HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-06-22 Public Comment - L. Semones - Attention Mr. Jeff MihelichFrom:Linda Semones
To:Agenda
Subject:Attention Mr. Jeff Mehelich
Date:Saturday, August 6, 2022 9:37:42 AM
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.
Dear Mr. Mehelich,
I am writing to you as a private citizen, and not as a representative of the city board of
which I am proud to be a member. I appreciate your kindness in the past, listening to my
concerns about the combination of the city boards. As you know, we don't always agree, but I
respect your experience and involvement at all levels of the city.
I am writing out of concern over 2 city board meetings that I was only able to watch on
video. The first is the August 1 meeting of the Community Development Board. The second is
the August 3 meeting of the Economic Vitality Board. Both boards had a discussion and took
a vote on draft ordinance 2105 and the outcomes were exceedingly different. The
Community Development Board voted against adopting the ordinance as written with 1
dissent. The Economic Development Board voted for adopting the ordinance as written with 1
dissent.
When 2 city boards meet, and have such different discussions and different suggestions to
present to the city commission, it appears to me that it would be optimum to reach a
consensus between those 2 boards. The idea of high performing boards should include the
ability of the members of those boards to reach compromises.
Before sending 2 different votes to the City Commission, when the votes are so divergent, a
high performing city organization would have those 2 boards meet and iron out a
compromise. Then the compromise could be presented in a positive manner to the City
Commission.
If one city board feels that more time is needed to develop an ordinance, and another
board feels that the ordinance is perfect, it is the TWO BOARDS that should have an
engagement session. The city should try something different, out of the box, to show the
public that indeed the city boards are important, high performing, and a place to bring their
public concerns.
The current system of just turning these votes over to the City Commission and then having
the public come and speak for their 3 minutes is a system that only encourages confrontation.
We seem to let our differences exist until they reach the most upper level of city government,
and then we all come out with our anger. We need to make the engagement, understanding,
and compromise process start much earlier. We have the Engagement process that Dani Hess
instituted and that the city has used at the most basic level, that of the public. In this case,
that process was not used. Perhaps it should have been. But since it was not, we need to
move the engagement and compromise process on up the ladder to include city boards.
This is just my attempt to create understanding and change for the good. I love Bozeman, I
love the people who volunteer for her boards and who serve on her staff. I don't want to see
the kind of division that is so apparent in the political world at large undermine our city and its
people, all of its people. When compromise is possible to achieve the greater good we need a
system that knows how to employ it. I would be glad to sit down with you and talk about this
further.
With great respect and gratitude for your energy,
Linda Semones 404 S Church Ave 406-599-3916