Butte Silver Bow Study Commission Meeting - October 27, 2025
Butte Silver Bow Study Commission Meeting - October 27, 2025
The October 27, 2025, meeting of the Butte Silver Bow Study Commission began with the Pledge of Allegiance and public comments, followed by the approval of October 20th minutes and scheduling deliberations for late November and December. Commissioners discussed the formation of subcommittees to draft language for potential ballot measures and engaged in a detailed debate comparing the current Chief Executive/Council form of government against a proposed City-County Manager form. The meeting concluded with a unanimous vote to include the City-County Manager option in the preliminary report and the formation of a subcommittee to research and draft the necessary charter language.
Consent Calendar
- Approved the minutes of the October 20th, 2025, meeting with grammatical and spelling corrections only. The motion to approve carried unanimously with Mr. Thielen making the motion and Mr. Casey seconding it.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Karen Sargent: A professional emergency first responder with 30 years of experience who lives at 3021 Josephine Street. She expressed that while she respects individual firefighters, she has experienced "distrust, disrespect, and disdain" from the upper administration (officers, battalion chiefs, and fire chief) of the career Fire Department. She stated she was treated with nothing but respect by the commission and urged the body to remove specific sections of the fire department charter (7.03, subsections A, D, E, and F) to allow volunteer departments to operate under current state laws governing district establishment. She clarified this request is within the commission's scope and does not impact the form of government.
Discussion Items
- Schedule and Work Process: Commissioners established a timeline for deliberations, including sessions on the City Manager/Chief Executive (Nov 3), reduction of Commissioners (Nov 3/related), Fire Departments (Nov 10), Neighborhood Councils (Nov 17), Coroner/Superfund Coordinator (Dec 1), and Cleanup/Charter Walkthrough (Dec 8). Commissioners debated the method for drafting ballot language, agreeing that general deliberations should happen in the full body while specific language drafting and "workshopping" could be delegated to subcommittees working via email or private meetings to avoid quorum issues, provided all findings return to the full commission for a public vote.
- Op-Ed and Survey Data: Mr. Steppen presented a draft op-ed regarding extending the timeline to gather more input. Ms. Adams reported the survey has received 419 responses (exceeding the statistically reliable sample of 375), with over 1,900 responses to open-ended questions and 60 handwritten comments from listening sessions.
- Chief Executive vs. City-County Manager Deliberation: Commissioners debated the pros and cons of switching from an elected Chief Executive to a City-County Manager.
- Support for City Manager (Ms. Casey, Mr. Selk, Ms. McCormick, Mr. Steppen): Speakers argued that a City Manager provides necessary "continuity" in long-term planning, which is currently threatened by the political turnover of elected Chiefs. They expressed concern that under the current system, department heads shift priorities every four years based on the Chief's agenda. They noted that survey data and department heads overwhelmingly support this change for efficiency and professional management.
- Support for Chief Executive (Mr. Denehee, Mr. Thielen): Mr. Denehee, a self-described "traditionalist," argued that the current form maintains a crucial "balance of powers" where the executive branch is separate from and equal to the legislative branch, preventing the council from having unchecked control. He emphasized the democratic right of any 18-year-old citizen to run for the Chief position, contrasting this with the restricted eligibility of a professional manager. He expressed concern that a City Manager form could lead to an imbalance of power. Mr. Thielen initially expressed support for the change but questioned the role of the Mayor under a City Manager system and ultimately stated he was not ready to vote for the proposal on the ballot without further exploration of other options.
- Procedural Concerns: Commissioners discussed the need for checks and balances in the removal of a City Manager, citing Bozeman's charter which requires a process and public hearing for removal, rather than serving "at the pleasure" of the council. They also discussed whether a Mayor should be elected, noting state law places the Mayor in the legislative branch, and debated the Mayor's potential role as a tiebreaker or ceremonial figurehead.
- Comparisons to Other Municipalities: Mr. Shaw and Ms. Adams noted the difficulty in comparing Butte-Silver Bow to other municipalities due to its consolidated form and unique population size, while Mr. Denehee noted that Helena's open position pays between $175,000 and $205,000.
Key Outcomes
- Motion Carried unanimously: The commission moved to include the option of a City-County Manager form of government in the preliminary report to be sent to the public. Additionally, the commission voted to form a subcommittee to outline the duties, responsibilities, and specific charter language for this form of government. The subcommittee is to return their findings to the full commission for a vote.
- Subcommittee Formation: Commissioners volunteered to serve on the subcommittee, with specific mentions of Mr. Denehee and Ms. Casey (who declined Saturday meetings).
- Next Meeting: Scheduled for November 3rd to address the structure and number of City Commissioners.
- Future Deliberations: A vote will occur later in the process to determine the final questions to be placed on the ballot among the three primary form-of-government questions (Chief vs. Manager, number of commissioners, districting vs. at-large) and additional cleanup language questions.
Meeting Transcript
Welcome everyone. I'd like to call the October 27th meeting of the Butte Silver Bow Study Commission to order. If we can have roll call, please. Ray Lynn Brandle here. Laurie Casey. Here. Dan Denehee. Here. Mary McCormick. Here. Cindy Purdue Dolan. Excuse. Cindy Sha. Chad Selk. Here. Matt Steppen. And Ben Thielen. Here. Okay, if we could have the Pledge of Allegiance and Pier. All right, thanks everybody. If we can have public comment on any item on the agenda. Right, hearing none, I'd have public comment on anything not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the study commission. My name is Karen Sargent. I live at 3021 Josephine Street here in Butte. Thank you, Commissioners, for giving me this opportunity to speak to you tonight. All reference to experiences regarding the Butte Silverbow Career Fire Department are from what I have experienced since coming to Butte. Also, I would like to clarify that these experiences do not reflect on the firefighters in the career department, but they do reflect on the officers, battalion chiefs, and fire chief of the career department. Some background information for those individuals that were absent from last Monday night's meeting when I first spoke of these issues. In December, I will be finishing my 30th year as a professional emergency first responder. Since arriving in Butte as a volunteer firefighter, I have been treated with distrust, disrespect, and disdain from the upper administration of the career fire department. The upper administration has done nothing but assume that they know my experience and knowledge level. In turn, I have treated them with nothing but respect and have followed the incident command system while on scene on incidents. Take them out of the charter. Specific sections include but are not limited to the following. All of these are in section 7.03, subsection A, subsection D, subsection E, and subsection F. Doing this will allow the volunteers to be subject to current state laws that dictate how each district was established and how they should operate. Just like all the rest of the volunteer departments in the great state of Montana. Doing this does not impact the form of government by the definitions and examples given to you by county attorney Enroth last week. As such, this request may be put forth from this commission in the other changes with no quantity limitations. It's a simple fix and it is well within the defined scope of this commission. Do you have any questions for me? Ms. Sergeant, unfortunately, we can't take questions, but we will happily have you come back if you wish to uh visit with us when we take on debate deliberations about this section of the charter. Okay. Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you. Any other public comment on anything not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the study commission? All right, hearing none, I will move on to approval of the minutes of the meeting held October 20th, 2025. Are the changes grammatical in nature and don't change the content of the minutes? Okay, so misspellings and a couple of grammar changes. So the motion is to approve the minutes with those changes.
openpublica.com