're gonna have to get back in front of this body and answer to you guys.

So Commissioner Fisher, point of order.

The motion on the floor failed due to lack of uh the motion failed.

Yeah, thank you.

Appreciate that.

Okay, Commissioner Fisher.

Thank you, Chief Executive Gallagher.

You know, the communication calls to request information.

You know, we're we're stirring up a bunch of stuff here that don't even matter.

I mean, you know, people moving here not.

Let's just vote if we want to send out the letter or not.

I mean it's a simple question.

Let's not create a monster out of this thing.

We either want to send the letter or we don't.

Simple as that.

Okay.

Okay.

Any other more comments by commissioners?

Seeing none.

Could commissioners please vote?

This is to concur in place on file responding to the RFI.

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

A dee two nay.

A two nay motion passes.

Okay.

Moving on to item number five, communication number 2025-475.

David Gary, community enrichment director, requesting council of commissioners' authorization to have Chief Executive Gallagher sign the vendor invoice and accept fiscal year 2026 junk motor vehicle graveyard grant in the amount of $70,333.

Commissioner Healy.

Thank you, Chief Executive.

Actually, I just want to thank you for all you're doing.

There's a lot of positive feedback out there.

And I myself, if I had more money, I'd give you more money because there are things that are changing, and I appreciate you taking walks with me and teaching me about the process, because then that helps me explain to constituents about the process without having to have them go necessarily through you.

For example, you know, Wall Street has had a problem with drug addicts, and then they send me pictures of all these cars.

So I went and looked at them myself and saw that they had permanent stickers on there, the tires were inflated, so they were not junk vehicles, so then I didn't have to you know uh communicate to you that you know there's five junk vehicles when they were not five junk vehicles.

So I'm I just wanted to say I appreciate you and all you're doing.

And if I had more money, I'd give you more money.

Thank you, Commissioner Healy.

Uh Director Gary wanted to respond to that.

I guess I would just say thank you.

We're working hard on it.

So thanks.

Commissioner Morgan, did you have a comment?

Uh Commissioner Healy, did you want to make a motion?

Make a motion then did you I'd like to make a motion to concur and place this on file.

We have a motion and a second to concur and place on file communication number 25-475.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

10 years nay.

10 years nay, motion passes.

Moving on to section three ordinances resolution for final reading.

We have two.

First one is resolution number 2025-58.

Clerk, could you please read the caption?

A resolution authorizing the city and the city and county abuse of a bow to apply for the land and water conservation fund financial assistance from the National Park Service through Montana's Fish and Wildlife Parks Department for replacement of playground equipment at Clark Park.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move to place council resolution 2025-58 on final reading and pass, having been deemed fully read at length.

We have a motion of second place and resolution number 225-58 on final reading.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

Commissioner Anderson, you're saying go.

Oh and would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

10 yay 0 nay.

10 yay, 0 nay motion passes.

Moving on to item number two, can council bill number 2025-03 and ordinance number 2025-03.

Clerk, please read the caption.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move to place Council Bill 2025-03 ordinance number 2025-03 on final reading and passed, having been deemed fully read at length.

We have a motion and a second place in council bill number 2025-03, ordinance number 2025-03 on final reading.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

Ten yeah zero nay.

Ten year nay.

Motion passes.

Moving on to section four ordinances resolution for emergency suspension of the rules.

We have four.

We have four of them.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move for the suspension of the rules for the purpose of passing council bill ordinance number, well, just resolution number 2025-59.

Resolution 2025-60.

Resolution 2025-61, and resolution 25-62 by waiving subsection seven of Rule 36 of the rules and order of the Council of Commissioners, thereby having it considered for advanced passage without reference to the Judiciary Committee.

The reason for the suspension of the rules on this is just to get these districts established and/or funds established so that they are able to be added to the November tax bills that will be sent out here shortly.

We have a motion and a second to suspend the rules for resolution number 2025-59, resolution number 2025-60, 2025-61, and 2025-62.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

10 years motion passes.

Moving back to resolution number 2025-59.

Clerk, please read the caption.

A resolution leveling special assessments to pay for the cost of lighting within the special improvement district in membering by this resolution within the city county of Usua Bo at State of Montana for fiscal year 2026 and providing for an affected date herein.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move to place council resolution 2025-59 on final reading and passed, having been deemed fully read at length.

We have a motion on a second, placement resolution number 2025-59 on final reading.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

Ten yeah zero nay.

Ten yeah zero nay.

Motion passes.

Moving to item number two, resolution number twenty twenty-five-six zero.

Clerk, please read the caption.

A resolution estimate as near as possible the cost of maintaining special improvement districts number four oh one and number four oh two for the purpose of fire hydrant rental within the city county of Ute Silverville, State of Montana for the fiscal year two thousand twenty-six and providing for an affected date herein.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move to place council resolution 2025-60 on final reading, having been deemed fully read at length.

We have a motion on the second place and resolution number 2025-60 on final reading.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

Ten yeah zero nay.

Ten yeah, zero nay.

Motion passes.

Moving on to item number three, resolution number twenty twenty-five-six one.

Clerk, please read the caption.

A res a resolution to alter the boundaries of the city county of Butte Silverbow, State of Montana, Solid Waste Special District for the Solo Waste Collection to include this to include the boundaries of the home state medals two subdivision and providing for an effective date herein.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move to place Council Resolution 2025-61 on final reading and passive having been deemed fully read at length.

We have a motion on second place on resolution number 2025-61 on final reading.

Is there anything on the question?

Could Commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

Ten years nay.

Tenye zero nay.

Motion passes.

Moving on to item number four, resolution number twenty twenty-five-six two.

Commissioner Morgan.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Clerk, please read the caption.

Getting ahead of myself.

A resolution establishing the assessment for fiscal year 2026 on the properties included in the special tourism business improvement district number one for the purpose of promoting tourism conventions, trade shows, and travel to the city, county of youth silver bow, designating and describing the boundaries of set special tourism business improvement district and providing for an effective date herein.

Commissioner Morgan.

Thank you, Mr.

Chief Executive.

I move to place council resolution 2025-62 on final reading and passed, having been deemed fully read at length.

We have a motion and a second placement resolution number 2025-62 on final reading.

Could commissioners please vote?

And would anyone like to change their vote?

Clerk, please record the vote.

10 yay 0 nay.

10 yay 0 nay.

Motion passes.

Moving on to calendar and other meeting events, please note the dates and times of those meetings.

Um next we'll move on to any public comment on any item on tonight's that is not on tonight's agenda.

Seeing none, I would take a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

We have a motion and a second.