HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-25-21 Public Comment - R. Zimmer - Board ConsolidationFrom:Ralph Zimmer
To:Cyndy Andrus; Terry Cunningham; I-Ho Pomeroy; Jennifer Madgic; Christopher Coburn
Cc:Agenda; Marilee Brown; Jim Ness; Michael Veselik; James R. Nickelson; Chris Saunders; Taylor Lonsdale; John
Vandelinder; Mike Maas; Jesse DiTommaso; Greg Sullivan; Melody Mileur
Subject:Board Consolidation Questions That Must Be Addressed
Date:Tuesday, May 25, 2021 11:09:05 AM
Importance:High
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Tuesday, May 25, 2021
Mayor Andrus, Deputy Mayor Terry Cunningham, Commissioner I-Ho Pomeroy,
Commissioner Jennifer Madgic, and Commissioner Christopher Coburn
I am truly impressed with the amount of time and effort that City staff has poured into theproposed consolidation of the City's citizen advisory boards. They should be congratulated
and commended. However, there are some basic issues and some details that the Commissionshould see are addressed before implementing ordinances and resolutions are prepared. For
obvious reasons, this email will concentrate on the Bozeman (Area) Pedestrian and TrafficSafety Committee (PTS) and the proposed Transportation Super Board (TSB).
Objectives of Board Consolidation Proposal
One of the Stated purposes is to promote public safety. PTS is, I believe, the onlyexisting City Board that actually has "safety" in its name. It hears, and often solves, citizens'
complaints and concerns on transportation safety matters. It is the board that makestransportation related safety recommendations to City staff and the City Commission. It is
engaged in transportation related safety education. It is the group to which the CityCommission gave the responsibility to implementing Community Transportation Safety Plan
that the Commission adopted. It is the group that advocates for transportation relatedlegislation both in the State legislature and in Congress.
Therefore it seems ironic that the board consolidation proposal calls for the elimination of
PTS. (Yes, the proposal suggests those responsibilities will be assumed by the TSB, but howmuch time will the TSB be able to devote to a subset of its expanded responsibilities?)
Advocates for the board consolidation proposal tout it as increasing transparency.
However, the City has not modeled good transparency in its proposal to eliminate PTS. InFebruary the City Manager verbally told the Commission that "joint" boards (PTS is one of
those) would not be affected by consolidation. In March the City Clerk wrote us saying PTSwould not be affected. It wasn't until earlier this month we found out in a mass mailing to all
advisory boards that PTS somehow, in some way, was going to be included in the TSB. Itwasn't until Thursday afternoon that we learned by examining the agenda for tonight's
Commission meeting the nature of PTS's inclusion in TSB. That gave us no time to discuss itwith PTS and little for the officers to prepare for tonight's meeting.
However, we have learned a little in that small amount of time. As you know, PTS was
created by an interlocal agreement between the City Commission, the County Commission,and the School District. The proposal presented to the City Commission suggests that both the
County and the School District would be supportive of discontinuing PTS. However sinceseeing the written board consolidation proposal we have learned neither the County
Commission nor the School District Trustees have discussed even the possible discontinuanceof PTS.
As an aside, in its capacity as a joint board PTS has weighed in on concerns far outside
Bozeman city limits and even outside of the area that might become a MPO.
You have heard that one benefit of consolidation would be a citizen would not have tolearn the intricacies of our boards and run from one board to another to get their concern
addressed. The example I recall hearing is running between the Planning Board, the ZoningCommission, and the Design Review Board. It is not clear to me how the proposed
consolidation would eliminate the potential need to appear before that collection of boards.
Nor do I understand how the proposed consolidation will increase citizen participation inthe city's business. I think it does the opposite. As I recall, the proposed consolidation would
cut the total number of citizens serving on the City's advisory boards by APPROXIMATELYhalf. Granted there would be a larger turnover in some of those slots when people like Ralph
Zimmer are tenured out but looking out over an extended period of time there still would befewer citizens serving on boards. However, it is not just a question of how many slots there
are It is also a question of what those slots are. Some citizens who have special interest orexpertise in one particular area may be more reluctant to volunteer for a board in which their
particular interests are just a subset of the time and effort they will have to contribute. '
There is another factor. The proposal makes some subtle changes which in my opinionsomewhat transfer these boards from being CITIZEN advisory boards to being boards
"designed" to reflect the staff's opinions and objectives. Let me mention just three things. First would be the staff selecting board chairpersons rather than the boards selecting their own
chairpersons. Second would be the proposal gives the PRIMARY responsibility for preparingagendas to the staff rather than to the chairperson. Third would be the proposed very strict
(i.e., short) tenure limits. That prevents a board member from developing institutionalmemory and from staying on the board long enough to develop the skills and knowledge
needed to be a truly effective board member.
Recommended Directives to City Manager
1. PTS should remain a separate, stand-alone, joint (with County and School District)advisory board in the same manner as the Transportation Coordinating Committee(TCC) is proposed to remain a separate joint board. If desired, the City's two votingmembers of PTS could come from the TSB.
Alternatively, if the City is intent on discontinuing PTS, the City Managermust explicitly obligate the TSB to perform the current responsibilities of PTSincluding but not limited to considering safety concerns raised by citizens, safetyeducation, implementation of the City's adopted Community Transportation Plan,advocacy for transportation safety in both the State legislature and Congress, etc.
2. Consideration could be given to eliminating duplication of subject matter betweenBABAB and PTS thereby potentially reducing demands on staff liaison time. Onealternative might be to establish a bicycle group under PTS. (Any option consideredshould be thoroughly discussed with both PTS and BABAB.)
3. The Impact Fee Advisory Committee (or at least that portion of it relating totransportation) should be moved to the TSB and consideration should be given tomoving the Parking Commission to some other Super Board. While both couldjustifiably be included in the TSB, the collection and allocation of transportation relatedimpact fees has a much greater relationship to the achievement of a safe, efficient,connected transportation network.
4. The chairperson of each Super Board and joint boards should be elected by thevoting membership of the respective board. (There could be a "backup" provision if theelected members do not elect their own chairperson for any reason.)
5. To insure true citizen input, agendas should be developed by the boardchairpersons in consultation with the staff liaison, not the other way around.
6. City staff should prepare DRAFT meeting minutes for approval by the boards.
7. For ALL advisory boards, tenure restrictions should at least match those of theState legislature (eight years). This would foster institutional memory and promotedevelopment of informed citizen input. It should be made clear if service on a directpredecessor group counts or does not count towards fulfilling the tenure restriction(e.g., service on the Parking Commission county towards tenure restrictions on TSB?)\. The tenure policy must make it clear how gaps in service are counted (e.g., someone who"tenures out" after eight years of service is able to start another eight years of service idthey sat out for say two years)..
8. Any ordinances and resolutions developed to implement the board consolidationshould be given to the existing boards at least one full month before they are presented tothe City Commission. That will enable the respective boards to consider the nitty-grittydetails at a monthly board meeting before the City Commission considers their adoption.
Ralph W Zimmer, Chairperson Bozeman (Area) Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee